just finished watching....


the nfo says all audio and everything is included. FALSE!

there's supposed to be 3 audio tracks but there's only 1 and it's NOT DD 5.1 it's just stereo 2.0 !

still a decent movie.

video: 10 (untouched, what more could you ask for?)
audio: 8 (DD 2.0? wtfever. why strip DD 5.1?)
movie: 7 (only a 7 because it's got some original characters/actors and any National Lampoon Vacation movie series' can appreciate with)

just my 2 cents...

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

haha this looks so awful, didn't know they'd done a sequel.. so glad its a TV sequel. even better! don't think i could be bothered to grab a dvdr tho.. divx on the other hand

__________________
563-773-1880

<Dwaggy> i caught you a delicious Bass
<The404> This is because you are an idiot

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

quote:

---

Originally posted by Air1
just finished watching....


the nfo says all audio and everything is included. FALSE!

there's supposed to be 3 audio tracks but there's only 1 and it's NOT DD 5.1 it's just stereo 2.0 !

still a decent movie.

video: 10 (untouched, what more could you ask for?)
audio: 8 (DD 2.0? wtfever. why strip DD 5.1?)
movie: 7 (only a 7 because it's got some original characters/actors and any National Lampoon Vacation movie series' can appreciate with)

just my 2 cents...

---

Video a 10 my ass. 8 at most. Just because its direct source dvdr ripped doesn't automatically give it a 10. Your crazy and these movie looks terrible. Please end the misery. Vegas Vacation was bad enough. Move on

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Damn! It's got 2.0 audio? That just sucks .. i heard about this movie like a year ago, was wondering when it'd come out. The 7 you gave it surprises me .. i hear this movie is the shit. Literally, it's so terrible it's not even worth watching. Still deciding if i should grab this.

bcool2k: Sure, maybe it doesn't deserve a 10, but it's a direct copy. Nothing better will come out, nor will this movie ever be improved on dvd. So, like it or not, it deserves a 10. After seeing a few rars i will infact rate it a 10 as well. Only have 2 speakers at my desk tho, so can't confirm on it having 2.0 audio .. but i trust ya.

Oh .. that's weird. I loved Vegas Vacation, actually, i loved all the NL Vacation movies (except this one cuz i havent seen it yet)

::edit::

quote:

---

Originally posted by pHo
don't think i could be bothered to grab a dvdr tho.. divx on the other hand

---

pHo:
National.Lampoons.Christmas.Vacation.2.DVDRip.XviD-SAPHiRE
Your wish has been granted

Last edited by vip3r on 10-03-2004 at 12:06 PM

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

quote:

---

Originally posted by vip3r
Damn! It's got 2.0 audio? That just sucks .. i heard about this movie like a year ago, was wondering when it'd come out. The 7 you gave it surprises me .. i hear this movie is the shit. Literally, it's so terrible it's not even worth watching. Still deciding if i should grab this.

bcool2k: Sure, maybe it doesn't deserve a 10, but it's a direct copy. Nothing better will come out, nor will this movie ever be improved on dvd. So, like it or not, it deserves a 10. After seeing a few rars i will infact rate it a 10 as well. Only have 2 speakers at my desk tho, so can't confirm on it having 2.0 audio .. but i trust ya.

Oh .. that's weird. I loved Vegas Vacation, actually, i loved all the NL Vacation movies (except this one cuz i havent seen it yet)

---

Its cool bro. To each his own. Nothing will best the comic genious of the original Xmas vacation. A true classic needs no sequel. Just my opinion. Enjoy it!! P.S watch out for peevtu posting crap about POT and others. Clearly a moron. Gave Shark.Tale.CAM-POT a 3.LMFAO.Thought u'd like to hear that one.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

quote:

---

Originally posted by bcool2k
To each his own.

---

Yeah, that's something we all need to remember

but that rating for the other movie .. can't be ignored lol

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

bcool2k:

As Vip3r said and as I said and you quoted me, it's UNTOUCHED VIDEO so it automatically gets a 10. The video didn't look GREAT but it was untouched so it deserves a 10 and that's the bottom line.

Would you rate a black and white movie's uncoutched video less than a 10? When you rate you should rate on the release the group did (meaning the rip) and a 10 for video is genuine since it's untouched and it's the best they could do.

Now if we were rating the STUDIO'S RELEASE'S video quality, then yes, we would rate it lower than a 10.

---- Anyhow, like I said I rated it a 7 because it's hard to rate any National Lampoon movie lower that has any ties to the 'Vacation' series (at least for a big-time movie buff like me).

No bad feelings, just thoughts/opinions/etc. Cheers.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

quote:

---

Originally posted by Air1
bcool2k:

As Vip3r said and as I said and you quoted me, it's UNTOUCHED VIDEO so it automatically gets a 10. The video didn't look GREAT but it was untouched so it deserves a 10 and that's the bottom line.

Would you rate a black and white movie's uncoutched video less than a 10? When you rate you should rate on the release the group did (meaning the rip) and a 10 for video is genuine since it's untouched and it's the best they could do.

Now if we were rating the STUDIO'S RELEASE'S video quality, then yes, we would rate it lower than a 10.

---- Anyhow, like I said I rated it a 7 because it's hard to rate any National Lampoon movie lower that has any ties to the 'Vacation' series (at least for a big-time movie buff like me).

No bad feelings, just thoughts/opinions/etc. Cheers.

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

quote:

---

Originally posted by bcool2k
That cool man NONE taken. The highest rating i've ever given is a 9.5 for Video Quality, perhaps its because i review alot of Retail DVDS. A one to one copy deserves the same treatment as the studio. Its the same source. So i would give it the same treatment. Right or Wrong, I care NOT. Nothing deserves a 10, ie perfection. Never seen it, Never will!!

---

Ya, but this forum compares the video to the retail DVD (where the retail video is the reference of comparison). So no matter how shitty the video, if it's 1:1, then it's a 10. If the video sucks ass and it was downsampled, then the score starts going down accordingly.

IRONICALLY, if the video was stated as "downsampled" in the NFO, people (including myself) would be raping the score down around 5/10, as the video actually don't look too good I guess that's the down side to not having the original to compare it to.

If you want to review the actual video transfer quality, then you'll unfortunately have to go elsewhere for that.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Im with Bcool on this, if untouched automatically means a 10, why bother posting it.
If a group wrongly or accidently puts Untouched on a Downsampled release, does that mean a 10.

I was under the impression this forum was to review the quality, not make the groups feel all warm and fuzzy, when they see all the 10's they get.
People seemed to have stopped using they're eyes, I dont give a fuck if its downsampled or not, I care what it looks like.
If someone give a release a 10 cause its untouched an i get it and it looks shit, i will be pissed off and dissapointed.

I know theres always gonna be two sides on this, but i just think its flawed, if the retail is poor, but still has to be downsampled, then it will effect the score, as more people will say the group fucked the rip.
The same thing with happen with the SVCD and Divx, those releases dont take the original DVD for comparison, so why should these.

I know its a rant, but i just think giving something a 10 when it looks shit is stupid and misleading.

8/8/4 Why did i watch this guff

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

quote:

---

Originally posted by Redemption1980
Im with Bcool on this, if untouched automatically means a 10, why bother posting it.
If a group wrongly or accidently puts Untouched on a Downsampled release, does that mean a 10.

I was under the impression this forum was to review the quality, not make the groups feel all warm and fuzzy, when they see all the 10's they get.
People seemed to have stopped using they're eyes, I dont give a fuck if its downsampled or not, I care what it looks like.
If someone give a release a 10 cause its untouched an i get it and it looks shit, i will be pissed off and dissapointed.

I know theres always gonna be two sides on this, but i just think its flawed, if the retail is poor, but still has to be downsampled, then it will effect the score, as more people will say the group fucked the rip.
The same thing with happen with the SVCD and Divx, those releases dont take the original DVD for comparison, so why should these.

I know its a rant, but i just think giving something a 10 when it looks shit is stupid and misleading.

8/8/4 Why did i watch this guff

---

Rock on Brotha!! Thank You i dont' give 10's otherwise why bother posting at all, oh so true. However, no matter how many times i state i'll NEVER give a 10 ppl have to object. Well i say object away, I've never seen a perfect release. Even George Lucas with all his tech Nuts couldn't perfect Star Wars. I usually say Video Untouched, but no fault of the group because come on ppl. Many of you do NOT buy the retails. I actually do. I have well over 1000. I just download dvdr for fun

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

quote:

---

Originally posted by bcool2k
Rock on Brotha!! Thank You i dont' give 10's otherwise why bother posting at all, oh so true. However, no matter how many times i state i'll NEVER give a 10 ppl have to object. Well i say object away, I've never seen a perfect release. Even George Lucas with all his tech Nuts couldn't perfect Star Wars. I usually say Video Untouched, but no fault of the group because come on ppl. Many of you do NOT buy the retails. I actually do. I have well over 1000. I just download dvdr for fun

---

There are already dozens of webpages out there that review the actual video quality of retail releases.

This forum (IMO) has always been for reviewing the actual DVD-R release, not the release from whichever movie publishing house released this movie. These reviews are "how good is my DVD-R copy compared to the retail".

Of course each to is own on this one. Everyone's got different taste in video quality, and many people here still watch these movies on a 27" 4:3 TV.

SIDE RANT: The fault of picture quality on DVD mostly lays in the format. Some retails are screwed up in the video department, but that's because of limitations of either the original print or the dvd format. If we all had Blu-Ray at 1080p with it's throughput of 35mbit/sec, then imagine how many 10's you would be giving out AT LEAST for the upper echelon movies (ie: the blockbusters that had decent film to record movies onto).

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

I agree this forum is about reviewing the actual DVD-R release, so why does it matter what the source is, a Downsampled DVD could look better than a Untouched one, so why does the Untouched get a higher score.

I hope you can see my logic here, IMO the quality should be compared against other DVD-R's, irrespective of original DVD source.

Porco i agree on your Side Rant, Ive never like VHS pic, but years ago when i first say DVD i thought it doesn't get much better than that, but now im constantly finding flaws in retail DVD's.
BlueRay should look awesome and i hoping Columbia Tristar take advantage of the format as they have some of the best looking and sounding DVD's out there, well at least the PAL releases are, haven't saw an NTSC one, but i dont imagine they'll differ much.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged