1. Join Now

    AVForums.com uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Das Boot: The Original Uncut Version R1 Review

Discussion in 'Movie Forum' started by Sigismund, Jul 14, 2004.

  1. Sigismund

    Sigismund
    Member

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2003
    Messages:
    5,376
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    86
    Location:
    London
    Ratings:
    +102
    [​IMG]

    Edward Marshall takes a look at the original lengthy cut of Das Boot.

    Read his review here
     
  2. overkill

    overkill
    Well-known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2003
    Messages:
    11,778
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    136
    Location:
    Murkeyside
    Ratings:
    +1,194
    Cheers sigismund. Anyone seen the "superbit" version?
     
  3. Ed Selley

    Ed Selley
    AVF Reviewer

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2003
    Messages:
    10,941
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    166
    Ratings:
    +3,308
    Yeah I own it- it is a reasonable picture and a good soundtrack but you always know you're missing scenes:mad:. I think the only option it to own both :zonked:.
     
  4. dynamic turtle

    dynamic turtle
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2004
    Messages:
    1,501
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    41
    Location:
    Central London
    Ratings:
    +17
    I have the superbit version. IMO the PQ is very, very good (just look at the sweat on the 1st officer's forehead - incredible!!!!)

    It is such an awesome film. How wolfgang peterson makes 3 hours go by so quickly is beyond me (and something peter jackson should research!!).

    Not sure if I'll bother with the "uncut" version, though.

    DT
     
  5. sjp1966

    sjp1966
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2003
    Messages:
    540
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    21
    Location:
    Kent
    Ratings:
    +10
    I must admit i have been pondering over buying this movie for some time now. This new release is tempting but i see that the superbit has DTS sound. Does this make better use of the surround sound as i see there was a low score for the sound in the review.

    I don't really want to own both, but i want good sound, what one is the better to own?

    can anyone advise?
     
  6. dynamic turtle

    dynamic turtle
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2004
    Messages:
    1,501
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    41
    Location:
    Central London
    Ratings:
    +17
    Well AFAIK all superbit releases use "half" bit-rate DTS (768k) . DD5.1 rates go up to 640k but are usually 448k . But to be honest it seems that the recording/mixing/engineering process has more effect on soundtrack quality than the bit-rate does.

    Given the frequency extremes (esp. at the low end - depth charges) in this movie and your good-quality kit, I can recommend the superbit DTS version. It replaced my "standard" DD5.1 dvd and there was noticeable improvement (significantly less muddy) at the extreme low-end.

    DT
     
  7. sjp1966

    sjp1966
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2003
    Messages:
    540
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    21
    Location:
    Kent
    Ratings:
    +10
    Cheers turtle, thats the one i shall go for
     
  8. John-D

    John-D
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    Why does everybodies DTS bit rates say 768k? When mine's always said 754k? :lease:
     
  9. dynamic turtle

    dynamic turtle
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2004
    Messages:
    1,501
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    41
    Location:
    Central London
    Ratings:
    +17
    Blimey, no idea?

    Maybe the rate itself isn't "steady" and fluctuates with the changes in disc temperature/stability? It might be an average rate (the bit-rates of every dvd I own fluctuate - for superbit, anything between 6-10 Mbps, depending on the colours/lighting in the scenery. Dark scenes seem to use lower rates!).

    Just speculation though, better wait for one of the techies to explain properly!
     
  10. BrianC

    BrianC
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2003
    Messages:
    2,190
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    66
    Ratings:
    +101
    erm, that would be the video rate :) which put simply varies for each film dependant on the about of changes on screen, so a high action section should see a higher bit rate than a steady face shot on the leading man crying - within the same film obviously.

    The bitrate average varies from film to film and is dependant at the rate the film was encoded from the orginal source - but this shouldn't been seen as the be all and end all for DVD quality, see the superbit version of Bad Boys, that has a 9/9.5 Mb rate, yet the picture is far from perfect.

    I'm guessing, but I would think that your DVD player is discounting the header and CRC for the audio bitstream, as I think thats about 14 KB? Or another guess, it might be assuming 1024 bits to the byte so its 754 kilobytes rather than 768 kilobits?
     
  11. dynamic turtle

    dynamic turtle
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2004
    Messages:
    1,501
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    41
    Location:
    Central London
    Ratings:
    +17
    Yes, BrianC, I was talking about the video rate (not sure if the pio 565 rate includes audio in the "transfer rate" display). True what you say about the PQ/Bit-rate ratio too.

    As for your other suggestions, forgot about the bit/byte situation. I've always found it very confusing and having argued with my boss about it for the last 10 mins! he insists they both use the 1024 convention, (though I'm inclined to disagree with him). I always thought Data transfer rates were measured in bits (with 1024 bits in a kilobit) and storage rates were measured in Bytes (with 1000 bytes in a Kilobyte).

    I'm probably completely wrong here, so can someone please correct me once & for all!!

    DT
     

Share This Page

Loading...