What?!! The Usual Suspects not in 5.1? (1 Viewer)

[Derek J]

Today while I was at Best Buy I had The Usual Suspects in my hand ready to buy it when I was appalled to learn that it is in 2.0 Stereo!! What gives? This is one of the best who-dunnits I have ever seen and the best they can do is 2.0 Stereo?

 

[Vince Maskeeper]

OH MY GOD!

The film was actually a lower budget film when it was made, and was most likely mixed dolby 2 channel for release. I didn't see it in the theater, but some films are mixed dolby 2.0!
There is a SE coming, which will feature the required 5.1 remix so that all your speakers can be filled.
I doubt it will actually sound much different from the 2.0 mix. On the plus side, all the lights on my receiver will light up.
-Vince
------------------
http://www.musicianassist.com
AIM: VinceMaskeeper
Interested in moving into FRONT PROJECTION with huge 6-10 foot widescreen? Buy my whole HDTV-ready CRT based front projection system delivered, cheap! Click here

 

[Jeff Ulmer]

This has been 2.0 since Polygram first released back in, oh I don't know, 1998?
The MGM version is just a repack of the original release. Sounded fine to me.
------------------
Link Removed | Burt Lancaster is Link Removed | dOc

 

[Michael Reuben]

I saw it in theaters, and I'm pretty sure it wasn't 5.1.
In retrospect, after a couple of Oscars and Bryan Singer's leap to the big time, the film seems like it was always a big deal. In fact, as Vince points out, it had a low budget and flew in under the radar, a little like Memento. The only thing I knew about it before I saw it was that the cast sounded amazing and it involved some guy named Keyser Soze.
M.
[Edited last by Michael Reuben on August 12, 2001 at 12:30 AM]

 

[Jeff Ulmer]

Who's Keyser Soze?
------------------
Link Removed | Burt Lancaster is Link Removed | dOc

 

[Colin Jacobson]

There is a SE coming, which will feature the required 5.1 remix so that all your speakers can be filled.

Why do some responses rely on sarcasm instead of information?
According to IMDB, The Usual Suspects offered a Dolby Digital mix THEATRICALLY. That site is far from infallible, but this isn't the only time I've heard this. From what I know, it looks likely that the original DVD screwed up the mix and didn't use the theatrical audio. As such, the new DVD should include the ORIGINAL sound and not a remix...
------------------
Colin Jacobson
DVD Movie Guide
www.dvdmg.com

 

[Vince Maskeeper]

According to IMDB, The Usual Suspects offered a Dolby Digital mix THEATRICALLY.

They had Dolby Digital listed for several other titles that were Dolby SR, even listed for a few dozen pre-1980's titles including the Thunderbirds series filmed for TV in 1964.
------------------
http://www.musicianassist.com
AIM: VinceMaskeeper
Interested in moving into FRONT PROJECTION with huge 6-10 foot widescreen? Buy my whole HDTV-ready CRT based front projection system delivered, cheap! Click here

 

[Rob Gillespie]

I'm 99% sure this had a 5.1 theatrical release. I remember thinking how well the score came through in split surrounds.

 

[Parker Clack]

The Polygram version that I have of this disc is Dolby Digital with no stereo track to choose from. It is definitely 5.1. The MGM version is listed as DD AC3.
Parker

 

[Dwayne]

I saw this in a Janus theater down in NC when it was released. It was 5.1 .
------------------
-Dwayne
"And vidi films I would."

 

[Michael Reuben]

quote: The Polygram version that I have of this disc is Dolby Digital with no stereo track to choose from. It is definitely 5.1. [/quote] That's odd, because I too have the Polygram version (I even kept that bizarre early Polygram case), and according to my Lexicon MC-1, the soundtrack is DD 2.0, matrixed, at 192kbps.
The credits are no help, either. They use the "Spectral Recording/Dolby Stereo" logo that was typical for films released in 2.0 surround, but the logo also includes the word "digital".
The LD was PCM 2.0, but that doesn't prove anything.
Anyone here know Bryan Singer?
M.
[Edited last by Michael Reuben on August 12, 2001 at 10:25 AM]

 

[Colin Jacobson]

They had Dolby Digital listed for several other titles that were Dolby SR, even listed for a few dozen pre-1980's titles including the Thunderbirds series filmed for TV in 1964.

As I noted in the parts of my remarks you neglected to quote, I fully understand that IMDB is not an infallibl source of wisdom, but others have also indicated that it was 5.1 theatrically. This isn't just a case of one source relating the information. Obviously others here also feel it was 5.1 theatrically...
------------------
Colin Jacobson
DVD Movie Guide
www.dvdmg.com

 

[Vince Maskeeper]

quote: The Polygram version that I have of this disc is Dolby Digital with no stereo track to choose from. It is definitely 5.1. The MGM version is listed as DD AC3.[/quote]
I had the Polygram version up until 3 months ago (in the sliding drawer case), and I'd bet half my DVD collection the track was only DD 2.0.
Please check your copy again I'd love to know if Polygram put out a 5.1 mix at somepoint.
The LD was 2 channel, checking IMDb shows the Polygram version as 2.0 (in addition, every single release for every region in every language is listed as 2 channel. Every version of this released so far seems to be 2.0).
-Vince
------------------
http://www.musicianassist.com
AIM: VinceMaskeeper
Interested in moving into FRONT PROJECTION with huge 6-10 foot widescreen? Buy my whole HDTV-ready CRT based front projection system delivered, cheap! Click here
[Edited last by Vince Maskeeper on August 12, 2001 at 01:03 PM]

 

[Iain Lambert]

Aaah, but was that the Polygram version or the Polygram version? Or maybe the Polygram version?
1) US Polygram release - 2.0 DD, 2.35:1
2) UK Polygram release 1 - 2.0 Mpeg, 1.33:1
3) UK Polygram release 2 - might have been 5.1 if memory serves. Still picture from hell, so haven't bought it.

 

[Jesse Skeen]

I ran this when it came out in the theaters, and it was analog-only, Dolby SR stereo. They were still doing some movies with dual-inventory prints so there's a chance that there were some Dolby Digital prints sent to theaters that actually had it (mine didn't) but I think it would have been on the DVD and laserdisc if it did. That Dolby "Spectral Recording/Digital" logo was VERY misleading, as it was used on several films that were released only in Dolby A or SR- they got a few complaints about this and finally changed it, though some films now say just say "Dolby" which is almost as confusing since it doesn't specify digital or not.
I have "Gridlock'd" on DVD from Polygram in the original case and it's in 5.1, so I don't think they would have left it off "Usual Suspects" had it been available. ("Fargo" was NOT 5.1 in theaters, either!)

 

[Rob Gillespie]

Fargo was shown in Dolby Digital over here Jesse. Whether it was 5.1 or not I don't know but was definitely DD.

 

[Andrew 'Ange Hamm' Hamm]

If memory serves me right, TUS also had two LD releases with different sound, one that retailed $20 with DPL and one that was more expensive with DD.
------------------
Andrew Hamm's new album Link Removed is available now!

 

[Philip Hamm]

If memory serves me right, TUS also had two LD releases with different sound, one that retailed $20 with DPL and one that was more expensive with DD.

Love th IC reference... Neither LD release had AC-3. The $20 was barebones and the $30 one was an SE with commentary, etc.
------------------
Philip Hamm
AIM: PhilBiker