VCDQuality Forums Pages (2): [1] 2 »
Show all 38 posts from this thread on one page

VCDQuality Forums (http://forum.vcdq.com/index.php)
- VCD (http://forum.vcdq.com/forumdisplay.php?forumid=19)
-- Peter Jacksons King Kong CD2 CD3 *REPACK* *READNFO* - CAM - HYdRO (http://forum.vcdq.com/showthread.php?threadid=67738)


Posted by X69 on 12-15-2005 06:48 PM:


IMPORTANT, PLEASE READ

1 NO REQUESTING MOVIES OR SAMPLES (THIS INCLUDES REQUESTS FOR OTHER GROUPS TO RELEASE THIS MOVIE!)

2 DO NOT DISCUSS WHERE TO DOWNLOAD MOVIES OR SAMPLES

3 DO NOT ASK FOR "RAR PASSWORDS" COS WE DON'T KNOW THEM. CHECK WITH YOUR SOURCE

4 NO FLAMING

5 NO "SPOILERS"

6 NO SCENE-RELATED DISCUSSION/RUMORS (ESPECIALLY REGARDING BUSTS)

7 COMMENT ON THIS RELEASE ONLY (AND ONLY IF YOU'VE SEEN AT LEAST THE SAMPLE). THIS IS THE SOLE PURPOSE OF THE THREAD!

8 NO "NOOB" QUESTIONS SUCH AS "HOW DO I WATCH THIS?" ASK IN THE APPROPRIATE PART OF THE FORUM

9 NO DISCUSSING TRADING/SELLING. IF YOU SELL COPIES, GO AWAY YOU'RE NOT WELCOME HERE

* Newbie questions? General questions unrelated to this release? Internet LOL's? Right here dudes


*** PEOPLE IGNORING THE RULES WILL BE BANNED ***


Posted by vurtX on 12-15-2005 06:51 PM:

video = 2 ... cant see a fucking thing
audio = 2 -- absolute shite
movie = ?? ... yeh like im gonna spoil an epic by watchin this

ok so i read the NFO blurb about this is 4:3 blah blah, why even bother? its total shit .. you'd get more respect by releasing anything watchable , rather than rushing out the first turd that drops outta your arse.


Posted by White Rabbit on 12-15-2005 07:21 PM:

i didnt think it was THAT bad for a cam. sure, its not great but ive seen worse

FROM SAMPLE:

v 5 (its a bit blurry and grainy, and kinda dark but seemed watchable, nothing more)

a 3.5 (is this a cam? i think its just really really bad direct audio coz audio from a microphone doesnt usually have a hiss to it. it just sounds like bad direct audio from a drive in but someones filtered it the wrong way. on the other hand, im prolly wrong)

m ? (it looks decent but i will prolly go and see it, if i dont have time coz of the time of year then ill wait for a better copy)

thanks hydro but this isnt your best work

__________________

quote:
Originally posted by pHo
the difference between compression and encoding is:

compression software works the same way as trying to get The 404, who is 350lbs, through a normal door. its method is to basically keep kicking The 404 until he gets thru the door. This works quickly, but leaves a nasty mess.

encoding software is the equivalent of The 404 going on a diet and walking thru the door. takes longer and sometimes more skill, but ultimately worth it.


Posted by Air1 on 12-15-2005 07:40 PM:

already nuked for bad AR still - can't verify though cause i won't grab it, i don't care to see this movie


Posted by Flommy on 12-15-2005 08:00 PM:

this is awfull but hey the first one out wount be long for a good ts or a nice tc is here i think

V-4
A-2
M-10 this is by far the best movie of the year


Posted by Integrity on 12-15-2005 08:04 PM:

Some of you MOFOS crack me up last review for this crap as release was 3.4/3.1/7.9 and this time it was repacked and now all the sudden its a 7.0/7.0/9.5 dam someone jipped the ratings on this or was quick to score it. withought looking at it.


Posted by Clessy on 12-15-2005 08:15 PM:

Technicolly should something be nuked for being in 4:3 even if the movie is 16:9. I mean thats like saying all Fullscreen DVD releases should be nuked.


Posted by jaxxboss on 12-15-2005 08:39 PM:

I farted 4/4/6


Posted by me-self on 12-15-2005 08:45 PM:

V:3 (Blur-o-vision)
S:3 (Just plan bad)
F:? Heard its gd and watch the cinema viewing.


Posted by Goturenumba on 12-15-2005 09:52 PM:

Video = 3.5 (generous)
Audio = 3.5
Movie = 10 Fantastic


Posted by Konichiwa on 12-15-2005 10:01 PM:

still looks like pure shit.... ohh I know hydro why not go out and cam yourselves insted of grabbing a xvid source off p2ps...
pure shit
0/0/7


Posted by Iammyself on 12-15-2005 10:09 PM:

if this was a shitty movie it would have okay rates for a CAM... oh well its a good 1st rls... 6/5/5...too long... good action, though it doesn't make it a good movie


Posted by DBXfirefly on 12-15-2005 10:47 PM:

video = -1 cant see shit

audio = ouch my ears


movie = awsome but dont waste ur eyes nor time on this totaly shite rls..they should be shot, then hung, then shot some more for this embarresment!!!


Posted by Konichiwa on 12-15-2005 11:37 PM:

the worst cam iv seen since the fast and the furious, which the camera guy put vasaline all over his lense.
give it up hydro... just quit..

pure garbage, looks like Kong took a big ole pooper on the cam..


Posted by SuperDong on 12-16-2005 12:22 AM:

Question

How is that we got a Screener (or something almost as good as a Screener) the day Star Wars: Revenge of the Sith came out but it hasn't happened for King Kong? How does that work?


Posted by nykid on 12-16-2005 12:27 AM:

more like RECRAP..

NOT EVEN GONNA RATE THIS.


Posted by Longveiw on 12-16-2005 04:31 AM:

quote:
Originally posted by SuperDong
How is that we got a Screener (or something almost as good as a Screener) the day Star Wars: Revenge of the Sith came out but it hasn't happened for King Kong? How does that work?


that was a workprint...

This is sooooo freaking terrible.
Very very very poor release.

1/1/?


Posted by 0nslaught on 12-16-2005 05:04 AM:

V: 2
A: 2
M: ?

Pure crap.


Posted by goman on 12-16-2005 08:16 AM:

not worth the download:

5, 2, not watched yet


Posted by bernashmat on 12-16-2005 09:43 AM:

Definatly a bit darkish, But watchable


All times are GMT. The time now is 03:51 PM. Pages (2): [1] 2 »
Show all 38 posts from this thread on one page

Powered by: vBulletin Version 2.3.0
Copyright © Jelsoft Enterprises Limited 2000 - 2002.