Wembley DVD Critique /Quality and other prefered concerts over Wembley go here

[Frankyboy5]

The black thingy at the back is a water bottle with a black towel behind it and is in almost the same position and location in that Bad video and this Billie Jean performance. However it's not EXACTLY the same and also the wires behind the right stage light are not the same as ANY of the other Wembley videos. The wire is perpendicular to the stairs in the Billie Jean scene. It is diagonal on July 16 and other Wembley concerts.

I thought it was July 15 until I saw the wire... Now it might not even be Wembley! That just broadens up the spectrum even more. It's probably Rome or something else, or a LATER date of Wembley, like the 22nd, 23rd or August 26 and 27.

 

[KOPV]

I have to ask, some in this debate (not all - so if you take offense to this, it might be you) do these people feel like they are bigger fans because they are spotting out things that prove that it's edited or try or be the sherlock that discovers things other fans don't?

I am not always one to talk because in my day I spent alot of time researching things that sometimes lead to things, and many times no where. BUT wather it is edited or not, its the SECOND LEG of BAD tour, and most DVD's that are released have editing envolved from other conserts if unsatisfied about somthing.. it could be lighting/mic or sound problems/ film issues (you know on VHS's often there are areas that start to get extra fuzzy or lines just run through really fast because that area of the tape is well warn)...

I don't think anyone would edit for any other reason but to make the footage better... so if there was an issue with something that either the estate, or MJ had edited out previously... Then theres a reason.. NOT saying that its always my ideal thing, or even sometimes people would do it too much.. BUT! BELIEVE me it comes from no malice part of them to edit it film..

They are only trying to make the fan experience better.. If you don't favor something, I bet you there are numbersss of people are glad to have the footage the way we recieved it..

I am in no way an Estate supporter or enemy.. I just want MJ music and video, as much of it as possible.. and IF the estate indeed edit this footage in anyway (which cannot be proven) than it at the least it shows they care what we are viewing..

 

[lom kit]

I've started to think that these estate hater, conspiracy people either have no life or no job, seriously. I've seen some of this shit on twitter and who seriously has time to pick apart every single second of everything and come up with theory after theory!?

As for "fans" giving Bad25 one star on amazon, that reflects on Michael. If non fans go there and see that, they're not going to buy it either. If you don't like it, boohoo, but don't try ruin it for everyone else and for Michael's legacy.

Its not conspiracy and not hating the estate.

What makes you think that the people giving one star rating are fans or only fans. You think regular buyers don't rate that low. They are more picky then fans. You think someone who didnt read the ratings, buys the dvd, wont give one star? You're so wrong. They don't give a f*** whats the story with that dvd.They are not appreciative like we are.

And the estate expicit notet that this is "unedited just as shown on the jumboscreens". And once again they couldn't fool us. Thats whats all about. For me its not a big deal. But as the dvd was annouced, many yelled "not editing of different nights", cause thats making the concert not authenting or such crap. Is the editing reasonable or not is different thing.
Do they (estate) learn to be careful with their announcements and discribtions? Hmmm... i dont know.


I'm starting to think that such comments like "conspiracy" and "hating the estate", comes only from people without any opinion and people that would eat any crap they get with Michael Jackson's name on it.

 

[Frankyboy5]

As for the unknown concert, I'm not keeping my hopes up. It could be from one of the other umatics or betas where they do not have the audio for.

I thought we petitioned since like 2005 (actually way before) for a concert from Wembley.

I am indifferent about the estate (aside from the Michael album controversy, but leave that aside). They did indeed say the footage would be the same as from the jumbotrons, but with damaged frames the probably just COULDN'T live up to that promise. Billie Jean especially looks damaged where MJ's face looks "eaten" before he puts his hat on, and then that frame judder before they cut to the unknown concert.

Also MJ edited his own concerts, as much as we hate that. Bucharest Human Nature vocals were dubbed from another concert because he was sick and his voice cracked a lot in the original version. Munich looks mostly good except some parts are a bit off where the concerts cut off. MSG is totally sloppy with the disappearing mic and moving stool, but clearly MJ was not at his best in either of the two concerts. He said about Motown 25 how important it was to have the camera angles right and that he edited it before release.

 

[Galactus123]

I have to ask, some in this debate (not all - so if you take offense to this, it might be you) do these people feel like they are bigger fans because they are spotting out things that prove that it's edited or try or be the sherlock that discovers things other fans don't?

I am not always one to talk because in my day I spent alot of time researching things that sometimes lead to things, and many times no where. BUT wather it is edited or not, its the SECOND LEG of BAD tour, and most DVD's that are released have editing envolved from other conserts if unsatisfied about somthing.. it could be lighting/mic or sound problems/ film issues (you know on VHS's often there are areas that start to get extra fuzzy or lines just run through really fast because that area of the tape is well warn)...

I don't think anyone would edit for any other reason but to make the footage better... so if there was an issue with something that either the estate, or MJ had edited out previously... Then theres a reason.. NOT saying that its always my ideal thing, or even sometimes people would do it too much.. BUT! BELIEVE me it comes from no malice part of them to edit it film..

They are only trying to make the fan experience better.. If you don't favor something, I bet you there are numbersss of people are glad to have the footage the way we recieved it..

I am in no way an Estate supporter or enemy.. I just want MJ music and video, as much of it as possible.. and IF the estate indeed edit this footage in anyway (which cannot be proven) than it at the least it shows they care what we are viewing..

If they edit clips from other Wembley concert in then they shouldn't call the dvd July 16th concert. They should just call it Michael Jackson Live At Wembley 1988

 

[qbee]

I have a few questions. I'm not sure of all the evidence yet, because those stating it was edited each say something different. What exact part are they saying is edited. What frames on the timeline of the DVD. How much time total are people claiming has been replaced by footage from another concert? Some say it was already edited on the VHS that way. Some say its was edited after the fact. Which is it? Why attack the Estate over this before they even know all the facts. If it was already on the VHS then The estate would not know if other concerts were edited in. Is is possible they also thought it was all the same concert labeled on the VHS.

From what I hear those complaining are not concerned that it had to be replaced, but only that it wasn't labeled correctly . Much like Michael's live in Bucharest wasn't labeled that it contained performances from other concerts. I just don't think its a valid reason to publicly give this DVD Bad reviews or attack the estate. I just think its interesting trivia to discuss that a frame or some content may be from another concert - but certainly nothing sinister as some are trying to make it out to be.

 

[Galactus123]

Your right. That black thing just appears on the steps. Its not there on 6:37 but it is there on 7:03

I think the part that could be from other concert is from 6:53 to the end of the song. Other than that I don't see any other parts that could be from other concert.

 

[HIStory]

Its not conspiracy and not hating the estate.

What makes you think that the people giving one star rating are fans or only fans. You think regular buyers don't rate that low. They are more picky then fans. You think someone who didnt read the ratings, buys the dvd, wont give one star? You're so wrong. They don't give a f*** whats the story with that dvd.They are not appreciative like we are.

Because they state that they are fans.

The reviews those gave one star to this release on Amazon usually claim to be fans. One, for example, whined and ranted about the package how crap it is, in a long post. And he/she gave it one star. So just because he/she did not like the package the whole thing deserves to be trashed like that? Surely there is also something positive in it, if you are a fan, like Michael's performance, the demos etc? But no, just because you don't like the package, trash it publicly and give it one star. Okkay. What a fan! The same with the quality of the DVD. I can understand that some don't like it but even then surely there's also something positive in the release and you just don't give it one star on Amazon - if for nothing else then to show appreciation to Michael, the artist?

I'm starting to think that such comments like "conspiracy" and "hating the estate", comes only from people without any opinion and people that would eat any crap they get with Michael Jackson's name on it.

I do not personally care about whether the Estate or MJ edited in some frames from other concerts. I also do not think such edits would make this release "crap". But just because someone does not obsess about such details does not mean we "would eat any crap they get with MJ's name on it". I did not like the "Michael" album, for example. But I LOVE Bad 25 and IMO it's the good direction.

 

[Elegantly Wasted]

From what I hear those complaining are not concerned that it had to be replaced, but only that it wasn't labeled correctly . Much like Michael's live in Bucharest wasn't labeled that it contained performances from other concerts. I just don't think its a valid reason to publicly give this DVD Bad reviews or attack the estate. I just think its interesting trivia to discuss that a frame or some content may be from another concert - but certainly nothing sinister as some are trying to make it out to be.

Amen. If it was Michael who had released this no one would be saying a thing!

 

[lom kit]

Because they state that they are fans.

The reviews those gave one star to this release on Amazon usually claim to be fans. One, for example, whined and ranted about the package how crap it is, in a long post. And he/she gave it one star. So just because he/she did not like the package the whole thing deserves to be trashed like that? Surely there is also something positive in it, if you are a fan, like Michael's performance, the demos etc? But no, just because you don't like the package, trash it publicly and give it one star. Okkay. What a fan! The same with the quality of the DVD. I can understand that some don't like it but even then surely there's also something positive in the release and you just don't give it one star on Amazon - if for nothing else then to show appreciation to Michael, the artist?




I do not personally care about whether the Estate or MJ edited in some frames from other concerts. I also do not think such edits would make this release "crap". But just because someone does not obsess about such details does not mean we "would eat any crap they get with MJ's name on it". I did not like the "Michael" album, for example. But I LOVE Bad 25 and IMO it's the good direction.

I never read reviews of MJ products. There are always idiots that are biased, that piss me off.
Ok, that really sucks, if some give up BS reviews for no reason.

I'll give the deluxe edition 4 stars.
And average 3,5 stars are totaly acceptable.

I dont understand you. isnt the "negativity" here not enough? That you go an anger your self to sites that have people that give their lame reviews. And amazon is full with exaggerated reviews. I know you want to read, whats the opinion of average custumer. I think the numbers in the charts and sales, speak for them self.

I want to say, everything i have said, about the remastering, editing and etc in not directed to the estate.

Thats where people do wrong. The estate didnt replace that frames them self. They just gave the extra footage to the remasterer and didnt confess. The estate isnt responsible for the audio, which is pretty good, no matter how the 5.1 mix is. And everything that people are not satisfied, is not estates fault.

BUT, it pisses me off when some call the critism here conspiracy agains the estate. I and all the others gave you dosen of times explanation why we critisize the dvd.
Also, just because we waited 25 years for this dvd, is no reason to give 5 star or 100% positive reviews.
Reviewes must be objective.
And someone who says "dont care if ... , i'm happy to finaly have it", is someone who buys everythung with MJ on it.
Many discribe the quality of Vision as Yt video, but suddenly ignore the mistakes on this dvd. Thats not fair.

 

[ivy]

I have to ask, some in this debate (not all - so if you take offense to this, it might be you) do these people feel like they are bigger fans because they are spotting out things that prove that it's edited or try or be the sherlock that discovers things other fans don't?

yes some do. in the recent years there's a tendency to be a "Real" fan, to show that such fans know better - even know better from the Estate. For some others it's just an observation.

Its not conspiracy and not hating the estate.

perhaps not for you but for some others it's a conspiracy and hating the estate. A fan - TJ for short - has been linked on this thread a couple of times. I posted a selection from his tweets. So if you have a person that calls the Estate "evil greedy bastards" and calls for a boycott of their products and then goes on to blast a minimal edit without knowing who and why it was done, that can be called as "hating the Estate". It's not like such people are denying their hate for the Estate.

I'm starting to think that such comments like "conspiracy" and "hating the estate", comes only from people without any opinion and people that would eat any crap they get with Michael Jackson's name on it.

Do not generalize. I have explained why some people call it a conspiracy and hating the estate - because for some people that is exactly what this is. It might not apply to you. Similarly for some that doesn't complain about the DVD and so on doesn't mean that they would "eat any crap". You need example? I don't complain about the DVD, I also did not buy the $199 boxset because I think it's not a good value and overpriced. So you can see that I don't complain about the DVD, I call some people as obviously biased Estate haters and I'm not "eating any crap" as I will not be spending $199 on a not good value box-set.

If they edit clips from other Wembley concert in then they shouldn't call the dvd July 16th concert. They should just call it Michael Jackson Live At Wembley 1988

How much edit is there? If it was a considerably large amount than I would agree but if they only edited a little amount due to damage and so on then it's not realistic to expect a mention of it. I mean what do you expect them to day "This concert is from Michael's personal VHS. 99 % of it is from July 16 but for some reason the Billie Jean part was damaged, damn Michael should have replayed it to many times so we took some footage from the Umatic tapes of this other concert, you can see the edited parts between 1:16:43 to 1:17:23. ps: we added some crowd shots as well"

how realistic is this really?

I have a few questions. I'm not sure of all the evidence yet, because those stating it was edited each say something different. What exact part are they saying is edited. What frames on the timeline of the DVD. How much time total are people claiming has been replaced by footage from another concert? Some say it was already edited on the VHS that way. Some say its was edited after the fact. Which is it? Why attack the Estate over this before they even know all the facts. If it was already on the VHS then The estate would not know if other concerts were edited in. Is is possible they also thought it was all the same concert labeled on the VHS.

No one knows for sure. And for some they are actively looking for things to attack the Estate.

for example I have seen someone to call Estate "liars" because they said Wembley DVD was #1 at US but Billboard didn't publish DVD chart online. So as this fan couldn't google and find the DVD charts online, he had no problem calling the Estate "liars". The reality is that Billboard / Nielsen conducts the charts and sends them all to the record companies / music companies and Yahoo Music had an extensive article saying that the DVD was #1. So there's an independent confirmation of DVD being #1 coming from Yahoo Music but in the quest to hate the Estate such fans do not bother to fact check or gather information or consider explanations.

I want to say, everything i have said, about the remastering, editing and etc in not directed to the estate.

Thats where people do wrong. The estate didnt replace that frames them self. They just gave the extra footage to the remasterer and didnt confess. The estate isnt responsible for the audio, which is pretty good, no matter how the 5.1 mix is. And everything that people are not satisfied, is not estates fault.

BUT, it pisses me off when some call the critism here conspiracy agains the estate. I and all the others gave you dosen of times explanation why we critisize the dvd.

Again do not generalize please. MJJC is generally filled with a lot more reasonable and objective people and what people are writing doesn't necessarily apply to you personally. At the same time please do not ignore the fact that there's a certain amount of people out there outside of MJJC that is actively campaigning against MJ Estate and loves to portray everything as a fault of MJ Estate.

 

[DJ_OXyGeNe_8]

Editing is not problem for me, they can add some footages from other concerts. But if there is an edit, means they have other concerts...

 

[ivy]

Editing is not problem for me, they can add some footages from other concerts. But if there is an edit, means they have other concerts...

they never said they don't have other concerts. They said they have master for yokohoma, vhs for july 16 and multiple umatic tapes but limited multi tracks.

 

[Daffie]

Can anyone tell me how the quality of the "Bad In Japan" DVD is when compared to this one of the Wembley show included in the Bad25 package?

Please split up the comparison in video quality and audio quality when comparing.

Thanks in advance, appreciated !
I am considering buying the "Bad In Japan" DVD, that's why I am asking.

Could someone please help me with this?
I guess my post kinda got lost in the last few posts.
I would really appreciate the feedback on this from some fans who own booth DVD's and can make an honest and critical comparison.
Thanks!

 

[HIStory]

I never read reviews of MJ products. There are always idiots that are biased, that piss me off.
Ok, that really sucks, if some give up BS reviews for no reason.

I'll give the deluxe edition 4 stars.
And average 3,5 stars are totaly acceptable.

I dont understand you. isnt the "negativity" here not enough? That you go an anger your self to sites that have people that give their lame reviews. And amazon is full with exaggerated reviews. I know you want to read, whats the opinion of average custumer. I think the numbers in the charts and sales, speak for them self.

I did not go to Amazon to anger myself, but to write a review and then I saw other reviews. Most are positive, FYI, and they average at 4.7 out of 5 stars, although it has to be said that Amazon mixed together the reviews for the original Bad album and Bad 25, so the average isn't only about Bad 25. The Wembley DVD averages at 4.5 out of 5. They may not be indicative of the "average costumer's" opinion, because obviously people who are fans of an artist tend to buy said artist's product and review it (as a result most products have high averages on Amazon). But the same can be said about charts and sales. In themselves they say nothing about "people's opinion" about Bad 25, because obviously only those can form an opinion who bought it. Probably there are a lot of albums out there which I'd like, only I never get to hear them, so I cannot form an opinion about them either way.

Also, just because we waited 25 years for this dvd, is no reason to give 5 star or 100% positive reviews.
Reviewes must be objective.

Sometimes from your posts it seems to me that you consider your opinion as objective while dismissing those fans who may have more favorable views of MJ releases than yourself as not objective. Maybe you should accept that just because someone likes a release more than you do that does not make that person's opinion less valid or less objective than yours. People might simply have different priorities. For example, to me it's the performance that matters and I rate it 5. That would make me someone who would "eat any crap they get with Michael Jackson's name on it", according to your previously stated opinion, but maybe I'm just not that bothered about the quality as you are. Maybe I'm just not that bothered about the quality that it takes away from the whole concert experience to me.

Of course, someone might have the opinion that he would only give an absolutely perfect release 5 stars, in the best HD/Blue-ray quality or something. There are also such people and they are entitled to their views as well. I also do not say I don't wish this would be in the best cinema quality. But to me it's relatively unimportant compared to the concert itself. It's just a different perspective, different priorities, I guess.

 

[Galactus123]

How much edit is there? If it was a considerably large amount than I would agree but if they only edited a little amount due to damage and so on then it's not realistic to expect a mention of it. I mean what do you expect them to day "This concert is from Michael's personal VHS. 99 % of it is from July 16 but for some reason the Billie Jean part was damaged, damn Michael should have replayed it to many times so we took some footage from the Umatic tapes of this other concert, you can see the edited parts between 1:16:43 to 1:17:23. ps: we added some crowd shots as well"

About 20 seconds if that end part is really from other concert. That black thing just appears on the strairs after that side camera angle. I can't be 100% sure that it is from other concert but it looks like it. Frankyboy5 noticed it

Edit: I don't have problem with some little footage from other concert if the original footage from that part was damaged. I wouldn't like if they have added it just because they thought that Michael did some move a little better in other concert.

 

[lom kit]

I havnt seen someone calling for boycott in this thread, so dont understand why bring this subject here up.
This is theread about criticize the quality, right?
You and qbee remind us all the time to stay on topic. Well, please do that too.

@respect
If you would like to buy a dvd of artist you like, but not sure which, you' ll also expect to read opinions that rates the overall product. You'll like to know how's the quality of audio and video, and not just the performance.
I dont have to accept anything. And, yes i think i'm objective. Where your is more about personal feelings.
You always see it as from "die hard fan" point of view.
To me "i've waited half of my life of this release and give 6 of 5 stars and ignore the flaws of the product" isnt objective at all.

 

[ivy]

I havnt seen someone calling for boycott in this thread, so dont understand why bring this subject here up.
This is theread about criticize the quality, right?
You and qbee remind us all the time to stay on topic. Well, please do that too.

perhaps you need to re-read the thread and realize that those group of fans are brought into this thread - twice - by posting links to their negative reviews as well as the liar estate edited the video articles. They are also presented as "normal fans" and an "objective" review. Replying to such IS on topic. same goes to the replying to your posts.

 

[lom kit]

perhaps you need to re-read the thread and realize that those group of fans are brought into this thread - twice - by posting links to their negative reviews as well as the liar estate edited the video articles. They are also presented as "normal fans" and an "objective" review. Replying to such IS on topic. same goes to the replying to your posts.

You guys merge close thereads all the time, its hard to keep overview. I have not seen in this thread such things and i follow this thread regulary. Its you and few others that bring this thing up.
And again its critique and not complaning.
Thats what i've read here in this thread.

 

[HIStory]

@respect
If you would like to buy a dvd of artist you like, but not sure which, you' ll also expect to read opinions that rates the overall product. You'll like to know how's the quality of audio and video, and not just the performance.
I dont have to accept anything. And, yes i think i'm objective. Where your is more about personal feelings.
You always see it as from "die hard fan" point of view.
To me "i've waited half of my life of this release and give 6 of 5 stars and ignore the flaws of the product" isnt objective at all.

Actually in my review I noted the issue about the quality because I think that is fair, so that people would not expect it to be HD quality and then get disappointed. But believe me some people are able to enjoy the content regardless. I'm one of those and you are not, that's OK to me - like I said we have different priorities and focuses. I explained it in my review what my priorities are and since it's my favorite DVD now I won't give it anything less than 5 stars. You are free to make your own review and present your priorities and give it 3 stars or 2 or 1. Just never forget that you thinking that you are objective doesn't mean you really are.

And I don't know why you keep saying "i've waited half of my life of this release" isn't objective. I never said that it's good because of that. Not in my review, not here.

 

[ivy]

You guys merge close thereads all the time, its hard to keep overview. I have not seen in this thread such things and i follow this thread regulary. Its you and few others that bring this thing up.
And again its critique and not complaning.
Thats what i've read here in this thread.

no it wasn't merged or closed. those posts have been on this thread for all the time starting from page 36 and please do not challenge me to prove to you who brought those up. I can easily show that the starting point was other people. So please again read the thread better.

http://tx7.me/2012/09/30/the-michael-jackson-estate-lie-again/

I just watched the both videos at the same time and only the camera angles were almost the same. The performance is a little different. Only time it looked almost the same was before the 2nd chorus.

Do you guys think the DVD could have some footage from other shows?

And also read this: http://tx7.me/2012/09/30/the-michael-jackson-estate-lie-again/

Well, I think we all know by now, saying this again, the estate is not trustworthy!

I am posting a video of a simple fan reviewing the Bad Tour Wembley, I think it would be great in this thread. He talks about the performance and also the quality and such. He is not quality freaks like us, but a normal MJ fan who seems to review DVDs and other Blu-Rays;

MJ Bad Tour Wembley REVIEW: The Good, The Bad25, and the Ugly

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7vRZuW01g4Q

As you can see other people brought it up but me and other people have all the right in the world to answer such posts, including your generalization and your posts , if you don't like it, well tough luck.

ps : wouldn't it be better that rather than focusing on who started what, you focus on the replies to your posts? I clearly replied to you saying that some stuff written doesn't apply to you, it's about some other people and yet you are still complaining? Do you also fail to realize that your own post saying that people "will eat every MJ crap" is hurtful?

 

[lom kit]

@respect
Take it personal or see me as arrogant, do what you want.

I don't take any of your comments serious.

Turn you "negative radar" off. You only see the negative in mine and posts that don't see it as you.
I never said i don't like that release and don't enjoy it.
You say i insist on my opinion, but you don't see you doing the same.
Seams we have different definition about the word objective.

 

[HIStory]

@respect
You say i insist on my opinion, but you don't see you doing the same.

What you insist on is that only your opinion (or whoever agrees with you) is objective. I do not brag about how objective I am and others are not. Fact is, we are both subjective. You too - more than you care to realize it.

 

[Urvino]

Editing is not problem for me, they can add some footages from other concerts. But if there is an edit, means they have other concerts...

I have no problem with it either if they have added footage from other concerts to mask unrestorable damages in Michaels personal VHS tape. However I am not 100% convinces they added footage from other nights on this DVD (aspect of some crowd shots which were in better picture quality).

they never said they don't have other concerts. They said they have master for yokohoma, vhs for july 16 and multiple umatic tapes but limited multi tracks.

So if they did add footage from other nights (edit work done in 2012), it could mean that 1) the video editors took footage from some U-matic (or beta) tape and downgraded the quality to make it appear VHS quality, 2) Michaels personal VHS tape contained also footage of other Wembley nights cause all picture quaility (aspect the crowd shots) in the concert look the same to me (no quality expert here, so I could be wrong ) or 3) the Estate has more concert footage on other VHS tapes (so in VHS quality) although it's not written in the post of Ivy.

I am not sure if option 1 could have been executed so well to get the quality so close to the 16th July footage.

Its possible the VHS Michael had was not directly sourced from the Jumbotrons and the concert was a mix of different Wembley concerts given to Michael. Does anyone actually know where the TWYMMF footage on the DVD was sourced from - option 2 and 3 come to mind?

 

[lom kit]

As i said i don' t read reviews in amazon or any other reviews on other sites. I ignore that. Only the "complanings" as you guys call it in this thread. I don't remember any of them to say boycott, lie or anything like that.
For me these are two different things. When i and the other "complainers" have said such things in this thread. Or when posting lunks to comments by others outside mjjc.

Code said estate is not trustworthy. Thats not as he would have said boycott. I dont see this extream as if he said boycott them.

 

[Frankyboy5]

This is my comparison of July 16 with the unknown concert:


The quality of umatics is greatly exaggerated. When compared with the Wembley VHS the difference is only slightly better. As seen here there is only a slight bit more detail in this unknown concert compared to July 16.


I wouldn't mind that they did this editing, just I'm disappointed cuz I want to know what MJ ACTUALLY DID on July 16 at that point, likely he didn't do that pointing move or side crouch as those were exceptional moves during Bad Tour. The pointing move is similar to what he did in Barcelona as well as some concerts before Wembley, however he did not do this on July 23. However I think it's likely this video came from AFTER the first five Wembley shows.

 

[lom kit]

ps : wouldn't it be better that rather than focusing on who started what, you focus on the replies to your posts? I clearly replied to you saying that some stuff written doesn't apply to you, it's about some other people and yet you are still complaining? Do you also fail to realize that your own post saying that people "will eat every MJ crap" is hurtful?

I'm very direct person. Things i say do come hurtful sometimes.
But you also dont realize its not complaining i'm doing. And you keep calling it that.
I almost had let this subject go.
Then i found that review of disneys blu-ray and posted that screen comparisation, because some here imply the complainers as "wanna be experts". The reason was, that just because the this was remastered by professionals, are the criticism in here invalid .that this remastering must be taken as the ultimate that could be done. Or that we dont know what we are talking about.
I dont know if you get what im trying to say.
I dont know how i got into this again and why.

 

[ivy]

I'm very direct person. Things i say do come hurtful sometimes.
But you also dont realize its not complaining i'm doing. And you keep calling it that.
I dont know if you get what im trying to say.
I dont know how i got into this again and why.

what I called complaining was in regards to the posts and how you seemed to complain about who started what topic and why people are talking about other people outside MJJC and so on. The complaining word had nothing to do with the DVD quality discussion.

Yes I also wonder why are you writing these last 3-4 posts that you addressed to me. I checked my post addressing to you, saying that it applies to some people that they are focusing on conspiracy and estate hating. I also wrote to you not to take it personally. I also mentioned MJJC members tends to be more objective and rational. I haven't written anything about you personally - and made it clear twice . My post was clearly about some other people - which I also made it clear multiple times. So yeah I still don't understand your latest replies addressed to me and the complaining included in those replies.

and let's be clear. You accused people of coming up stuff with "hating the Estate" because they have no opinion and they would eat any crap coming from the Estate. And I'm saying to you that there are people that are openly hating the Estate and not denying it. This doesn't apply to you personally necessarily. I hope you can at least have the decency to not to generalize your opinions as well.

 

[dmehta]

This is my comparison of July 16 with the unknown concert:





The quality of umatics is greatly exaggerated. When compared with the Wembley VHS the difference is only slightly better. As seen here there is only a slight bit more detail in this unknown concert compared to July 16.


I wouldn't mind that they did this editing, just I'm disappointed cuz I want to know what MJ ACTUALLY DID on July 16 at that point, likely he didn't do that pointing move or side crouch as those were exceptional moves during Bad Tour. The pointing move is similar to what he did in Barcelona as well as some concerts before Wembley, however he did not do this on July 23. However I think it's likely this video came from AFTER the first five Wembley shows.

The only conceivable reason why they'd edit in that short segment at the end of Billie Jean from another concert would be if the VHS at that point was damaged beyond repair. They couldn't leave that part on the DVD if it was severely damaged. So if they did edit in a very short segment from another gig in order to provide continuity and a full Billie Jean performance, then I don't see the problem. And I don't see why the Estate have to tell the public "by the way, 30 seconds of the concert is edited in from another date". It makes no sense for them to state that publicly.

 

[ByReyberHDVideos]

This is my comparison of July 16 with t
The quality of umatics is greatly exaggerated. When compared with the Wembley VHS the difference is only slightly better. As seen here there is only a slight bit more detail in this unknown concert compared to July 16.


I wouldn't mind that they did this editing, just I'm disappointed cuz I want to know what MJ ACTUALLY DID on July 16 at that point, likely he didn't do that pointing move or side crouch as those were exceptional moves during Bad Tour. The pointing move is similar to what he did in Barcelona as well as some concerts before Wembley, however he did not do this on July 23. However I think it's likely this video came from AFTER the first five Wembley shows.

I agree with you here have done some comparisons,
1) The quality is different.
2) The positions of the cables are different.