Quote:
Originally Posted by Daemonia  And even when he did talk about the quality of the films he admitted he hadn't even watched the damn films yet. Sorry, but don't start posting some nonsense when you haven't even watched the BD yet. Watch it first, critique afterwards - that's how it's supposed to be done.
Look, if a BD is really obviously bad, I'm happy for that to be pointed out so I can save my pennies. But, honestly, anyone moaning about the Arrow release of COTLD is, IMO, seeing problems that really aren't there. I've watched it a couple of times now and it looks ace, there is nothing to complain about. The feature presentation is flawless and the extras are a delight to sit through, never a dull moment (hats off to Calum for not only getting good features and putting key personnel before the camera, but he also makes them enjoyable - some extras on some releases are so academically dry I can't sit through them). |
Thanks for saying this! I'd always wanted to give DVD extra features a bash as you know (Daemonia will remember the days - about eight years ago now - when I was trying to urge the long defunct, and utterly useless, American Program Power brand to let me have a go at The Slayer and Nightmares in a Damaged Brain) and the feedback has been really strong for COTLD.
It's also pleased me to no end because someone, who will remain nameless, once told me "no one wants to see extras that go past 10 minutes."
Yeah,
right...
However, the nit-picking over City of the Living Dead is indeed a bit puzzling. Who would ever have thought you'd see this and Inferno getting lavish treatment, by company's investing big bucks into them? I don't mind complaining if there is a good reason but I don't think the loving restoration of City of the Living Dead (either the BU or Arrow version) deserves that at all.