Armour of God 2: Operation Condor [88 Films]

[Scott_Napier]

Hi,

Just some corrections and information for the Blu-ray comparison (http://dvdcompare.net/comparisons/film.php?fid=16926) and the 88 Films release:

1. The subtitles were re-translated from Cantonese.
2. Typo: Arne [not "Arnie"] Venema.
3. It is from a 2K master (same as Universal), whereas Mediumrare, Splendid, HKVideo (HK version only; French is genuine HD) and Kam & Ronson use the same upscaled master. Paramount uses its own HD master, as do the Echo Bridge releases. I'd argue that it influences the overall section more (as opposed to a 7.1 remix).
4. There is a signs track for the English dub.

Regarding the review (http://dvdcompare.net/review.php?rid=6281):

1. Typos: "it's" (instead of "its" - when appropriate, of course); "din't"; "palls"
2. I can confirm no seamless branching was used.
3. The original trailer was always 1:85:1, for whatever reason (see this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P2sermxXKDk). The 2K one was reconstructed using footage from the restored film, so it is missing behind-the-scenes. Both have English subtitles.
4. The first UK Blu-ray was the Mediumrare one, and that was uncut too.

Disclaimer: I was involved in the production.

Thanks!

[Rick_Curzon]

Cheers, updated.

Can you confirm if any digital tinkering has been done on the 88 Films' master?

[Scott_Napier]

Hi Rick,

Cheers, updated.

Thanks for this!

Can you confirm if any digital tinkering has been done on the 88 Films' master?

Not that I'm aware of. In fact, the company's modus operandi is avoiding DNR whenever possible (including the requesting of masters without), though there was an exception with one title (see details: https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread.ph ... st16291626)

I'd have to confirm this, but I'm assuming each version was presented on its own layer, and no 5.1 options were included, so that would probably have helped the disc capacity and compression overall. The disc doesn't have a great deal of visual extras either (all extras - including the audio commentary - are AC3, I believe). I'd have to check the reason for using LPCM (as opposed to DTS) for the main feature, but it's still two channels for each soundtrack.

Whenever audio stems are requested of such films (we've had recent experiences with them from Fortune Star), they tend to come as three mono tracks: dialogue, effects and music. Fortune Star commissioned 5.1 remixes (circa 2004) based on these (7.1 on Kam & Ronson may have just fiddled the 5.1 to expand it). However, we ultimately felt the stereo (or 2.0 surround) mix was actually the best "remix" option because the producers at the time evidently had access to superior elements (including stereo music, etc), and I notice that it's your preference.

[Rick_Curzon]

Thanks for the information and the reply. I've overhauled my review. If there are any other issues please don't hesitate to PM me as I will be sent an email and will be aware of it quicker. I hope that I'll be covering all 88 Films discs going forward so if that's the case and I have any questions regarding the technical side I'd be eternally grateful for any pointers.

All the best

Rick