www.hometheaterforum.com/htf/showthread.php?+=246933

No Thread specified. If you followed a valid link, please notify the administrator

Are you sure that's the right link?

http://www.hometheaterforum.com/htf/showthread.php?t=246933

This is the correct link...sorry about that. :)

And best sound ever also ;)

I am definetely getting this one.

I just hope the reviewer has seen all the high definition movies on both formats to make that statement. There are quite a few ref. titles that people have endorsed.

best PQ doesn't seem good enough for a 5 out of 5 a DVDTALK and highdefdigest ;)
http://www.dvdtalk.com/reviews/read.php?ID=25207
http://bluray.highdefdigest.com/blackhawkdown.html

best PQ doesn't seem good enough for a 5 out of 5 a DVDTALK and highdefdigest ;)
http://www.dvdtalk.com/reviews/read.php?ID=25207
http://bluray.highdefdigest.com/blackhawkdown.html

DVDtalk gave Tears of the Sun a 2 .......riiiiiiiiight.....there credible....and hifi digest could be called hd dvd digest....and nobody would know the difference.

I don't know about best PQ...but it's certainly at the top for SQ.

DVDtalk gave Tears of the Sun a 2 .......riiiiiiiiight.....there credible....and hifi digest could be called hd dvd digest....and nobody would know the difference.

I'm just saying highdef gave Enemy of the State and The Transporter the better PQ rating. You must love BR quite a bit to defend it so strongly.

DVDtalk gave Tears of the Sun a 2 .......riiiiiiiiight.....there credible....and hifi digest could be called hd dvd digest....and nobody would know the difference.

Well DVDTalk has many editors and only a few are credible. It's High DEF Digest and no they are not biased. In fact, alot of recent BD releases have gotten 4 stars of higher. And BHD is not that great, a solid 4 if you ask me.

I've only seen little pieces of BHD, but there are some weird issues there. Could be in the master, but there are some things that don't look right (like a bad halo like effect that is pretty thick around one guy).

--Darin

The sound was unbelievable in this one. Makes me glad the Panny has 7 analog outs. Of course when that firmware arrives...

Darin it does have slight EE, like most Sony stuff, Tears had EE more severe, neither are to a point of ruining either, but they are there

BHD also has very slight black clipping, but the DVD was the same

BBHD is 27 Mbps Mpeg2 and it shows, not one compression artifact or posterization, unlike Tears which has a few of both

I would give both a 4 out of 5 on video, my reference for a video 5 would be Red Dragon

5 out of 5 for each on audio, they both rock hard in PCM ;)

-Gary

The sound was unbelievable in this one. Makes me glad the Panny has 7 analog outs. Of course when that firmware arrives...
For the past 6 months all Ive been paying attention to is PQ. When I finally got around to hooking up the analogs and watching this movie, I remembered what got me into this hobby...... the audio!!!

I just watched it on a Samsung 61" 1080p DLP RPTV with picture "enhancements" turned off, and my new PS3 via HDMI. Yes, I know the DLP chip uses wobulation so I'm not getting every single little pixel available (it isn't my TV), but it still looked pretty darn good.

It's not prettily photographed (very gritty and grimy), but I saw only slight EE (there really should be none--- studios take heed!) and virtually no MPEG artifacts even with ultra fast moving objects.

Detail could have been a tad better in some shots, but it could be the digital post processing that Ridley Scott subjected the negatives to for stylized effects. Hard to tell without having Ridley compare the master print to this disc.

Can't wait to hear it on a system with HDMI connections! I think this is supposed to be one of Sony's first 24 bit LPCM tracks if I'm not mistaken.

Dan

I don't think BHD is the best quality of any format. King Kong looks more polished. But I can see how someone could make that claim. Some of the bright sceneries look very sharp and gorgeous!!

The AQ on BHD is outstanding. Among the very best. :cool:

Darin it does have slight EE...By a halo I meant something much bigger than that. I'm not sure what part of the movie it was in as somebody else was showing me, but it was almost like a bubble of distortion around one guy that I think would have been measured in inches on an 8' screen. If the shot had been in front a blue screen I might have thought it was some bad special effects, but I think he was near the beach or something like that and it looked like a real shot except for that weird effect.

--Darin

I own BHD down...definitely NOT the best PQ "on either format", but certainly a solid film transfer.

The sound however...wow...

Darin it does have slight EE, like most Sony stuff, Tears had EE more severe, neither are to a point of ruining either, but they are there

BHD also has very slight black clipping, but the DVD was the same

BBHD is 27 Mbps Mpeg2 and it shows, not one compression artifact or posterization, unlike Tears which has a few of both

I would give both a 4 out of 5 on video, my reference for a video 5 would be Red Dragon

5 out of 5 for each on audio, they both rock hard in PCM ;)

-Gary
Red Dragon huh? I've had that sitting on my shelf since it arrived. I'm gonna have to make it my next watch now. Thanks for the suggestion. :)

Yeah the audio is unbelievable. Glad I'm not the only one noticing the halo issues though, it's in just about every scene however slight. Even the worst HD-DVD in terms of EE (The Italian Job) doesn't look this bad.

the best pq in both formats? from this grainy of a movie? even if it is intended to be there (which it is) this is hardly the pq winner overall, maybe in blu-ray but not overall. Not even close imo.

There's good PQ because of detail, and I agree completely. This has a lot of detail down to the sweat and the pores on faces.

But there's also PQ from pure vivid colors, eye candy material that says : "Pretty picture!"... There's nothing really pretty here. The closest is the blackhawks moving in to mogadishu, and with the detail of the buildings. Once the dust kicks up and blood splattering everywhere, the pretty picture side of it pretty much is gone.

There is a lot of gore in this movie. Want to know what a large calibre bullet going through someone's neck looks like, you have it here. Severed hand from RPG hit, got that too.

I like it not because of the gore, but because it tells a good story. Unfortunately, it is not a movie you can show to friends with children, so not good demo material.

I had the superbit version SD DVD and it was amazing. I could only imagine the HD version, BRD or HD-DVD. However, the movie is kinda sad and knowing the lead character the film is based on came home from Mogadishu and molested his younger daughter prevents me from wanting to watch the movie over and over.

Well DVDTalk has many editors and only a few are credible. It's High DEF Digest and no they are not biased. In fact, alot of recent BD releases have gotten 4 stars of higher. And BHD is not that great, a solid 4 if you ask me.

BHD is the single biggest improvement over the sd dvd......that I have seen on either format.....so I happen to agree with this.

Making a nicer version of an already reference sd dvd.....is no special trick......and there is nothing in this BD thats not in the print to distract from the great intended gritty P/Q IMO.

No disc on either format has pleased me more for P/Q and S/Q improvement over the sd dvd version....and I have bought over 60 discs on both formats.

I'm just saying highdef gave Enemy of the State and The Transporter the better PQ rating. You must love BR quite a bit to defend it so strongly.

If posting the pesky facts is defending.....then color me guilty.
I don't think BD at this point needs any defending as its not 6-06 anymore. :)

I had the superbit version SD DVD and it was amazing. I could only imagine the HD version, BRD or HD-DVD. However, the movie is kinda sad and knowing the lead character the film is based on came home from Mogadishu and molested his younger daughter prevents me from wanting to watch the movie over and over.

Geeeze. I didn't know that. Now I have a bad taste in my mouth for this film as well.

I had the superbit version SD DVD and it was amazing. I could only imagine the HD version, BRD or HD-DVD. However, the movie is kinda sad and knowing the lead character the film is based on came home from Mogadishu and molested his younger daughter prevents me from wanting to watch the movie over and over.

Just who is supposed to be the lead character?

I don't believe there is a lead in this film....sounds like FUD to me. :rolleyes:

Considering that the location where this film was shot looks nothing like Somalia, I think it's best not to think of this film as being so closely tied to the events or people it was based on.

Just who is supposed to be the lead character?

I don't believe there is a lead in this film....sounds like FUD to me. :rolleyes:

Agreed.

To the poster making the claim, link please.

Just who is supposed to be the lead character?

I don't believe there is a lead in this film....sounds like FUD to me. :rolleyes:
The guy wasn't in the movie. They took him out and replaced him with Ewan McGregor's fictional character.

BHD is the single biggest improvement over the sd dvd......that I have seen on either format.....so I happen to agree with this.

If I understand you correctly you're saying BHD has the most improved PQ over SD than any other HD disc on either format. Just wanna clarify because that's a totally ludicrous statement. I have seen several HD-DVD's that are leaps and bounds ahead of their SD versions and from what I understand, the Superbit BHD already looks great as it is.

Agreed.

To the poster making the claim, link please.
Its not the lead character... it was the one played by Ewan Mcgregor and they changed his name for the movie. I dont think he molested his daughter but it was some kind of rape in a foreign country(not that thats any better).

I dont have a link, but I remembered that rumor after watching BH again and did a little searching. It very well could be internet FUD though.

http://www.armfor.uscourts.gov/opinions/2005Term/03-0678.htm

The artifact Darin is talking about is in the beginning of the film when they are at the shooting range on the beach. Look at the Delta guy who starts walking toward the target with his pistol. One of the shots is from the side (his left) and there is a very unusual artifact that looks like a bunch of banding around his body. I saw it right away.

BHD is a great looking disc overall, but definitely not the best of any format. Hell, I watched Wolf Creek on HD DVD last night and I would say it looks even better.

The artifact Darin is talking about is in the beginning of the film when they are at the shooting range on the beach. Look at the Delta guy who starts walking toward the target with his pistol. One of the shots is from the side (his left) and there is a very unusual artifact that looks like a bunch of banding around his body. I saw it right away.

BHD is a great looking disc overall, but definitely not the best of any format. Hell, I watched Wolf Creek on HD DVD last night and I would say it looks even better.

Wolf Creek....wasn't that shot on video instead of film?

The guy wasn't in the movie. They took him out and replaced him with Ewan McGregor's fictional character.


If I understand you correctly you're saying BHD has the most improved PQ over SD than any other HD disc on either format. Just wanna clarify because that's a totally ludicrous statement. I have seen several HD-DVD's that are leaps and bounds ahead of their SD versions and from what I understand, the Superbit BHD already looks great as it is.

Yes its the title that had me thinking Wow.....the most as far as detail of picture and sound quality.....over any other.

This of course would not make it the best title for everyone as some only like movies that were shot very cleanly.....and that is what represents the best to them.

I like both styles...and if the movie justifies it....added grain ect are ok with me.....but directors intent should not be held against the movie in any comparison to a cleanly shot movie IMO.

Yes its the title that had me thinking Wow.....the most as far as detail of picture and sound quality.....over any other.

This of course would not make it the best title for everyone as some only like movies that were shot very cleanly.....and that is what represents the best to them.

I like both styles...and if the movie justifies it....added grain ect are ok with me.....but directors intent should not be held against the movie in any comparison to a cleanly shot movie IMO.

Umm... BHD wasn't a five-star transfer either. Forget all the filtering and film grain, there is excessive ringing throughout the whole movie. Black levels fluctuate and there is also some noise in certain scenes among other issues. Not sure if you've watched many HD movies but this was FAR from the best transfer on either format. Still a good-looking disc though.

Umm... BHD wasn't a five-star transfer either. Forget all the filtering and film grain, there is excessive ringing throughout the whole movie. Black levels fluctuate and there is also some noise in certain scenes among other issues. Not sure if you've watched many HD movies but this was FAR from the best transfer on either format. Still a good-looking disc though.

I have bought and watched over 60 titles on both formats....and the black levels are fine on BHD.
And its...." in your opinion"......its not a 5 star title.....and thats just fine.....but don't state it as everyones elses opinion because clearly thats not the case.

It plain and simple has more detail than any title on either format so far.....but keep trying to nit pick other areas.....because god forbid others that have been lied to with FUD....figure out that MPEG-2 has supplied the best detail on either format so far. ;)

I have bought and watched over 60 titles on both formats....and the black levels are fine on BHD.
And its...." in your opinion"......its not a 5 star title.....and thats just fine.....but don't state it as everyones elses opinion because clearly thats not the case.

Show me where I stated my opinions as everyone else's.

It plain and simple has more detail than any title on either format so far
OK! So now I'M the one making my opinions seem like facts.

http://www.dvdtalk.com/reviews/read.php?ID=25207
http://bluray.highdefdigest.com/blackhawkdown.html
http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/volume_13_4/mrg-140-november-2006-part-3.html#Black%20Hawk%20Down

Look what we have here. Not that it should matter but here are three editors (from well-respected DVD review sites), who clearly know more than you, that all agree BHD is a solid 4/5 stars, which would fit my description of it being a "good-looking" disc.

http://www.dvdtalk.com/reviews/read.php?ID=25207
http://bluray.highdefdigest.com/blackhawkdown.html
http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/volume_13_4/mrg-140-november-2006-part-3.html#Black%20Hawk%20Down

Look what we have here. Not that it should matter but here are three editors (from well-respected DVD review sites), who clearly know more than you, that all agree BHD is a solid 4/5 stars, which would fit my description of it being a "good-looking" disc.

Since when is dvd talk respected ;)

Since when is dvd talk respected ;)
That's it? That's the best you could come up with? You don't know anything at all. Your idea of a quality review site is hometheaterforum, who, in their infinite wisdom, not only gave BHD 5/5 for pq, but also for the film itself.

Back to my original question, show me where I stated my opinions as other people's because I love it when you make things up like that.

That's it? That's the best you could come up with? You don't know anything at all. Your idea of a quality review site is hometheaterforum, who, in their infinite wisdom, not only gave BHD 5/5 for pq, but also for the film itself.

Back to my original question, show me where I stated my opinions as other people's because I love it when you make things up like that.

You said "BHD wasn't a 5 star transfer either".....with no IMO.....and I consider the Spot to be another unbiased review site IMO.....even though I thought RV was rated higher for PQ than it should be.
Everyone will not usually agree with every review....regardless of the reviewer.

I know that COR and Seabiscuit along with the first Underworld.....are all considered to be the very best sd dvd reference titles ever (check AVS reference list for this)....and that they do not offer the same level of improvement or sd dvd that BHD does.

Thats comparing on a top player like the Onkyo sp 1000 for sd dvd vs Toshiba for hd dvd.

You think Hifi Digest is impartial....fine....then check there P/Q and A/Q totals since the 5 star rating and add them up for BD vs hd dvd.....I think you may be shocked at the results which I have already seen posted elsewhere. :)

You said "BHD wasn't a 5 star transfer either".....with no IMO.....and I consider the Spot to be another unbiased review site IMO.....even though I thought RV was rated higher for PQ than it should be.
Everyone will not usually agree with every review....regardless of the reviewer.
Explain to me how my statement can be misconstrued as representative of OTHER people's opinions. BHD is not a 5-star transfer. We can take a poll if you'd like and let OTHER people tell you what they think. I can guarantee you a vast majority will disagree with you.

You think Hifi Digest is impartial....fine....then check there P/Q and A/Q totals since the 5 star rating and add them up for BD vs hd dvd.....I think you may be shocked at the results which I have already seen posted elsewhere. :)
You're kiding right? Tell me you're kidding. You can't even get the name of the site correct. I don't have to add them up because unlike you, I READ the reviews and I WATCH the movies and I know whether or not they are biased. You should try that sometime. In fact, show me that link you've seen posted "elsewhere."

Explain to me how my statement can be misconstrued as representative of OTHER people's opinions. BHD is not a 5-star transfer. We can take a poll if you'd like and let OTHER people tell you what they think. I can guarantee you a vast majority will disagree with you.


You're kiding right? Tell me you're kidding. You can't even get the name of the site correct. I don't have to add them up because unlike you, I READ the reviews and I WATCH the movies and I know whether or not they are biased. You should try that sometime. In fact, show me that link you've seen posted "elsewhere."


I dont think he is kidding.

Explain to me how my statement can be misconstrued as representative of OTHER people's opinions. BHD is not a 5-star transfer. We can take a poll if you'd like and let OTHER people tell you what they think. I can guarantee you a vast majority will disagree with you.


You're kiding right? Tell me you're kidding. You can't even get the name of the site correct. I don't have to add them up because unlike you, I READ the reviews and I WATCH the movies and I know whether or not they are biased. You should try that sometime. In fact, show me that link you've seen posted "elsewhere."

Anyone that can add....knows I am not kidding.

I dont think he is kidding.

Thanks. :)

I will add for you then
Since the 5 star rating was implemented there were 37 BD titles rated.
37 divided by 149 stars = 4.02

The latest thirty reviews.

P/Q
BD 116=3.87
HD DVD 114=3.80

A/Q
BD 127 = 4.23
HD DVD 112=3.75

This is not to say that hd dvd was not the better looking format overall at first.....but it does say that anyone whos seen both recently....that P/Q is now a moot point.

Attack at will....but these are the latest numbers from one of your favorite reviewers...HD Digest.

Since when is dvd talk respected ;)

pretty much agree (also on the PQ being moot)

from what I have put together so far on both sides of the format fence, no pro reviewers have been respect worthy, some **** is so far off-bass it is pathetic

all the reviewers are obsessing over King Kong, everyone saw my thread on that, it is the first HD-DVD with issues, I had many PM's on that one, people afraid to come forward on Kong, some professional ;)

stuff like Army of Darkness and Memento trashed, Click, Total Recall, Terminator, Fugitive and Samurai picked on :eek:

I could go on, I buy what movies I want and IMHO the only release so far from either format that is a total waste of time is Fifth Element, shortly followed by Jay and Silent Bob, both BR and thats it

trashing BR has just become the latest bashing fad to hit AVS, people that enjoy the look of film vs TV video are very happy with BR, those that pray that every movie look like CO Riddick are gonna be sadly disappointed :rolleyes:

-Gary

"Audio: Previous SD versions had good distribution across the speakers and a robust sound, but the transfer to Blu-ray disc of the uncompressed PCM English 5.1 audio was done at a lower volume than most of the Blu-rays (and even SDs) I've reviewed. Compared to other six-channel Blu-ray soundtracks, this one just doesn't have the boom and resonance. Obviously, the original source masters aren't of the same quality as some of the better Blu-ray releases. That's disappointing, since "Black Hawk Down" won an Oscar for Sound. Other options include English and French Dolby Digital 5.1, with subtitles in English, English SDH, French, Korean, Portuguese, Spanish, Chinese, and Thai. "- DVDTOWN
http://www.dvdtown.com/reviews/blackhawkdown/4110
Just removed them from my bookmark!
I can see some people arguing back and forth about the PQ on this one but not the audio.

"Audio: Previous SD versions had good distribution across the speakers and a robust sound, but the transfer to Blu-ray disc of the uncompressed PCM English 5.1 audio was done at a lower volume than most of the Blu-rays (and even SDs) I've reviewed. Compared to other six-channel Blu-ray soundtracks, this one just doesn't have the boom and resonance. Obviously, the original source masters aren't of the same quality as some of the better Blu-ray releases. That's disappointing, since "Black Hawk Down" won an Oscar for Sound. Other options include English and French Dolby Digital 5.1, with subtitles in English, English SDH, French, Korean, Portuguese, Spanish, Chinese, and Thai. "- DVDTOWN

Just removed them from my bookmark!
I can see some people arguing back and forth about the PQ on this one but not the audio.


BWAHAHAHA! Who's the idiot who reviewed the disc? Anyone who gives the audio less than a 9.5/10 needs to get their hearing check.

BWAHAHAHA! Who's the idiot who reviewed the disc? Anyone who gives the audio less than a 9.5/10 needs to get their hearing check.
http://www.dvdtown.com/reviews/blackhawkdown/4110

Okay guys...

I'm glad that my review has started a debate and that some interesting points have been made. I certainly don't expect everyone to agree with my opinion on BHD, but I do have my reasons for rating it a 5/5 in PQ. First and foremost, I think it is the most faithful transfer I've yet seen... sure, there are titles with more saturated colors, but this transfer doesn't call for that. It is totally transparent to the theatrical print that I've viewed a number of times. If a transfer can accomplish that, then it is doing precisely what it is supposed to do. I've seen plenty of beautiful transfers rated highly that are nothing like the theatrical presentation - - free of grain and perfectly smooth. If that's what you are looking for, then that's cool... I'm just looking for something that brings a true theater experience into my home theater. BHD does that perfectly! So, if you haven't seen it on BD, then pick it up and judge for yourself. Regardless of if you rate it a 4 or a 5, it is still a sight to behold and a truly exceptional home theater experience!

at least we can all agree that the PCM track is killer!

I have this movie and have watched it twice, and it is indeed one, if not the best Blu-ray PQ out there. :)

But saying "best PQ on either format" is a bit over the top (There's a lot of blind bias in that statement). I can name 10 HD DVD movies that have BETTER PQ than this movie. :rolleyes:

But I have to say the AQ is killer. :)

I will add for you then
Since the 5 star rating was implemented there were 37 BD titles rated.
37 divided by 149 stars = 4.02

The latest thirty reviews.

P/Q
BD 116=3.87
HD DVD 114=3.80

A/Q
BD 127 = 4.23
HD DVD 112=3.75

This is not to say that hd dvd was not the better looking format overall at first.....but it does say that anyone whos seen both recently....that P/Q is now a moot point.

Attack at will....but these are the latest numbers from one of your favorite reviewers...HD Digest.

Not sure if these numbers are accurate but if they are you are completely contradicting yourself. You specifically stated that high def digest is biased towards HD-DVD so why would they be giving BD higher scores according to you then?

DVDtalk gave Tears of the Sun a 2 .......riiiiiiiiight.....there credible....and hifi digest could be called hd dvd digest....and nobody would know the difference.
Please explain I really want to know. Do you just like to pick and choose facts that support your agenda and completely ignore everything you say before? I guess consistency isn't important to some people.

IMO the Black Hawk Down BD is indeed one of the best releases on either format. Superb PQ and AQ make the purchase of this disc a no-brainer for any fan of the movie.

Having now installed the Samsung update and watched BHD again, it looks even better. BHD and KOH are clearly at the top of the releases on either format, in my opinion.

Having now installed the Samsung update and watched BHD again, it looks even better. BHD and KOH are clearly at the top of the releases on either format, in my opinion.

and both Mpeg2, were are the VC1 mongers :rolleyes:

-Gary

and both Mpeg2, were are the VC1 mongers :rolleyes:

-Gary

VC-1 mongers? That term doesn't even make any sense.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Earz
I will add for you then
Since the 5 star rating was implemented there were 37 BD titles rated.
37 divided by 149 stars = 4.02

The latest thirty reviews.

P/Q
BD 116=3.87
HD DVD 114=3.80

A/Q
BD 127 = 4.23
HD DVD 112=3.75

This is not to say that hd dvd was not the better looking format overall at first.....but it does say that anyone whos seen both recently....that P/Q is now a moot point.

Attack at will....but these are the latest numbers from one of your favorite reviewers...HD Digest.


Not sure if these numbers are accurate but if they are you are completely contradicting yourself. You specifically stated that high def digest is biased towards HD-DVD so why would they be giving BD higher scores according to you then?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Earz
DVDtalk gave Tears of the Sun a 2 .......riiiiiiiiight.....there credible....and hifi digest could be called hd dvd digest....and nobody would know the difference.

Please explain I really want to know. Do you just like to pick and choose facts that support your agenda and completely ignore everything you say before? I guess consistency isn't important to some people.

I still wanna know...

people that enjoy the look of film vs TV video are very happy with BR, those that pray that every movie look like CO Riddick are gonna be sadly disappointed


Could you expand on that please? :confused:

Go for it, gary!

Seemed good, just with the odd color cast / tint throughout the movie which is in the film also, I am not so sure it is a best movie to show off the format.

4 out of 5 and yes I do think it's one f if not the best BD to date on PQ.

pretty much agree (also on the PQ being moot)

from what I have put together so far on both sides of the format fence, no pro reviewers have been respect worthy, some **** is so far off-bass it is pathetic

all the reviewers are obsessing over King Kong, everyone saw my thread on that, it is the first HD-DVD with issues, I had many PM's on that one, people afraid to come forward on Kong, some professional ;)

stuff like Army of Darkness and Memento trashed, Click, Total Recall, Terminator, Fugitive and Samurai picked on :eek:

I could go on, I buy what movies I want and IMHO the only release so far from either format that is a total waste of time is Fifth Element, shortly followed by Jay and Silent Bob, both BR and thats it

trashing BR has just become the latest bashing fad to hit AVS, people that enjoy the look of film vs TV video are very happy with BR, those that pray that every movie look like CO Riddick are gonna be sadly disappointed :rolleyes:

-Gary

Yep....some movies just don't have that ultra clean video look....and some don't like the look of intended added grain.
Just wait until Saving Private Ryan comes out ....I can hear the whining already ;)

^^Can't explain away your contradictions so you don't even try :rolleyes:

Yep....some movies just don't have that ultra clean video look....and some don't like the look of intended added grain.;)
Do you even know what grain is or what causes it?

Just who is supposed to be the lead character?

I don't believe there is a lead in this film....sounds like FUD to me. :rolleyes:
You getting defensive over a less than flattering fact about your favorite movie sounds like fud to me.

the dolby digital track has weak bass if any compared to the region 2 japanese dts edition for instance. we havent tested the pcm yet. seems the 5.1 DD mix has seen most of its bass removed.

the dolby digital track has weak bass if any compared to the region 2 japanese dts edition for instance. we havent tested the pcm yet. seems the 5.1 DD mix has seen most of its bass removed.
Interesting. Having watched this recently, I thought the bass was very powerful. At a very low frequency, however. I will say I turned my sub up a tad more than usual, but not much. I wouldn't describe the bass as weak by any means, though. I think it's just very, very low (frequency wise). Perhaps I'll check my sub setting again to make sure I didn't turn it up a lot more than usual.

finally got around to watching this.

how the **** did this get top marks for video ? i know it's a very rough, gritty, grainy picture, but still, it didn't look half as good as i was expecting. i don't know how much was because of the stylised nature of the film, but i felt underwhelmed. wide shots were particularly poor (detail wise). which i'm fine with if that's how the film was, but my expectations were elevated quite a bit.

this disc seemed to be grouped with kingdom of heaven for PQ. i can understand where people are coming from with KOH, but BHW ... mystery. the edge enhancement alone should have stopped it in it's tracks from being called reference.

I wasn't that impressed either - until I did a direct A/B comparison to the SD Superbit version. Anyway - low tier 1 / high tier 2 would be my placement. (hard to believe this title was once tier "0" :eek: )

I wasn't that impressed either - until I did a direct A/B comparison to the SD Superbit version. Anyway - low tier 1 / high tier 2 would be my placement. (hard to believe this title was once tier "0" :eek: )
i agree low tier 1 and high tier 2 is where i would place it to me its comparable to a movie like dejavu

Thanks guys. We'll get right on it.

It's at least upper tier 1, certainly not tier 2.

tier 1 ?

no way.

tier 3 terriority for this bad boy.

there are other discs in tier 1 that are much better.

anything with edge enhancement this noticeable should be banished to low tiers.

First and foremost, I think it is the most faithful transfer I've yet seen... sure, there are titles with more saturated colors, but this transfer doesn't call for that. It is totally transparent to the theatrical print that I've viewed a number of times.

Ben.. I don't think you can make make such a definitive comment like that unless you are viewing the telecine side by side with the compressed version, and not relying on your memory.

Nevertheless, it is a great looking disc, and the PCM track is welcome.... It is a great track, definitely worth of the Oscar it won. I happen to work for the company that did both the sound editorial and mixing, and can tell you that the same crew is currently working on Ridley's new film and the restoration of Blade Runner... you are all in for some treats :)

Ben.. I don't think you can make make such a definitive comment like that unless you are viewing the telecine side by side with the compressed version, and not relying on your memory.

Nevertheless, it is a great looking disc, and the PCM track is welcome.... It is a great track, definitely worth of the Oscar it won. I happen to work for the company that did both the sound editorial and mixing, and can tell you that the same crew is currently working on Ridley's new film and the restoration of Blade Runner... you are all in for some treats :)

:cool:

Why on earth do so may folks believe in the mythical tier system?

Specialist Grimes, portrayed by Ewan McGregor, is a fictional character, though given his administrative position and penchant for coffee, he is unabashedly based on the real-life Ranger clerk Spc John Stebbins, who was awarded the Silver Star for his actions during the battle. However, Stebbins was convicted in 2000 for child molestation and is currently serving a 30-year jail term. As a result, the Pentagon apparently pressured screenwriters to alter his name in the film, although a spokeswoman for the movie defended the change as "a creative decision made by the producers.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0265086/trivia

just watched payback. similar kind of film visually - gritty, grainy etc. but MUCH, MUCH better transfer (no edge enhancement, background details didn't smear).

this is how i was expecting BHD to look, not the rather sad clown transfer that i saw yesterday on BHD. don't get me wrong, it's not terrible, but not as good as some would have you believe.

I have bought and watched over 60 titles on both formats....

So, seeing 60 HD discs makes you very experienced? I've seen way more than that in 3 HD formats and I don't push opinions like you do. If I rated HD material on 1-5 scale, after seeing close to 300, there's only a handful I'd even consider giving a 5. BHD which is a very decent disc is not on that list.Yeah, when BHD came out it was a step up for Sony that was struggling.

You sure spend alot of time arguing with folks on this forum over lines in the sand. I'd suggest that you soften your approach. There are so many folks around here that we can learn from. :)

So, seeing 60 HD discs makes you very experienced? I've seen way more than that in 3 HD formats and I don't push opinions like you do. If I rated HD material on 1-5 scale, after seeing close to 300, there's only a handful I'd even consider giving a 5. BHD which is a very decent disc is not on that list.Yeah, when BHD came out it was a step up for Sony that was struggling.

You sure spend alot of time arguing with folks on this forum over lines in the sand. I'd suggest that you soften your approach. There are so many folks around here that we can learn from. :)

Rachael its called fanboyishim :)

I too have seen at least 300 HD titles from 3 formats. Black Hawk Down's PQ is satisfactory. I like the way it looks. Best PQ on either format? Hardly. Not even close.

Specialist Grimes, portrayed by Ewan McGregor, is a fictional character, though given his administrative position and penchant for coffee, he is unabashedly based on the real-life Ranger clerk Spc John Stebbins, who was awarded the Silver Star for his actions during the battle. However, Stebbins was convicted in 2000 for child molestation and is currently serving a 30-year jail term. As a result, the Pentagon apparently pressured screenwriters to alter his name in the film, although a spokeswoman for the movie defended the change as "a creative decision made by the producers.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0265086/trivia

Actually some people in the film was renamed, because they were composite characters.

Or as the real Eversman was saying, I would be proud if i did 1/10 of what i did in the movie.

To me Crank has better PQ, BHD was about the same as kingdom of heaven in my opinion.

So, seeing 60 HD discs makes you very experienced? I've seen way more than that in 3 HD formats and I don't push opinions like you do. If I rated HD material on 1-5 scale, after seeing close to 300, there's only a handful I'd even consider giving a 5. BHD which is a very decent disc is not on that list.Yeah, when BHD came out it was a step up for Sony that was struggling.

You sure spend alot of time arguing with folks on this forum over lines in the sand. I'd suggest that you soften your approach. There are so many folks around here that we can learn from. :)

Did you check the date on this thread?
When this one was released..there really wasn't a whole lot of great looking non animated titles yet...and I still consider it tier 1....just farther down the list at this point.

Not that it matters but I have watched over 170 HD movies in my theater between D-vhs, hd dvd and BD on a screen thats big enough to reveal things like soft and filtered looking releases....that aren't noticed as much on smaller displays.

I liked this movie a lot in the theater, and I bought the BD version because it was an excellent price at Wally World.

I think the BD version is outstanding for audio: really shows off your sub and surrounds. Video is good but not great for showing off Blu-ray because of all the grain. However, there are some absolutely wonderful hi-def shots here and there. Early in the movie, you see some close-up shots of the black dude that they're interrogating in camp; you can see every hair on his face. Some of the aerial shots of the city and of the seacoast are outstanding in hi-def. But the muted colors used in shooting most of the movie gives it a documentary-like feel that is just not meant to show off your PQ that well, IMO.

Did you check the date on this thread?
When this one was released..there really wasn't a whole lot of great looking non animated titles yet...and I still consider it tier 1....just farther down the list at this point.

Not that it matters but I have watched over 170 HD movies in my theater between D-vhs, hd dvd and BD on a screen thats big enough to reveal things like soft and filtered looking releases....that aren't noticed as much on smaller displays.


Yeah, I know the date. I remember the thread well. BTW, I don't believe in the cult of tiers.... ;)

Somebody on another thread was on about how good their eyesight was yesterday. I'm one of those lucky, cat eyed peoples too. Some of us don't need a drive-in theatre to get a good glimpse of films. Let's just say I disagreed with the thread when you started it and got inspired to reply yesterday. :)

BTW, I don't believe in the cult of tiers.... ;)

Ditto....the tiers threads are rather ridiculous (for both formats).

I think it's a shame that this version isn't the unrated cut that came out on DVD over a year ago. It has a lot more footage added back into the film. I'm afraid to buy this one as it may be a double dip disc.

"Ditto....the tiers threads are rather ridiculous "

Why? it gives a general opinion on the PQ of a movie. Opinions vary but it is a good starting point. Nothing wrong with the tier list.

I think some of the issue is in a difference of opinions...the quality of transfer and the IQ should be in comparison to the master, not necessarily how it looks to your eyes.

I don't see this happening anytime soon so we end up with a mixture of judgments that vary from putting importance on seeing known compression artifacts and putting importance on "wow" factor.

Maybe BHD polarizes opinions more than some others because it is a very stylized movie, which is perfectly captured at times, and once and a while an artifact will appear. I don't know, I don't have near the HD experience as many of the others here, it is just what I have noticed regarding PQ judgments.

I take something like Planet Earth...put it in front of someone to "just watch" and they will think it is amazing...a critic can easily point to a few scenes with some banding and knock it down one or two full stars....while on the other hand you can take a perfectly captured, faithful to the master, which has intentional film grain, muted colors, etc...and the experienced critic can note how well it performed technically while the average person will claim "I've seen DVD better than this crap".

I think most things fall in the middle and many of us judge in varying degrees from either camp. I tend to use stars and tiers as a starting point...but a more detailed write up by someone who has experience and can make more in depth comments is more valuable.

I think some of the issue is in a difference of opinions...the quality of transfer and the IQ should be in comparison to the master, not necessarily how it looks to your eyes...



I take something like Planet Earth...put it in front of someone to "just watch" and they will think it is amazing...a critic can easily point to a few scenes with some banding and knock it down one or two full stars....while on the other hand you can take a perfectly captured, faithful to the master, which has intentional film grain, muted colors, etc...and the experienced critic can note how well it performed technically while the average person will claim "I've seen DVD better than this crap".



Bingo.

I can't wait for when Saving Private Ryan is released and all the clueless go, "Ugh! What's with all the grain? It looks washed out! Where's the color?!?! Where's the 3-d POp?!?!?!"

:)

PQ = WOW
SQ = Awesome

I just think that the whole tier thang promotes wrong and unrealistic expectations, period.

I just think that the whole tier thang promotes wrong and unrealistic expectations, period.

Only if the person reading is ignorant to begin with.

FF4 is still TIER 1.

Bingo.

I can't wait for when Saving Private Ryan is released and all the clueless go, "Ugh! What's with all the grain? It looks washed out! Where's the color?!?! Where's the 3-d POp?!?!?!"

:)

Yep saw this one in 720p OTA ...and the added grain was front and center.
Even so it was quite a few pegs above the sd dvd played back on a top player.

Can't wait for the eventual BD version.

Sony should have included the OST with the Blu release. Kudos to the legendary Hans Zimmer.