What did you watch today?

[Samuel_Scott]

Erm... the wikipedia article above writes "...Contrary to popular belief, the film is not a remake of the 2004 Japanese horror film Premonition and is its own original story..." - are they wrong?

Every days a school day I guess. Too many similarities for me that at the very least, I would call it a re-imagining.

[Chris_Xa]

Erm... the wikipedia article above writes "...Contrary to popular belief, the film is not a remake of the 2004 Japanese horror film Premonition and is its own original story..." - are they wrong?

Every days a school day I guess. Too many similarities for me that at the very least, I would call it a re-imagining.

So from what you're saying, no need to bother with the "original" (as I haven't seen it)?

[Samuel_Scott]

Well, I really like 2004 film. Thought the 2007 was worth a single watch, nothing great.

[Jim_Mcdonaugh]

Panasonic TX-P65VT50B

How much did you pay for it? I wanted to get it (another model though), but it was sold out. So I got myself TX-P60ZT60, but it costed like a car!
I also have TX-P50VT60 in a small room in my mansion, but it was very cheap ~2500$

[Samuel_Scott]

£2600 which wasn't a bad price. I'll not upgrade it for 2-3 years.

[Jim_Mcdonaugh]

£2600 which wasn't a bad price.

It's a very good deal indeed. You're a smart guy for sure. Lots of people believe it's too expensive and plasma is obsolete.
VT/ZT series are the best TVs of our time.

I'll not upgrade it for 2-3 years.

There's nothing to upgrade to. Current LED technology soon gonna be finished as it has too many issues.
Bad/incorrect color display (esp. black/grey), clouding (impossible to watch B/W movies) and usually many defective/dead pixels on matrix (oh, yeah!).
Got myself that '82 Sony sometime ago. It's awful! Compared to top plasma it's a joke. Wasted money...

[Samuel_Scott]

Plasma is now practically obsolete. Panasonic released their final models just a few weeks ago.

I'm a fan of LED TV's also, providing they are backlit. My LG is edgelit but has no problems and is a fantastic TV for the money (the 50" 3D smart was £450). In fact, the reason I prefer the plasma is simply for the black levels plasma can reproduce in comparison to LED. I have to say though, I am very interested in the future of the curved UHD TV's and do think this is the way forward. Probably will be my next step a few years down the line.

Anyway, off to watch the final episode of Inspector De Luca!

[Jim_Mcdonaugh]

I am very interested in the future of the curved UHD TV's and do think this is the way forward. Probably will be my next step a few years down the line.

I'm only interested in OLED. BTW what exactly will you watch on UHD TV? Blu-ray won't be replaced for the next 10 years.

My LG is edgelit but has no problems and is a fantastic TV for the money (the 50" 3D smart was £450

You're joking, right? My 30000$ TV sucks, but you actually like some TV for £450?! Why did you even bother with that turd? What's wrong with your Panasonic?
It's like replacing Bentley Mulsanne with Ford Focus.
And LG is the worst TV manufacturer today. I had some '70 LG a year ago. It lasted for 3 weeks, and then something happened to its matrix. I replaced it with exactly the same model, worked only for a few days! And that was it, I had my money back.

[Samuel_Scott]

You make me laugh sometimes Jim. You always think that the more something costs, then the better it is. You have to realise, 99.9% of people can't afford to buy such expensive TV's (I know I sure as hell can't!) and when you look at everything you get for the LG, it's superb value for money - and this has been recognised by every AV magazine or site there is. The Panasonic is my favourite TV, but do I think the LG is rubbish. Not at all. The specs you get for the price are excellent. I'd be sad if I spent $30k on a TV and it was rubbish. You say it's like buying a Ford Focus, and I agree. Affordable, reliable, great for the money, and not a problem for 99% of the non-elitest people who have one. There's a reason they are one of the most popular cars ever made.

If you think LG is the worst TV available today, you have serious disillusions.

[Chris_Xa]

Think it all depends on the TV models. Have a Samsung LA40M81BDX/XSA, and I have no problem with its black levels... sure they're not the best ever, but as I don't have a fortune to spend on TVs I'm quite happy with it. A friend got another Samsung model and was quite upset over its black levels (he replaced it with another TV model/brand)... meaning even within the same brand, quality varies. Seen it for myself in showrooms as well. And price is not always indicative of quality.

At the time of purchase (6years ago I think), the Panasonic had the superior picture - but was out of my budget. And in a side-side comparison with a Sony (at the same price as the Samsung), the Samsung had the superior picture. Size aside, can't say I'm sorry I purchased it - even if it did drop 25% in price a few months later. Am always wondering what a bigger size could do, and then I realise that even a cinema screen at home wouldn't make me happy; yes it'd be bigger, but then I'd need a bigger wall, and I'd need a longer room to sit further back to enjoy it, which would make it comparatively small again (ie further back from screen you are, smaller the screen seems)... There's always a tradeoff.

As for the future, nothing's set in stone yet for new technologies always emerge.
* Laser TV sounded quite promising when announced a few years back, but nothing has been heard since that initial hype.
* OLED's blue has issues, but I've also heard that won't rear its ugly head for at least 3000 (or was it 30000?) hours I believe - which is a LOT of TV-on. Guess by the time it expires, one would be ready for an upgrade anyway.
* LED/LCD just keeps on going until the unit itself dies... I've worked with LCD monitors that were on for 24hours/365days for at least 15years, and they were still going with no sign of reduced visual quality (except the unforeseen dead-pixel issue).
* Projectors would probably be the best solution, but they have the ongoing lamp-replacement cost to consider - and need darker rooms. Their only advantage is obviously the HUGE displays they can create (no need to go to a cinema again, for one can create an IMAX display in their own home).
* Plasmas obviously have the gas-issue, but like OLED blue will take a lot of viewing before having to worry about it.
* Then you have spray-able/wrap-able technologies talked about as well...
* Perhaps the most future-feasible technology is if Google Glass marries Oculus VR. If both technologies take off (and paired with true 3D-headset sound), they have the potential of a 3D-IMAX-like display right in front of your eyes, without requiring an entire room to enjoy it. One could conceivably watch a film on public transport, in bed, etc without intruding/bothering anyone else... no more fighting over the remote. But THAT is at least 10years away, if indeed it catches on.

* As for cost... when a few months ago I shoved the Silence Of The Lambs blu into an UHDTV, there was no difference whatsoever. They cost appx U$8K at the time, but looking at the display alone I'd notice not much difference to the HDTV alongside it... And then they switched the UHD to a 576p (TV broadcast) program: !!! QUITE BAD - worse than the same program running on the HDTV next to it !!! Obviously one can only upscale a low-resolution source so much; one could do the same on a HDTV with a (for example) 144p video, and get a similar comparative result. Guess my point is, don't even consider a UHDTV unless you have the UHD content to use it with - else it's a waste of $. And when you consider that even the few blu's at the moment that are mastered-in-4K-but-still-output-1080p (eg MiB) don't even do that, it will take a long while. Plus we'll need another disk format to fit the 4K content, which is questionable considering all the talk at the moment saying "blu will be the last disk format"...

Also looked at a recent 100inch TV (which I think was based on a rear-projector-like technology), and its contrast levels were quite disappointing. THAT costs appx U$10K if I remember correctly.

Anyway, nice to live in interesting times, where consumers like us can have such discussions and options... Quite a change from, say, even 20 years ago when you only had 2 affordable options (a cinema screen and a CRT) to watch our favourite pastime...

[Jim_Mcdonaugh]

You make me laugh sometimes Jim.

Laugh it up all you want. But when you're used to expensive things and personal comfort, you won't go back. Atleast I can't.

You always think that the more something costs, then the better it is.

Sometimes it's waste indeed, but sometimes it's truly better. Depends what we're talking about.

it's superb value for money

I don't care about value/quality balance. I want maximum quality, the price is unimportant.
And why did you even buy that Panasonic then? If you care about quality/price thing, you could've got much cheaper model.

I'd be sad if I spent $30k on a TV and it was rubbish.

You think I bought that crap for myself?! Now you think I'm a total idiot. How sad.

You say it's like buying a Ford Focus, and I agree. Affordable, reliable, great for the money, and not a problem for 99% of the non-elitest people who have one. There's a reason they are one of the most popular cars ever made.

You remind me one of my buddies, who ridiculed me for buying expensive/exotic cars. Until he "borrowed" one of my R/R (without my permission).
Now he's a different man. A car can change you forever, you know. He never went back to his Toyota Landcruiser and Lexus LX 430...

If you think LG is the worst TV available today, you have serious disillusions.

Maybe you're right, Sharp is probably worse. I love their menus which never save settings!

Think it all depends on the TV models. Have a Samsung LA40M81BDX/XSA, and I have no problem with its black levels... sure they're not the best ever, but as I don't have a fortune to spend on TVs I'm quite happy with it. A friend got another Samsung model and was quite upset over its black levels (he replaced it with another TV model/brand)... meaning even within the same brand, quality varies. Seen it for myself in showrooms as well. And price is not always indicative of quality.

The most people buy '42 TV for no more then 1K$.

At the time of purchase (6years ago I think), the Panasonic had the superior picture - but was out of my budget. And in a side-side comparison with a Sony (at the same price as the Samsung), the Samsung had the superior picture. Size aside, can't say I'm sorry I purchased it - even if it did drop 25% in price a few months later. Am always wondering what a bigger size could do, and then I realise that even a cinema screen at home wouldn't make me happy; yes it'd be bigger, but then I'd need a bigger wall, and I'd need a longer room to sit further back to enjoy it, which would make it comparatively small again (ie further back from screen you are, smaller the screen seems)... There's always a tradeoff.

I'm thinking about ordering a custom '215 screen. Though I'll need to redecorate my biggest hall (not big enough for such screen). Will cost ALOT, but what the hell...

As for the future, nothing's set in stone yet for new technologies always emerge.

* Laser TV sounded quite promising when announced a few years back, but nothing has been heard since that initial hype.

I have a '55 Mitsubishi. Bought it 4 years ago as I recall. Quality reminds me some old CCFL TVs. Wasted money, I really feel stupid for paying 10K for that turd.

* OLED's blue has issues, but I've also heard that won't rear its ugly head for at least 3000 (or was it 30000?) hours I believe - which is a LOT of TV-on. Guess by the time it expires, one would be ready for an upgrade anyway.

The biggest issues are its price and size. Right now you can get only '55 for ~20K. Is it worth it? Anyway I'll pass for now, though the technology itself is very promising.

* LED/LCD just keeps on going until the unit itself dies... I've worked with LCD monitors that were on for 24hours/365days for at least 15years, and they were still going with no sign of reduced visual quality (except the unforeseen dead-pixel issue).

Cheap LED/LCD monitors actually die quickly. The best are professional NEC LED monitors (current gen), the most reliable and the most expensive. Got 4 of them (~2.5K$ / '30). I know, it's crazy but I need them for my work.

* Projectors would probably be the best solution, but they have the ongoing lamp-replacement cost to consider - and need darker rooms. Their only advantage is obviously the HUGE displays they can create (no need to go to a cinema again, for one can create an IMAX display in their own home).

I've read about one guy who made this monster projector, spent like 2 mil $ on it. Claims it's the best thing ever.

* Plasmas obviously have the gas-issue, but like OLED blue will take a lot of viewing before having to worry about it.

Good plasma is very reliable, cheap isn't. Been there, done that.

* Then you have spray-able/wrap-able technologies talked about as well...

We also have little green men with guns and cowboy hats who like icecream.

* Perhaps the most future-feasible technology is if Google Glass marries Oculus VR. If both technologies take off (and paired with true 3D-headset sound), they have the potential of a 3D-IMAX-like display right in front of your eyes, without requiring an entire room to enjoy it. One could conceivably watch a film on public transport, in bed, etc without intruding/bothering anyone else... no more fighting over the remote. But THAT is at least 10years away, if indeed it catches on.

I wear glasses when watching movies, and it's pretty bad watching 3D with glasses. Plus 3D technology will really advance only after 2043 (I read this article which totally convinced me). Right now it's just Scar 3D and other crap.

* As for cost... when a few months ago I shoved the Silence Of The Lambs blu into an UHDTV, there was no difference whatsoever. They cost appx U$8K at the time, but looking at the display alone I'd notice not much difference to the HDTV alongside it... And then they switched the UHD to a 576p (TV broadcast) program: !!! QUITE BAD - worse than the same program running on the HDTV next to it !!! Obviously one can only upscale a low-resolution source so much; one could do the same on a HDTV with a (for example) 144p video, and get a similar comparative result. Guess my point is, don't even consider a UHDTV unless you have the UHD content to use it with - else it's a waste of $. And when you consider that even the few blu's at the moment that are mastered-in-4K-but-still-output-1080p (eg MiB) don't even do that, it will take a long while.

2K video on 4K TV it's still a 2K video. Plus video quality gets worse.

Plus we'll need another disk format to fit the 4K content, which is questionable considering all the talk at the moment saying "blu will be the last disk format"...

4K video requires atleast 75 GB disk. But today Blu-ray players don't support such capacity and video resolution.
At the end of the day launching new production for 4K video isn't economically viable whatsoever. It was said and repeated many times.

Also looked at a recent 100inch TV (which I think was based on a rear-projector-like technology), and its contrast levels were quite disappointing. THAT costs appx U$10K if I remember correctly.

Yeah, all colors are crushed and there're some other issues. I was asked to buy that one, but I refused.

Anyway, nice to live in interesting times, where consumers like us can have such discussions and options... Quite a change from, say, even 20 years ago when you only had 2 affordable options (a cinema screen and a CRT) to watch our favourite pastime...

CRT is the best thing ever!

[Chris_Xa]

The most people buy '42 TV for no more then 1K$.

Back then, 42" were equivalent to today's 60" (in $).

* Laser TV sounded quite promising when announced a few years back, but nothing has been heard since that initial hype.

I have a '55 Mitsubishi. Bought it 4 years ago as I recall. Quality reminds me some old CCFL TVs. Wasted money, I really feel stupid for paying 10K for that turd.

Just so I don't misunderstand, is (was?) that a TV with laser display technology ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laser_video_display ) ? Didn't think they ever made the production line, and were only prototypes etc... Wow, a person who actually saw one!
Hmm, not that good huh? Probably explains why it never came out here then...

* OLED's blue has issues, but I've also heard that won't rear its ugly head for at least 3000 (or was it 30000?) hours I believe - which is a LOT of TV-on. Guess by the time it expires, one would be ready for an upgrade anyway.

The biggest issues are its price and size. Right now you can get only '55 for ~20K. Is it worth it? Anyway I'll pass for now, though the technology itself is very promising.

http://www.cnet.com/news/seven-problems-with-current-oled-televisions is an interesting starting point, but you're probably aware of the issues anyway...

* LED/LCD just keeps on going until the unit itself dies... I've worked with LCD monitors that were on for 24hours/365days for at least 15years, and they were still going with no sign of reduced visual quality (except the unforeseen dead-pixel issue).

Cheap LED/LCD monitors actually die quickly. The best are professional NEC LED monitors (current gen), the most reliable and the most expensive. Got 4 of them (~2.5K$ / '30). I know, it's crazy but I need them for my work.

Oh I don't know... aren't the Dell Ultrasharps similarly priced, due to their quality also?

I've read about one guy who made this monster projector, spent like 2 mil $ on it. Claims it's the best thing ever.

Have to ask - does he get the Star Wars films from LucasArts (now Disney) on hard disk in uncompressed format?

* Then you have spray-able/wrap-able technologies talked about as well...

We also have little green men with guns and cowboy hats who like icecream.

http://www.psfk.com/2013/01/microsoft-wall-tv.html and http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg2 ... of-tv.html were 2 starting examples that came to mind. Had seen something else talked bout: in a way, either "printing" or "painting" "pixel paint" on a wall, then applying current from a "control" box to display an image. Can't remember where I had seen it, and it was a laboratory/prototype/concept thing, but think it was sometime within the last 18months. Considering one can buy 3D printers now, I'm not dismissing it at all.

Anyway, nice to live in interesting times, where consumers like us can have such discussions and options... Quite a change from, say, even 20 years ago when you only had 2 affordable options (a cinema screen and a CRT) to watch our favourite pastime...

CRT is the best thing ever!:lol:

Well you DO need one to play Time Crisis 1 & 2 ( http://www.mobygames.com/game-group/time-crisis-series ) still!

[Jim_Mcdonaugh]

http://www.cnet.com/news/seven-problems-with-current-oled-televisions is an interesting starting point, but you're probably aware of the issues anyway...

I knew that, sure. But the technology itself is very promising. But time will tell...

Back then, 42" were equivalent to today's 60" (in $).

Probably, I don't recall that.

Just so I don't misunderstand, is (was?) that a TV with laser display technology ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laser_video_display ) ? Didn't think they ever made the production line, and were only prototypes etc... Wow, a person who actually saw one!
Hmm, not that good huh? Probably explains why it never came out here then...

Mitsubishi LaserVue TV, yes, one of those few models.

Oh I don't know... aren't the Dell Ultrasharps similarly priced, due to their quality also?

I had problems with PRO models in the past. They have issues with color calibration, plus some other minor stuff.

Have to ask - does he get the Star Wars films from LucasArts (now Disney) on hard disk in uncompressed format?

No, he's just an ordinary guy without any connections as far as I know.

Well you DO need one to play Time Crisis 1 & 2 ( http://www.mobygames.com/game-group/time-crisis-series ) still!

Nah, I prefer NOLF 1/2.

[Vincent_Bouche]

Hostages: Season 1 (TV) Pretty good israelian series, not awesome but a good finale - 7/10

For some reason I thought you meant Prisoners Of War, which I've seen up to the end of season 2. Do like that the US version/remake (Homeland) went a different direction, so I can enjoy both series. As for Hostages, do you mean Bnei Aruba ( http://www.imdb.com/title/tt3242480 ) - and if you do, is the US version different enough so I can enjoy the original?

This is the right IMDB entry for the series I'm talking about. I've only watched the Israelian series, not the US one!

[Jim_Mcdonaugh]

Watched today Out Of Furnace 2/10 and The Counselor -10/10 (disgusting).

[Samuel_Scott]

Inspector De Luca: The Complete Series (only 4-episodes) - If you like Poirot, Miss Marple etc and would like to see the mysteries in a wartime period in a notoriously corrupt country where the detective won't allow corruption, then this is for you. 7/10

Also, picked up The Walking Dead: Seasons 1-3 (UK Blu) for £30 the other day (bargain!). Seen season 1-2 before, but made a start on season 1 (just episode 1 so far). Tomorrow will crack through the seasons I have already seen as I do a few other bits and pieces I need to do!

[Chris_Xa]

Well you DO need one to play Time Crisis 1 & 2 ( http://www.mobygames.com/game-group/time-crisis-series ) still!

Nah, I prefer NOLF 1/2.

Also great games, but thankfully they don't NEED a CRT to play.

Watched today Out Of Furnace 2/10 and The Counselor -10/10 (disgusting).

Are you saying Counselor is 20points below a 10, as in 100% below zero? Wow that's harsh; have not seen it myself - do others here who've watched it feel the same (as in, not worth even bothering)?

Also, picked up The Walking Dead: Seasons 1-3 (UK Blu) for £30 the other day (bargain!). Seen season 1-2 before, but made a start on season 1 (just episode 1 so far). Tomorrow will crack through the seasons I have already seen as I do a few other bits and pieces I need to do!

Wouldn't it have been better to wait until ALL seasons came out, then get whatever boxset they decided to bring out? However it is a good series, and perhaps the best of the US zombie TV series. Speaking of which, what did you think of Death Valley ( http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1835129 ) ?

[Jim_Mcdonaugh]

Also great games, but thankfully they don't NEED a CRT to play.

Actually, they do. Both games look bad on any PRO display I have. Plus those games don't support widescreen. And CRT displays are 4x3, so it's a perfect fit.
I also had a bunch of LED gaming monitors, but they didn't last...

Are you saying Counselor is 20points below a 10, as in 100% below zero? Wow that's harsh; have not seen it myself - do others here who've watched it feel the same (as in, not worth even bothering)?

It's a perfect mix of everything I hate in cinema. Everything, and I mean every damn thing was done deliberately awful. In fact, I'm shocked that a director like Ridley Scott managed to shoot such, khm, THING. It's not a movie, it's a joke which is very sad. It was one revolting experience to me.
I'm doing my best to erase it from my memory completely.

[Ain_Uussaar]

The Counselor - Extended Director`s Cut

[Samuel_Scott]

Also, picked up The Walking Dead: Seasons 1-3 (UK Blu) for £30 the other day (bargain!). Seen season 1-2 before, but made a start on season 1 (just episode 1 so far). Tomorrow will crack through the seasons I have already seen as I do a few other bits and pieces I need to do!

Wouldn't it have been better to wait until ALL seasons came out, then get whatever boxset they decided to bring out? However it is a good series, and perhaps the best of the US zombie TV series. Speaking of which, what did you think of Death Valley ( http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1835129 ) ?

That is what my intention was, but the price pulled me in.

I have seen a couple of episodes of Death Valley, but not enough (or with enough attention) to pass judgement.