King Kong (1933) (Spain DVDs) BOOT

[Matthew_B_Harrah]

Two DVDs, note the first disc in the Special Collector's Edition is the same as the Remastered Edition.

Title: King Kong (1933) [Remastered Edition]
Country: Spain
Region: R2
Releasing Studio: Manga Films
Case Type: Keep Case
Aspect Ratio: 1.31:1
Anamorphic?: No
PAL or NTSC?: PAL
Soundtracks:
English Dolby Digital 2.0 Mono (192 kbps) [review says stereo, but menu says mono]
Spanish (Castilian) Dolby Digital 5.1 (256 kbps)
Catalán Dolby Digital 2.0 Mono (192 kbps)
Spanish (Castilian) Dolby Digital 2.0 Mono (192 kbps)
Subtitles (optional): Spanish (Castilian)
Cuts: (and if you know it, precise run time)
Running Time: (94:34)
Commentaries: Audio Commentary by film critic Antonio José Navarro
Extras:
“Everything about Kong” featurette (34:23)
Artistic Sheet (Text)
Data Sheet (Text)
Filmographies:
- Fay Wray
- Robert Armstrong
- Bruce Cabot
- Merian C. Cooper
- Ernest B. Schoedsack
Also on DVD: (Images)
- “Mademoiselle Fifi” (1944)
- “The Set-Up” (1949)
Notes: All extras are in Spanish (Castilian).
Easter Eggs: Unknown
Amazon ASIN (UK, French, German, USA releases only):
Source: Review
http://www.zonadvd.com/modules.php?name ... ent&id=520

===============================

Title: King Kong Special Collector's Edition
Country: Spain
Region: R2
Releasing Studio: Manga Films
Case Type: Digipak
Aspect Ratio:
- “King Kong” 1.31:1
- “Son of Kong” 1.30:1
- “Mighty Joe Young” 1.31:1
Anamorphic?: No
PAL or NTSC?: PAL
Soundtracks:
King Kong (1933):
English Dolby Digital 2.0 Mono (192 kbps) [review says stereo, but menu says mono]
Spanish (Castilian) Dolby Digital 5.1 (256 kbps)
Catalán Dolby Digital 2.0 Mono (192 kbps)
Spanish (Castilian) Dolby Digital 2.0 Mono (192 kbps)
Subtitles (optional): Spanish (Castilian)
Son of Kong (1933):
English Dolby Digital 2.0 Mono (192 kbps)
Spanish (Castilian) Dolby Digital 2.0 Mono (192 kbps)
Mighty Joe Young (1949):
English Dolby Digital 2.0 Mono (192 kbps)
Spanish (Castilian) Dolby Digital 2.0 Mono (192 kbps)
Subtitles (optional): Spanish (Castilian)
Cuts: (and if you know it, precise run time)
Running Time:
- “King Kong” (94:34)
- “Son of Kong (69:28)
- “Mighty Joe Young” (93:46)
Notes:
- Includes mini poster card of the original poster.
- All extras are in Spanish (Castilian).
- Titled: “El Hijo de Kong” (The Son of Kong)
- Titled: “El Gran Gorila” (Mighty Joe Young)
Easter Eggs: Unknown
Amazon ASIN (UK, French, German, USA releases only):
Source: Review
http://www.zonadvd.com/modules.php?name ... ent&id=527

DISC ONE
* “King Kong”
Audio Commentary by film critic Antonio José Navarro
Extras:
“Everything about Kong” featurette (34:23)
Artistic Sheet (Text)
Data Sheet (Text)
Filmographies:
- Fay Wray
- Robert Armstrong
- Bruce Cabot
- Merian C. Cooper
- Ernest B. Schoedsack
Also on DVD: (Images)
- “Mademoiselle Fifi” (1944)
- “The Set-Up” (1949)

DISC TWO
* “Son of Kong”
* “Mighty Joe Young”
Extras:
Artistic Sheet (Text)
Data Sheet (Text)

[Brent_Reid]

Hi and belated welcome to the forums, Matthew!

Your comparisons are nicely formatted, but I notice for some reason you've omitted the Amazon ASIN in each case. it's the eight-digit sequence in the URL of every listing and is also included in the Product Details column.

I'm afraid Manga Films is a Spanish bootleg label. The ZonaDVD site you've linked to is ok for tech specs, but routinely reviews boots as if they're legit releases. To save yourself future grief, have a look at this checklist.

[James-Masaki_Ryan]

Amazon IDs are not necessary for Spain since we have no affiliates with the site.

[James-Masaki_Ryan]

Amazon IDs are not necessary for Spain since we have no affiliates with the site.

[Brent_Reid]

Duh, of course; sorry all - wasn't thinking on all cylinders! The rest of it stands though...

[Matthew_B_Harrah]

Hi and belated welcome to the forums, Matthew!

Thank You.

I'm afraid Manga Films is a Spanish bootleg label. The ZonaDVD site you've linked to is ok for tech specs, but routinely reviews boots as if they're legit releases. To save yourself future grief, have a look at this checklist.

Strange, especially given this DVD seems to carry an exclusives Commentary not found elsewhere (at least based on what we have here on this site). I decided to look this up (not disagreeing, nor agreeing as I don't really know) and found three possible links that may say otherwise (though I will note I am stuck with classwork and pointless zoom nonsense and can't do a thorough look about):
https://en.unifrance.org/directories/co ... anga-films
https://cineuropa.org/en/distributor/21551/
https://variety.com/2006/film/global/ma ... 117949790/
However the company does seem to no longer be in service.
Found a DVDbeaver link while searching (for different film and no mention of bootleg, though the reviewer like me may not know?):
http://www.dvdbeaver.com/film/DVDReview ... mylove.htm
But then I found this article:
https://www.screendaily.com/manga-snags ... 39.article
Yet there are these reviews I have yet to do that show Buena Vista:
http://www.zonadvd.com/modules.php?name ... ent&id=883
http://www.zonadvd.com/modules.php?name ... ent&id=884
http://www.zonadvd.com/modules.php?name ... ent&id=170
http://www.zonadvd.com/modules.php?name ... ent&id=218

[Brent_Reid]

Thanks for all those links, Matthew. This could be one of those complicated ones then. It certainly appears Manga are operating legitimately in some areas, but if not, they wouldn't be the only pirates operating in plain sight. Without turning this reply into an essay, please read the series of articles I linked to above, and their comments, then let's continue.

Pay particular attention to two very similar examples I provided, run by Galeshka Moravioff and Guido Baechler. Moravioff even successfully ran a chain of cinemas and sued YouTube for a fortune, for hosting uploads of films he'd pirated himself! Then there is the plain fact that there are many companies, perhaps even the majority, that still simultaneously distribute a combination of bootleg and licensed films. Mill Creek spring immediately to mind...

I'm very tempted to continue but would mostly only be repeating what I've already written in the articles. Let's try and get to the bottom of this one at least; not only is this a subject dear to my heart, but Kong in particular has long been a favourite!

[Matthew_B_Harrah]

Brent, just some small editorials. Not sorry, can't help it. Been helping with others in my group this quarter with their spec scripts and sad part is I ain't leader. I would think with all her errors I would have been promoted by now , but I shall digress my slight off topic remarks.

...Hobbit, Potter, Jurassic, and the Transformers blockbusters here.

[Matthew_B_Harrah]

Based off the first part of your article, that I read so far. There are at least two things that suggest this shouldn't be a bootleg:

There are usually no proper, up-to-date studio logos or copyright credits anywhere on the discs or sleeves.

There is a copyright on the bottom, granted you'll have to squint given the resolution of the site's image, but it's there.
http://www.zonadvd.com/modules.php?name ... e&sid=3900

Pirate copies very rarely contain any extras but when they do it’s even rarer they’ll consist of anything substantial or officially unavailable.

This carries at least two 'substantial' extras:
Audio Commentary by film critic Antonio José Navarro
“Everything about Kong” featurette (34:23) [narrated by Antonio José Navarro]

[Brent_Reid]

I've got answers, but let's do this all in one go. Keep reading - and thanks!

[Matthew_B_Harrah]

Just finished reading Part 4. I also have actually read some of this before, because it gets posted with almost every Twilight Times release on the forums at Blu-ray.com when people are bitching about how a title is out of print and questioning if they should import what usually is claimed to be a bootleg.

But this one thing has been making my head itch:

M (1931) Films sans Frontières French pirate Blu-ray rear. As well as a lack of lossless audio and extra features, note the absence of region coding and proper studio, copyright or restoration credits.

What do you mean by "region coding"? Because it seems to be right under the Blu-ray logo. Not meaning to argue, just kind of confused when seeing/reading that.

[Matthew_B_Harrah]

Just starting "Alfred Hitchcock: Dial © for Copyright, Part 2" but before start it. I have one question to ask, as I may forget later.

Given that the British people finally did the right thing and left the EU, does that effect the copyrights now? Taking them back a few years or staying near the same date to which they become public domain?

Whimsically speaking; you brought this upon thyself by making me read this, now you must answer!

[James-Masaki_Ryan]

Given that the British people finally did the right thing and left the EU, does that effect the copyrights now?

None of that here, Matthew.

[James-Masaki_Ryan]

M (1931) Films sans Frontières French pirate Blu-ray rear. As well as a lack of lossless audio and extra features, note the absence of region coding and proper studio, copyright or restoration credits.

What do you mean by "region coding"? Because it seems to be right under the Blu-ray logo. Not meaning to argue, just kind of confused when seeing/reading that.

It means they are not region locking the discs.

[Matthew_B_Harrah]

It means they are not region locking the discs.

OK, I was reading it off as if the case didn't have a region coding on there and I was like what you mean? It's right there in plain sight. But I can see how I misinterpreted that.

[Brent_Reid]

None of that here, Matthew.

Well said, James!

There's a short, simplified summation of the Dial C for Copyright articles here: https://www.brentonfilm.com/articles/al ... omain-myth

[Brent_Reid]

I see this release has been flagged as a boot, but thought the discussion was still underway. Matthew, you're the only one who has this release in hand, so we're relying on you to confirm or refute my suspicions. While I know Manga are prolific bootleggers, especially of the RKO library, continuing the conversation should at least be a learning experience for everyone. As I said, I've a particular interest in this film and all its releases!

[Matthew_B_Harrah]

Matthew, you're the only one who has this release in hand

If you mean review, yes. The physical copies I own the 1933 "King Kong" is a really old VHS, the sweet looking DVD-Tin, and the Blu-ray-Booklet. [Plus avi of the colorized version, would love to see Warner add that as an extra in a future release. I'm hoping we'll get UltraHD release when Godzilla vs. Kong comes out.]

Now thought this done since it's been cabal a boot. Though your writing sort of suggest otherwise:

Based off the first part of your article, that I read so far. There are at least two things that suggest this shouldn't be a bootleg:
There are usually no proper, up-to-date studio logos or copyright credits anywhere on the discs or sleeves.

There is a copyright on the bottom, granted you'll have to squint given the resolution of the site's image, but it's there.
http://www.zonadvd.com/modules.php?name ... e&sid=3900
Pirate copies very rarely contain any extras but when they do it’s even rarer they’ll consist of anything substantial or officially unavailable.

This carries at least two 'substantial' extras:
Audio Commentary by film critic Antonio José Navarro
“Everything about Kong” featurette (34:23) [narrated by Antonio José Navarro]

Plus you bring up "Mill Creek" was once a bootlegger and now legit. So it could be plausible that "Manga Films" went the same way, then called it quits some time around 2008-2009, or since they were once bootleggers. Maybe got sue the heck out of since they could no longer run-being a legit company. This of course is all theoretical.

This is how far I've read, but stopped once it was dub a boot:
https://www.brentonfilm.com/articles/al ... s-in-print

I have very little time around right now as I have class work and now are heading into the last few weeks. What truly makes it worse is my birthday is on the 24th and fear the worse-classwork that is. I mean shite, I should have finished my "Batman Beyond" set and sent the comparison in long ago, but I'm on the extra disc. Then it's just movie and so should be able to post soon hopefully by the end of this week if I'm not bombard with work.

[Brent_Reid]

Again, I overlooked the fact you don't actually own it. A good rule of thumb is be very wary when adding Spanish and Italian classic releases in general, especially when they're from non-major studios. They will more likely than not be boots.

KK33's restoration did have a full 4K workflow, so a UHD release is theoretically possible. But the O-neg is long gone and the later generation elements used weren't in the best condition, so any gain over the current BD would only be visible virtually under a microscope or projected on a cinema-sized screen. And standing very close. Be very grateful for the brilliant releases we have!

The 1980s colorized version was done on SD videotape from an SD source. The best quality transfer for it is on the DVDs I added to the database. It can't look any better than on those.

Kong is one of the most valuable classic film properties in the world. It's always been copyrighted everywhere and any boots stand out a mile. Universal own it and share distribution with Warners outside of the US. Basically, any copyright credits from anyone other than those two is utterly meaningless. My articles cover this!

I also covered the fact that even bootlegs sometimes (but rarely) contain extras, even specially created ones. It stands to reason it's worth the bootleggers making some effort for potentially the most profitable film they could release. The two new extras are an audio commentary by an unknown Spanish blogger and a photo gallery narrated by the same person. Sound fishy much? Kong, as you well know, has a ton of brilliant extras already, by world renowned critics and historians, so why not just use those? Because they're relatively recent, obviously under copyright and if sued, the bootleggers can't claim ignorance in thinking they're PD.

Mill Creek are still pumping out hundreds of bootlegs and they do regularly get legal threats. To these, they simply say sorry, remove the offending items from their catalogue and make minimal reparations where necessary. It's too lucrative a model for them to bother changing their ways completely. Believe me, if copyright laws were less strictly enforced in the US, they'd be doing exactly the same as the Spanish and Italian bootleggers. There are plenty more like them, with Eureka probably the best known example of bootleggers who eventually went legit, prior to acquiring the Masters of Cinema brand.

You don't have to read all my Hitchcock articles! Just the summary I linked to above, the bootleg articles and the Dial C for Copyright series should cover you. I have got some more in the pipeline though.

Hmm... now I've taken the time to bash out the above, I may adapt and incorporate some of it into my articles, to provide further clarification.

Have I answered your questions satisfactorily, Matthew?

[Matthew_B_Harrah]

The 1980s colorized version was done on SD videotape from an SD source. The best quality transfer for it is on the DVDs I added to the database. It can't look any better than on those.

It more about just having a legit copy available as well as for reference purposes, and fun. They could even make complementary featurette on Turner colorization and it's semi-controversy. While an HD transfer would be nice, I could deal with it being in SD.

I also covered the fact that even bootlegs sometimes (but rarely) contain extras, even specially created ones. It stands to reason it's worth the bootleggers making some effort for potentially the most profitable film they could release. The two new extras are an audio commentary by an unknown Spanish blogger and a photo gallery narrated by the same person. Sound fishy much? Kong, as you well know, has a ton of brilliant extras already, by world renowned critics and historians, so why not just use those? Because they're relatively recent, obviously under copyright and if sued, the bootleggers can't claim ignorance in thinking they're PD.

I understand exactly what you're saying there, but "an unknown Spanish blogger"? Yes, unknown to me and you, but are not all critics [especially these days] technically unknown. I mean look at some of these unknowns [at least to/for me] that Kino sometimes dig up. I don't mean to play devil's advocate [can't help it, INTJ personality], but he has at least appeared in a few other releases and seems to have some books out. [google antonio jose navarro critico de cine] Now as for "why not just use those?" Well my guess $$$, wanting someone spoke their language, maybe he lives nearby, was at a signing and agreed to do it. The reasons can go on and on. It's like asking a studio exec why they change so many perfect scripts just to suit their ego?

Have I answered your questions satisfactorily, Matthew?

To the best of my acknowledge so far... Yes, but i'm sure there will be more.

Otherwise once this was labeled; bootleg there is nothing I can do about it. Rules are rules. I don't have any authority here to do such acts. I am merely a user/contributor/supporter. [User since the days of Mac G5(Why I remember when they had to which providers {or something} because they reached their storage cap and weren't told and lost some of their comparisons.) and contributor since "Space Adventure Cobra".]