Path: news.nzbot.com!not-for-mail
From: straight.man@straight.org (Straight Man)
Sender: straight.man@straight.org
Newsgroups: alt.binaries.multimedia.vintage-film.pre-1960
Subject: Favorite Westerns # 13_Not My Rip_[01/40] - "High Noon (1952).nfo" yEnc (0/1)
Organization: Straight
X-Newsposter: YENC-POWER-POST-A&A-v11b (Modified POWER-POST www.CosmicWolf.com)
Message-ID: <part1of2.bZ4ZuI$CySYJqZ&Qdm5B@powerpost2000AA.local>
X-No-Archive: yes
Lines: 10
X-Complaints-To: abuse(at)newshosting.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 08 Sep 2019 14:14:05 UTC
Date: Sun, 08 Sep 2019 14:14:05 GMT
X-Received-Bytes: 1551
X-Received-Body-CRC: 3868947078
Xref: news.nzbot.com alt.binaries.multimedia.vintage-film.pre-1960:2915
Thanks to the Original Poster!
I had two copies of this movie. The other was a slightly better quality. But the time of the other movie was 1:21:16. The Runtime given at IMDb is 85 min. In other words my other copy was about 3 3/4 min short. The time of the movie being posted is 1:24:36 - right in line with IMDb's Runtime.
Not noticing any missing scenes, I believe my other copy was time-warped. Whether it's time-warping to fit a movie into a TV slot, or fit a movie on a disc, or make the pace faster, or whatever reason, time-warping, in my opinion, is repugnant. It distorts the movie from what was originally intended by the producers and director.
Why not time-warp all movies to just 10 minutes? The difference between that, and time-warping a movie by 3 3/4 minutes, is one of degree, not of kind.
Anyway, for my taste, this copy is acceptable. and it is as originally intended by the producers and director.
|
|