Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="RoChess" data-source="post: 736920" data-attributes="member: 18896">Re: IMDb+ Scraper (Force English title, Auto-Rename titles to group, and more) v3.1.5You can put it anyway you want of course, for me it becomes a matter of the decades between them, the difference in filming methods has changed severly. That does not mean I don't like classics, infact they have done an awesome job at remastering some of the original 35mm film from the golden age, but it is also very easy to see the difference between a CGI laden 2000+ version and a 1970 movie with props (I do prefer the original Star Wars movies over their remakes though, maybe because I prefer Han shooting first <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite6" alt=":cool:" title="Cool    :cool:" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":cool:" />).But as a $100m+ budget film for this new 2011 version, it fits more closer to the 2001 version that had simelair big budget and modern CGI. The fact that they picked the 4th script from the original series to remake as sequel to the 2001 version has more to do I guess with what the market of today expects. I'm sure that script allows for more action for example then the original sequel.Put it in other words, a new user adding the 2011 movie to their collection sometime into the future, might be interested in the 2001 version to go along with it, but might not care for the classics. The (Remake) part will indicate to them that it is available if they do have an interest, but odds are a lot of users don't have many of the older movies.However I will go with the majority vote on this of course, it is easy for me to use a custom version myself as well <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite8" alt=":D" title="Big Grin    :D" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":D" /></blockquote>

Verification