kenratboy Posted August 27, 2003 Share Posted August 27, 2003 ...Downstairs, we have a Pioneer receiver, Panasonic DVD player, and some cheap speakers. The sound and picture quality are fine (though the speakers will be upgraded soon), but LOTR in widescreen on a 32" TV ruins EVERYTHING. I would take a dirt-cheap Wal-Mart 50" RCA any day over our current TV for movies. Yes, we have a 32" Sharp and it's a flat tube and is VERY nice, but when I saw the movie in the theaters, the scenes where they are 'flying' over the armies and the towers is ******* AMAZING!!! At home, it is lame and you don't get the sensation you are moving. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
m00n Posted August 27, 2003 Share Posted August 27, 2003 Well what do you expect? Movies of this nature are absolutly best on the big screen. Get a projector dude! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marksdad Posted August 27, 2003 Share Posted August 27, 2003 sound has a great deal to do with the total effect, and i am using an hitachi 31 incher, and everything you missed i recieved, what a movie, i had the neighbors over for a sneak peak, and all they could say is wow-wow-wow Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T2K Posted August 27, 2003 Share Posted August 27, 2003 The movie looks great on my TV. Maybe your thread should have been titled 'my TV sucks'. Keith Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kenratboy Posted August 27, 2003 Author Share Posted August 27, 2003 ---------------- On 8/27/2003 6:55:23 PM T2K wrote: The movie looks great on my TV. Maybe your thread should have been titled 'my TV sucks'. Keith ---------------- The TV is awesome for normal TV stuff (full screen), but LOTR is kinda lame in the REALLY wide-screen mode. Literally, over half of the TV was black... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
m00n Posted August 27, 2003 Share Posted August 27, 2003 ---------------- On 8/27/2003 6:55:23 PM T2K wrote: The movie looks great on my TV. Maybe your thread should have been titled 'my TV sucks'. Keith ---------------- LOL... Yeah man dunno what to tell you. Movie friggen rocked on my sys. First movie where I could VERY distincly hear affects coming from my rears. Normally they just produce ambiance, but not here... In specific, the scene where the elephant looking things are carrying those people around, when they would show Frodo and Sam looking over the cliff down onto the activity going on down below, they put the elephant sound affects in the rears so to give you the sensation of them being behind your line of sight... Way cool... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chinoloco Posted August 27, 2003 Share Posted August 27, 2003 Dude, You need to get a TV that is 16:9. Screw that 4:3 bullcrap. The movie was awesome at our home. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cluless Posted August 27, 2003 Share Posted August 27, 2003 I have a 36 inch wega that has a 4:3 ratio. Small by today's standard. I generally rent/buy widescreen versions to get the peripheral action. When the audio is top notch I get mentally dragged in (I don't know of a better way to explain it) and the picture size is not so much of an issue...Yeah fine I would like to have MORE MORE MORE....but isn't that where we all are? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruinsrme Posted August 27, 2003 Share Posted August 27, 2003 I agree with cluess. Personally I would rather sacrifice the picture size/quality for a better sounding sound track. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skonopa Posted August 27, 2003 Share Posted August 27, 2003 ---------------- On 8/27/2003 7:04:12 PM m00n wrote: LOL... Yeah man dunno what to tell you. Movie friggen rocked on my sys. First movie where I could VERY distincly hear affects coming from my rears. Normally they just produce ambiance, but not here... In specific, the scene where the elephant looking things are carrying those people around, when they would show Frodo and Sam looking over the cliff down onto the activity going on down below, they put the elephant sound affects in the rears so to give you the sensation of them being behind your line of sight... Way cool... ---------------- Tell me about it! How about that scene when Gandalf went bolting out of the stables on Shadow Fax to go and find the Rohan Riders. It was so awsome to hear the horse galloping from front to rear and then fading off to the rear. It friggan sound like he actually rode that horse right through my living room! As about the picture - yes, I am also stuck with a 32 inch Sharp. I do get a good picture, but it is on the smallish size, but still big enough to still feel engrossed in the movie. Some of my friends told me they actually liked watching it with the smaller picture. That huge screen at the movie theater can be overwhelming sometimes and the smaller picture can make it eaier to really take in the movie sometimes. However, I when I did see this very movie at the theater, I had to sit in the very last row - got the last friggan seat in the place (opening weekend)! It was a pretty big theater and the screen actually did not look much bigger from way in the back than when I was watching it on my 32 inch TV in my own room! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
m00n Posted August 27, 2003 Share Posted August 27, 2003 ---------------- On 8/27/2003 8:49:52 PM skonopa wrote: However, I when I did see this very movie at the theater, I had to sit in the very last row - got the last friggan seat in the place (opening weekend)! It was a pretty big theater and the screen actually did not look much bigger from way in the back than when I was watching it on my 32 inch TV in my own room! ---------------- Good Gawd dude... That must have been ONE HUGE theater. That or you sit very close to your TV. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skonopa Posted August 27, 2003 Share Posted August 27, 2003 ---------------- On 8/27/2003 8:57:10 PM m00n wrote: Good Gawd dude... That must have been ONE HUGE theater. That or you sit very close to your TV. ---------------- It was a pretty good size theater. I don't know what the seating capacity of that particular auditorium was, but from way back in the nose-bleed section, the screen did not look very big. I sit about 10 feet from the TV. A larger TV is in the future, just don't know when (would have been already if I did not have to drop $900 on my damn car - I would have taken "mmiles" up on his offer when he was selling off his!) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skonopa Posted August 27, 2003 Share Posted August 27, 2003 Ignore - double post Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
avman Posted August 28, 2003 Share Posted August 28, 2003 check my signature for,imo, a FIRST CLASS (106"13ft.back) movie/sound/picture experience avman. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ben. Posted August 28, 2003 Share Posted August 28, 2003 Don't worry kenrat, that TV won't last too much longer anyway!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prodj101 Posted August 28, 2003 Share Posted August 28, 2003 I only have a 24 inch Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kenratboy Posted August 28, 2003 Author Share Posted August 28, 2003 ---------------- On 8/28/2003 3:21:04 PM bclarke421 wrote: Don't worry kenrat, that TV won't last too much longer anyway!! ---------------- Yes it will, I will move out after college and buy a nice 50-60" set for myself. By then, a lot of programs should be in HD and/or 16:9. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TBrennan Posted August 29, 2003 Share Posted August 29, 2003 Chinoloco---Get a 16:9 TV? Screw that 4:3 "bullcrap"? What about when watching The Adventures of Robin Hood, Angels with Dirty Faces, Young Mr. Lincoln or Gone With The Wind? Think about this: Sony's 34" 16:9 TV has a screen 16" high. A 36" Sony Wega in 16:9 mode has a 16:9 area 15.5" high. Plus when you watch an Academy ratio movie on it you have a nice big 36" picture. A windowboxed 4:3 picture on the 34" 16:9 TV is about the size of 20" TV, big wow. I don't even want to talk about stretch mode with 16:9 TVs which is for rubes and yahoos and is to the 4:3 picture what pan and scan is to Panavision picture. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chinoloco Posted August 29, 2003 Share Posted August 29, 2003 ---------------- On 8/29/2003 12:02:11 AM TBrennan wrote: Chinoloco---Get a 16:9 TV? Screw that 4:3 "bullcrap"? What about when watching The Adventures of Robin Hood, Angels with Dirty Faces, Young Mr. Lincoln or Gone With The Wind? ---------------- The movies you will find in 16:9 mode will greatly outnumber the movies you can only get in full screen format on DVD. True, you will lose a few classic movies to this problem. I am sure you will always find 1 movie you love that can only be in 1.33:1. However almost every movie since the 1950s is shot in 16:9 format(the first movie in 1952). HDTV is broadcast in 16:9, I find the arguements for 4:3 TVs less and less compelling everyday. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TBrennan Posted August 29, 2003 Share Posted August 29, 2003 Hell Chino, I still watch lots of laserdiscs. A large 16:9 screen would be nice, one that still provided a good sized image when windowboxed for 4:3. But the 16:9 thing in and of itself is no big deal. The Sony 4:3 tubes with the 16:9 mode work well for me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.