This release had some discs made by WEA USA while others were made by Pioneer USA. This release has several reported cases of Laser Rot. However, I own 2 copies that play perfectly - they were both made by WEA USA. Just a heads up.

http://www.lddb.com/laserdisc/update/67772/

This is what I've submitted as an update for the Additional Information box:



I hope this info is helpful to someone.

STAY AWESOME!

Mark

thanks for posting this.

i think also others need to read under the "rot status" under "statistics" rot ratio vs collection is only 3.7%
but it is listed as High probability

I fell the wording on some of the rotters needs to be changed, 3.7% is not high probability in any sense

my copy is rot free, thanks to julien for fixing an error i did when updated it.

Thanks, this was the one Bat-film of the original series I need, but always tried to avoid dingy copies to avoid a rotter. Easily the best IMO, and if the LD is as good as the original film's then it will quickly become a demo disc.

One warning with WEA discs - while they did have some rot problems, those were overblown in the press. WEA was the first LaserDisc manufacturer to encode discs with higher video bandwidth and if you didn't have your monitors sharpness calibrated (had it set too high) then WEA discs would look noisy, which people tought was rot or just a bad pressing. WEA discs on a properly AVS or VE adjusted monitor can look beautiful - WEA was also the first company to start encoding higher chroma bandwidth, with both I and Q chroma subcarriers having the same extended bandwidth. They weren't using Super NTSC yet so the early WEA's can have more cross color/cross luma effects unless you have an excellent comb filter. But if you do, they are a beauty. MCA's release of Jaws 2 letterbox is a WEA pressing and to this day looks amazing.

Thanks for the information post Lord.

STAY AWESOME!

i have the following settings on my tv

contrast--max
blackness--35
color--35
sharpness--45-50 (max is 50)
tint--0/normal

and it didn't look too bad.
as for batman forever, the copy i have contains some audio glitches and picture problems--very minor

well, i see at one point, the light kinda flickers. (now using the led tv)

why would you have the sharpness up so high and why contrast at MAX
i guess you're trying to get that bluray picture quality out of a LD player

There are many who refuse to properly calibrate their televisions to their LaserDisc player, yet expect others to accept their judgements on disc mastering, transfer or pressing quality. If someone doesn't have their set calibrated with VE or AVS then all their judgements are not worth paying attention to. Same with DVD and Blu-ray - the set must be calibrated for the format and player for any comments on a disc's quality to be valid. Calibrating a set and making sure its adjusted to the correct color temp takes only minutes yet people just won't do it. I don't get it.

Music reviewers were often like that - It used to be joked about that Rolling Stone and Stereo Review music reviewers would often have the worst systems or improper setups with speakers placed so badly that no stereo effect could even be heard. The flip side is audio or videophiles who have thousands of dollars worth of high end equipment but own almost no software and watch or listen to only a few select "approved" recordings.

well, after testing the vhs and dvd copies, i noticed it's only on the laserdisc. when i turn it to the video input, or at chapter 4, right when selena pours max's coffee.
the disc has scratches on it, couldn't be my tv...

i will make a video.

Who made your copy? Both of my WEA made copies play perfectly.

STAY AWESOME!

LCDs are so weird that you never know what SD video is going to look like on any particular one.

These settings are probably bringing out the worst of LD though, almost certainly. This would be nearly as bad as the "Vivid" setting on Sonys.

Seriously, is "Vivid" actually for people who are legally blind or something? It makes everything look like garbage.

found the problem! it's not the disc, it's the combined composite/component input.

Just got a mint copy from Duff and there is rot on Sides 1 and 2. Thankfully it's minor and doesn't affect the digital audio at all. I can live with some slight colored artifacts and they really only last into the first few minutes with the images then reducing their infrequent reappearance. Side 3 in CAV is perfect.

It's interesting to hear the original Dolby Stereo mix on the first major 5.1 release after all this time. Like the first film there is some great fidelity in here, especially in the score cues. I'll have to dig up the old DVD for the old 5.1 mix and compare.

I'm thinking I might track down a Pioneer pressing to match my copy of the first film, which quickly became a favorite.

I just got a new copy in a lot sale, hoping for a Pioneer pressing.
Turns out it's another WEA copy, but this time absolutely rot free!!
The mint marks are exactly the same except for Side 1 which ends in DV instead of DJ as on my rotted copy.

thank god it's not a dadc pressing.

Sorry to resurrect an old thread but I wanted to comment on the potential rot status of this title.

I recently purchased a copy of this film and it was a WEA pressing and the discs are rot free. PQ was very good as well, I was pleasantly surprised.

Now since I saw that this title was listed as having a high probability of being a rotter I generally avoided it. I do appreciate cessnace's note on the WEA pressings, otherwise I would have never considered picking this title up. I realize every title and pressing will have its own peculiarities, but is there a way to approach the rot status feature that would better address this type of situation? I am not criticizing the current approach, which may in fact be the best way to document potential rotters. It just seems that at the moment there is no way to offset the rot status if in fact there are viable alternatives for a given title. Also, and perhaps this is just ignorance on my part, but for this title I see rot ratio vs collection rate is 4.4% and yet this is considered high? Is that intention or is the "high" status derived from a different data point.

In any event, I am glad I found a rot free copy of one of my favorite Batman films. Maybe I was just lucky and the rot status is indeed correct.

Mine has no rot either. In the end I'm not sure it matters as this disc is super common. Even if %10 of them are rotted it still isn't going to be hard to find one of the %90. Even if half of them were rotten you'd still be able to find one. We'll never run out of this or Red October or Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves or Terminator 2.

Overall I'd say at least %50 of the time the person reporting the "rot" doesn't know how to identity if. Most people group any and all defects as "rot". This movie is a more casual movie goers choice too so figure an even less informed survey than average.