1941 for only 12.99

[BrainofJ]

This dvd was over 30 bucks recently, amazon has it down to 12.99. www.amazon.com I've actually never seen it before but I'm thinking about buying it just because it's a Spielberg film, I know alot of people don't like it but it's so cheap I thought I would give it a shot.

[orf]

I saw it at Wal-Mart for $10 AND it sported new coverart. The coverart wasn't as good, though.

[the narrator]

it's under $10 at www.deepdiscountdvd.com

[BrainofJ]

How's the movie?

[Elmo Oxygen]

Originally posted by BrainofJ
How's the movie?

Long, loud, energetic, and maybe two laughs. And there's one good dance setpiece. Not as bad as everyone says it is but close. The Bob's (Zemeckis and Gale, who wrote 1941) did a much better job with this kind of kitchen sink mentality with Used Cars, a much funnier and raunchier film.

[manigrasso]

I don't own the disc, but from what I remember, anyone and everyone complained about this disc having a HORRIBLE transfer. Like, Highlander 10th Anniversary bad. Scarface SE bad. I'm not casting aspersions as to whether the movies are or are not worth watching. Just that the video image quality is astounding in its badness. If THIS 1941 DVD is the same as the old one, but in a different case, caveat emptor.

[3DMan]

It's pretty bad looking. I rented the laserdisc, which this is a port of. Definately needs a new transfer. Proabably didn't help that Speilberg used fog in EVERY single shot in the movie.

As to the movie, I love it. Big-budget comedies are very rare and seldom are successful, but I love the experiment. The chaos. The zany, over-the-top stuff. The 40s stuff(including a great dance number). And anything with Toshiro Mifune, Slim Pickens, Robert Stack, Christopher Lee, Dan Ackroyd, and Jim Belushi can't be ALL bad.

[JeffHanawalt]

I definitely will pick it up if it's only $10. I don't understand why
the critics and public hated this movie. It's alot of fun in a silly
and far-fetched way. Very chaotic. I liked it better than E.T.
(the most overrated film in history).

[Unicorn]

3D-Man, it was the late, lamented JOHN Belushi in this film, not his younger brother Jim.

This title is so cheap because it was on a long list of Markdowns on 1/7th.

[BubbleGumUK]

I love this film, and the transfer is as good as it's going to get.

It was shot using a soft lens for a 40s look. Doesn't work, but it's a great flick!

[JimboQ]

The 1941 re-issue has a shitty cover. It's been dropped in price. Please refrain from doing any backflips. It's unnecessary.

[palebluedot]

Wow! I paid $28 for this only a year or so ago. But I happen to love this movie. Of course I love anything Bob Gale/Bob Zemekis. I love their writing style.

My favorite part still has to be the comment the Japanese sailor makes when trying to fit the big radio down into their sub.

[Anti-Hero]

Whats up with the new cover art? It looks like its a bootleg I've never seen 'Universal' cover art like this one.. At the top it has a big bar that says Special Edition and it doesnt say widescreen or anything at the bottom.. its weird.. Is there anything different about the two? The old cover art dvd or the new one.. Anything different? On Ebay.com I found the new cover art and the the person who put it up said its an "Expanded Collecter's Edition".. Answers PLEASE!!

[Packman]

If I remember the first edition the disk is the same, only the cover is different. The transfer I don't think is bad, the problem is Speilberg used a soft lense on many of the shots making everything look fuzzy and out of focus.

All the special features with the first are included in the second.

[JimboQ]

This is the out of print, original cover. Lovely.

Sometimes late at night, when no one is around...I lick the cover.


http://www.thedigitalbits.com/reviews/1941.jpg

[BubbleGumUK]

What does the new cover look like?

All the links above do not link to 1941 and when I search for it it only comes up with the original artwork.

[orf]

It's got John Belushi and Dan Akroyd face shots on the cover. They're not UGLY face shots (like The Frighteners reissue), but they definitely don't make as good of a cover art as the 1941 text. They aren't clear face shots, either; they have this grainy look that mimics the original coverart. It's not too bad for face shots, but the original is loads better.

[BubbleGumUK]

Originally posted by BubbleGumUK
What does the new cover look like?

All the links above do not link to 1941 and when I search for it it only comes up with the original artwork.

...which probably means that you guys can pick this up for cheap AND get the better cover!

BTW, I always liked the original VHS which used the 1979 poster artwork:

[JimboQ]

What's even cooler is THIS. I myself are one of the very few who own the soundtrack on vinyl.

[BubbleGumUK]

I have that exact same picture on a huge poster for the film.

I was very young (around 9 or 10) and didn't know what the heck it was all supposed to be, but I loved that poster.

Kicked off my habit of poster collecting, and it's still one of the most jam-packed and best out there.

That's why I love the VHS cover as it uses elements from this.

[Packman]

Here's the new cover:

[Imagica]

Long, loud, energetic, and maybe two laughs. And there's one good dance setpiece.

maybe this is yet another, "you had to be there" film. I have no clue. but 2 laffs?

I can see younger people not liking it, after all, they like alot of crap. but this film, although hated by many, is hilarious. of course I was 20 when I saw it in the theater...but still. great cameos, great set-pieces(the fariswheel), Chris Lee as a lone nazi.....and Slim Pickens("hey boy, watch that knife")...please. this film is one of my favs....the dvd...so-so. but I'll take anyway I can get it.

btw, I too have the soundtrack on LP, 2 framed theatrical posters(one an original) and the t-shirt. remember the t-shirt?

but I'm glad it has so few fans. it makes it all the more cool for me....and them.

[BubbleGumUK]

Notice how they keep "A Steven Spielberg Film" off the front cover??