Just finished watching this movie the Aq on this one aint bad at all. Just a good fun action film.

For a second I thought you were talking about the original. Saw the remake once, that was enough.

larry

I did not even know there was an original

I did not even know there was an original

Dear. God. Yes, the original is actually loosely based on an overzealous sheriff. The one with that wrestler is based on the name of the original. Neither was any good, actually.

I was thinking about snagging this one, it was pretty cheap at amazon and comes with a dvd as well. I know it's a bad movie but a guilty pleasure for me. Knoxville saves it.

For a second I thought you were talking about the original. Saw the remake once, that was enough.

larry

Me too, Larry - I got all excited. I would actually buy the original (reminds me of being a kid in a small town in the 70s). Completely agree on the remake.

I did not even know there was an original

Wow...

I must be getting old. Wow.

Neither was any good, actually.

Wrong. The original is a classic. Great movie and true story. I met the real Bufford Pusser in 1973 when I was 8 years old. Very nice man. Tragedy that he died a year later.

Walking Tall deserves a BD release.

Wow...

I must be getting old. Wow.

The only one I was aware of over here in australia was the rock's version. I wasn't being sarcastic.

The only one I was aware of over here in australia was the rock's version. I wasn't being sarcastic.

Oh, I know it's ok. I just remember the original so vividly in the 70's, it was just hard to believe anyone wouldn't know about it but that just isn't reality.

Find the original and watch it. The Rock's version isn't even in the same ball park as the original with Joe Don Baker.

(reminds me of being a kid in a small town in the 70s).


+1

The only one I was aware of over here in australia was the rock's version. I wasn't being sarcastic.Now you have a another disc you might try to find and watch. The original is more of a cult classic although it supposedly grossed $23 million on a budget of $500K or so. Not a bad return. :) It was made in 1973, and the movie had 2 sequels that followed in the next 4 years. And they're still cashing in on Buford's legacy: http://www.bufordpussermuseum.com/

larry

Now you have a another disc you might try to find and watch. The original is more of a cult classic although it supposedly grossed $23 million on a budget of $500K or so. Not a bad return. :) It was made in 1973, and the movie had 2 sequels that followed in the next 4 years. And they're still cashing in on Buford's legacy: http://www.bufordpussermuseum.com/

larry

Thanks for the link Larry. Its amazing what they have done for him it was also interesting to read the history and look at the photos.

This movie is obviously a guilty pleasure for those of us who can enjoy it and pure crap for everyone else. I think it should be judged by itself, anyway, just like literary adaptations shouldn't be constantly compared to the books.

I think the image quality is quite good too, as good as we can ever expect, being a recent master (2004 I guess) and bitrates quite high. There's a lot of grain, that sometimes made me doubt whether it was some kind of artifacting or noise, but as I said the bitrate is high, so I guess it's original film grain.

It's funny how the movie runs like 71 minutes or so, and then the final credits run for 15 minutes or so, I'm guessing just to make the total an "acceptable" standard of 86 minutes, or whatever.

Love the film myself, The Rundown and Walking Tall are quality silly, fun action at it's best, but also funny. Shame The Rock is still not an action hero :(

I will upgrade, but really need to see how much better this transfer is than that good old dvd transfer.

http://www.blu-ray.com/movies/movies.php?id=330&show=review
not one word of "grain" but other stuff
so which is it ?
will get it next week
http://images.blu-ray.com/reviews/1535_8_large.jpg

Going of them 720 images, hey it looks pretty good to me, the detail is easily a noticable upgrade :)

http://www.blu-ray.com/movies/movies.php?id=330&show=review
not one word of "grain" but other stuff
so which is it ?
will get it next week


I'm curious to know your opinions.
That review mentions "contrast wavering", and that may be the case, I'm not a big one to notice that unless it's a disaster. He also mentions "intermitent softness", and that I agree with, but the cause may be a thousand different things, only one of them the transfer. And "motion blur"? does he mean smearing due to excessive DNR? He also mentions EE, and I did notice that, but I guess it didn't bother me much.
Anyway, it's been a few weeks since I watched it. Maybe I'll give it another spin to see if my recollections about the grain were wrong.