Which DVD should I get, the old or the new?

[fgadmin]

Peter-174 — 18 years ago(October 26, 2007 03:55 PM)

The movie is shot 1:37, so get the old one. It looks fine.

[fgadmin]

Pillsburyboy — 18 years ago(November 23, 2007 05:40 PM)

Me too matlar. I hope I can find the older one though. Since they released it in a newer DVD then that one is probably the only one stores carry. Oh well, I'm sure ebay would have it.

[fgadmin]

jarth-2 — 18 years ago(February 06, 2008 02:56 PM)

The movie is shot 1:37, so get the old one. It looks fine.
Uh, no. The film is shot in 1.37:1.

[fgadmin]

IMDb User

This message has been deleted.

[fgadmin]

TVMovie — 18 years ago(February 27, 2008 11:35 AM)

The Lionsgate release has richer colours, but is slightly overmatted. The OOP Anchor Bay still looks good, and is in a preferable aspect ratio (for the film).
There is also an OOP full frame R2 disc that should be easy to pick up, but I remember reading somewhere that the picture quality was inferior to the Anchor Bay.

[fgadmin]

james_oblivion — 18 years ago(March 17, 2008 12:21 PM)

Are you effing kidding me? He means the same thing. If I say 2:35 I mean 2:35:1. Either you're a complete freaking snob or you're kidding.
Actually, there's a huge difference. 2:35 would mean that the image is 17.5 times as high as it is wide. Which is ridiculous.
2:35:1, on the other hand, isn't even a real aspect ratio. 2.35:1, however,
is
and it doesn't mean the image is 17.5 times as high as it is wideit means it is 2.35 times as wide as it is high.
All aspect ratios are calculated on a scale of width by height, and height always equals "1." A proper abbreviation for the 1.37:1 aspect ratio (as if it needs abbreviation) would be simply "1.37"the "1" can be assumed. 1:37, on the other hand, would mean that the image is 37 times as high as it is widewhich is, again, ridiculous.
So either you're a complete freaking
idiot
or you're kidding.
And before you retort with something hilariously misguided, I'll just say that if understanding how aspect ratios work makes me a snob, so be it.

[fgadmin]

tween_us — 18 years ago(March 19, 2008 01:17 PM)

Good answer. I think the other guy needs to brush up on decimals and ratios before taking the GED.

[fgadmin]

jklein8787 — 18 years ago(April 04, 2008 05:43 AM)

The older DVD is way better. Proper matting, great picture and sound, however the new DVD has an entirely new audio commentary track so if you are a film buff/Romero fan, get both.

[fgadmin]

Xcalat3 — 17 years ago(October 30, 2008 07:16 AM)

the old one is better
When there's no more room in hell, The dead will walk the earth

[fgadmin]

orchidclub — 17 years ago(December 05, 2008 08:05 PM)

I prefer the older Anchor Bay DVD. It is in the correct aspect ratio, and the audio commentary on that one is better than the new one recorded for the Lionsgate release. Of course, you miss out on the featurette included on the new DVD, but I personally can live without it.

[fgadmin]

bobbo-30 — 17 years ago(January 20, 2009 08:31 AM)

I don't catch a big difference as to aspect ratio between the two; the Lion's Gate version, however, DOES include trailers, the featurette (nothing special, really), and commentaries from Romero and Tom Savinithis alone makes it a better "first/discovery" version to own, I think.
Okay,
Bobbo
"Only a fool would say that." STEELY DAN

[fgadmin]

political-terror — 11 years ago(June 16, 2014 02:30 PM)

If you love the film then get both editions, for the two different commentary tracks also the Anchor Bay edition has an attractive art chapter card, and I'm a sucker for those.