VCDQuality Forums - Dumb And Dumberer - SCREENER

Pages (7): « 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 »
Show all 127 posts from this thread on one page

VCDQuality Forums (http://www.vcdhq.com/forum/index.php)
- VCD (http://www.vcdhq.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?forumid=19)
-- Dumb And Dumberer - SCREENER - VideoCD (http://www.vcdhq.com/forum/showthread.php?threadid=21457)

Posted by SniperKilla on 06-13-2003 02:12 PM:

butch movie went all the way to the end for me, it cut off right before the credits, and after the bloopers.

pretty funny movie

Posted by RMO-MNY on 06-13-2003 04:35 PM:

heres some usefull information on this rls.
video is nice not bad for a wp or scr
audio is nice
the print is very weird towards the end of cd 2 we see what looks like outakes and different scenes out of sequecne before it cuts off alltogether . so if your expecting the whole movie from start to finish, beware.
also i think its hard to judge the movies content because it is incomplete.

Posted by Jerry Aldini on 06-13-2003 05:09 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by Rep-
LMAO. Half you morons think it is a sequel. A sequel occurs AFTER the first movie. Notice how this movie takes place before the first one?

Prequel / Sequel / Schmequel....who cares.

Great release, 9/8/6

Posted by LilKobe8ryant on 06-13-2003 05:27 PM:

great release, who cares if its workprint

Posted by r0b on 06-13-2003 05:38 PM:

Re: *From Film*

quote:
Originally posted by Butch
Film is not too bad.Film is incomplete cuts off before the end.
Props on the speed VideoCD!.
And you can also get away with cropping out the text and timer.
video 7
audio 8
film 3

This Film is NOT incomplete!!

The only thing missing is the end credits. You should not post that the movie is incomplete, people might take it the wrong way. The point of this forum and WEBSITE is to talk about quality and the movie it's self, if you say it's "Incomplete" then people might not want to even grab this rls. To clear things up, the movie IS complete. After the movie is over it shows a few minutes(give or take) of OUTAKES from the making of the movie. So maybe their copy didn't come with credits. Ever thought of that one?

one more thing....

If you cropped out the text and timer wouldn't there would be a HUGE blur or black bar over it? That would look horrible dude.

I stick to my rating and I did enjoy this PREQUEL(not sequel). I thought the movie had some rather funny parts and made me LOL quite a few times.

Posted by bizdady on 06-13-2003 05:55 PM:

7/7/? not bad for first release

Posted by Rep- on 06-13-2003 06:01 PM:

it was definitely dumberer. Definitely wouldn't spend $5 on it. Not nearly as great as the first one... although had some funny parts

Posted by lamercrusher on 06-13-2003 06:18 PM:

10/10/10

Great screener, pre-theatre too, as good as it will get for a vhs cap.

And no real site nuked this for being workprint, because real sites arent stupid. So ignore the lamers.

And the movie is not incomplete, the movie cuts off at the last blooper(after the movie is already over), maybe an attempt to get it as short as possible and fit it on 1 cd, which didnt work, nevertheless, the movie is a screener and is quite complete.

The movie is hilarious, Eric Christian Olsen and Derek Richardson portray a young Harry and Lloyd excellently, and despite Jim Carrey's lack of a blessing of this movie, it was great and is deserving of much success. Also, another self-deprecating cameo by Bob Sagget (former spitting image of the father family man), which was scrumtrulecent.

P.S. someone said "Good job videocd i hope they stick arround". Well, they've been around a while, you lamer, so dont act like they just appeared.

lamers suck

Posted by bryehn on 06-13-2003 06:41 PM:

looks like a legit screener to me...

movie was better than expected, but still not too great at all...

nice job though...

8/8/6

:::EDIT:::

definately a screener, little blur in the top right where the screener code would be...used to get these all the time when working at a cd warehouse.

__________________
Am I the only one missing the .rar file from the repack?

Posted by ratsting on 06-13-2003 07:26 PM:

wtf, this is a movie ? I would have been so pissed if i spent any money at all on it. The only reason I watched the entire thing was for the hot chicks in it =]

6/7/3 (<- for the chicks)

Posted by Spunko on 06-13-2003 08:13 PM:

Very nice release shame about the movie itself tho - bit shit compared to the first one.

8/8/3

Posted by wholeinfo4less on 06-13-2003 08:19 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by SPS

Honestly... I think its JIM Carrey

Btw to all of you who says "Who cares if its a screener or a workprint?" well it is a damn big different :P

A workprint aint always a complete movie, scenes or special effects can be left out and such things... A screener tho, is the real "retail" version but in promotion porpuse (cant spell) and thats because of all watermarks, serials and that shit....

I really think it does matter if it is a workprint or screener

I knew someone would flame me for using Jim Carrey's his REAL NAME! If you read (you can read can you?) his bios you would know that's his real name too! DUMBASS treating me like a noob because he got more posts than me. Now copyright that BITCH! HAHAHA Here's proof!

Name: James Eugene Carrey
Birthplace: Newmarket, Ontario, Canada
Birthdate: January 17, 1962
Debut: "Introducing... Janet" (TV movie, 1981)
Family: Percy (father); Kathleen (mother); Pat, John & Rita (siblings); Melissa Womer (ex-wife); Lauren Holly (ex-wife); Jane (daughter, with Womer)

P.S. Learn to spell too. PURPOSE

Sorry Mods had to get that off my chest.

BTW I watched the whole movie so here's an update.
7/8/6 Video just isn't that great with all that junk on it ALL the time. Also movie was better than I thought.

Posted by Tweezer on 06-13-2003 09:27 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by vm0b
JPEG looks pretty good, getting the sample now

7/7/x

when did jpegs have audio?

7/8/5

video woulda got a much higher rating if it wasnt for all the shit all over it, good rls

::EDIT:: I rated the movie. Not tooo bad, but not great definately nowhere near first one. The movie had funny parts but not many,.

Posted by Butch on 06-13-2003 09:43 PM:

quote:
If you cropped out the text and timer wouldn't there would be a HUGE blur or black bar over it? That would look horrible dude.

No m8 you can close the picture up to the top of the writing.Best thing to do is try it out on the sample and if it looks good do it to each disc.

__________________

Posted by lostaznguy on 06-13-2003 09:52 PM:

just grabbed the sample looked decent for a early release..

CHEERS!

Posted by extcyrolls on 06-13-2003 10:31 PM:

just got done watching this movie, man it was hilarious, I laughed my ass as the whole way throgh. Great look-a-likes for harry and llloyd. I also enjoyed the appearence of Bob Saggat as Jessica's Dad n-e wayz great pre video is definately watchable I give it

8/8/10

**edited***
I just got done watching a release special on comedy central for this, and I definately think this is a mislabled workprint because they should some scenes that on the special that weren't on the video cd, just my 2 cents still a great pic and if you can't see it in the theater I'd definately grab this one

Posted by neoparadox on 06-13-2003 10:38 PM:

8/8/8

Good video and audio quality. The movie wasn't as funny as the original, but it was still very funny. I think it might be missing some scenes though, I'll have to wait for a TS to find out. Good work VideoCD.

Posted by drMabuse on 06-13-2003 11:33 PM:

Like it, nice to see the first version of this as a screener, shame about the counter etc.. but I stuck with it and its ok, the films a laugh, not as much as the original. Nice video, nice audio

8/8/8

Posted by cokehead on 06-14-2003 12:08 AM:

street bootleggers have had this out for awhile, so i would imagine that is where they got it, for those wondering

Posted by Stabbe on 06-14-2003 12:10 AM:

Something weird about the Watermark saying Property of....
it seems to be reaaallly steady unlike the counter that jumps up and down , it´s almost like they put the watermark by them self.
I mean the picture is a little jumpy , that´s normal for a vhs, but the watermark doesn´t move at all.
Im not sure if im making myself clear , just a thought.It could be a workprint with the counter and then they put the watermark on themself , to make it look like a screener.

__________________
"i think i am getting hacked. my modem lights are flashing..."

All times are GMT. The time now is 03:17 PM.

Pages (7): « 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 »
Show all 127 posts from this thread on one page