The whole film looks really soft to me. Facial closeups almost never show the crisp detail we have come to expect from the best titles. There is no grain. The PQ reminds me of Batman Begins. Is this what we can expect from Disney in the future?

Most of the reviews for this disc have been quite favorable and I agree with them...it's a good looking disc. Not flat at all looking to me.

Most of the reviews for this disc have been quite favorable and I agree with them...it's a good looking disc. Not flat at all looking to me.

I didn't say it looked flat; I said it looked soft. Not focused. Not crisp. Not sharp. The facial closeups look out of focus.

The whole film looks really soft to me. Facial closeups almost never show the crisp detail we have come to expect from the best titles. There is no grain. The PQ reminds me of Batman Begins. Is this what we can expect from Disney in the future?
Batman Begins looks fantastic to me, so I guess that means I should pick up Enemy of the State!

I didn't say it looked flat; I said it looked soft. Not focused. Not crisp. Not sharp. The facial closeups look out of focus.

How does Kingdom of Heaven look to you. :cool:

I didn't say it looked flat; I said it looked soft. Not focused. Not crisp. Not sharp. The facial closeups look out of focus.

if the facial closeups are out of focus then it was meant to be that way, Tony Scott has alot of Style in his films, I saw this flick in the theater and it was the same way, so it damn well better be at home also ;)

Spy Game was hammered D-Theater/HD, save some slight EE, I would come near to calling it reference

-Gary

How does Kingdom of Heaven look to you. :cool:

Kingdom of Heaven looks superb to me.

if the facial closeups are out of focus then it was meant to be that way, Tony Scott has alot of Style in his films, I saw this flick in the theater and it was the same way, so it damn well better be at home also ;)

Spy Game was hammered D-Theater/HD, save some slight EE, I would come near to calling it reference

-Gary

I'm relieved to learn it looked the same in the theater. It seemed surprising to see this kind of look in a film about surveillance.

Here's what High Def digest said


"'Enemy of the State' comes to Blu-ray in a very fine 2.35:1 widescreen 1080p/MPEG-2 transfer. It certainly helps that the film was freshly remastered in high-definition for a recent 2006 standard-def DVD release, and I'd rank it as easily one of the best Blu-ray presentations yet from Buena Vista.

The source material is in pristine shape. Grain is just about non-existent. Blacks and contrast are also excellent. Perhaps because it was a Tony Scott film, I expected a totally tweaked image, with blooming whites and whacked-out colors. But while still stylized, the image is relatively natural. Colors are very vivid, but still clean. And despite some use of color filters and harsh lighting, fleshtones remain accurate throughout.

Detail is also terrific. I've often found MPEG-2 encodes to have a harder, more coarse look, but 'Enemy of the State' is one of the smoothest I've seen. Rare is a shot not flush with depth. Shadow delineation impressive, with fine details still visible even in the darkest scenes. I often partly judge a truly great transfer by how realistic skintones look, and here I could see individual pores on Will Smith's face. Noise is also surprisingly minimal, given how rich colors are. Aside from maybe two or three shots where I saw a slight bit of fuzziness in solid patches of color, this transfer is artifact-free. An overall superb effort by Buena Vista.

Kingdom of Heaven looks superb to me.

Just watched this last night. I could not believe how 3-dimensional the snowflakes were. I almost reached out and caught one. :)

Just watched this last night. I could not believe how 3-dimensional the snowflakes were. I almost reached out and caught one. :)

The blowing snowflakes are one of the many things I love in that movie.

Here's what High Def digest said


"'Enemy of the State' comes to Blu-ray in a very fine 2.35:1 widescreen 1080p/MPEG-2 transfer. It certainly helps that the film was freshly remastered in high-definition for a recent 2006 standard-def DVD release, and I'd rank it as easily one of the best Blu-ray presentations yet from Buena Vista.

The source material is in pristine shape. Grain is just about non-existent. Blacks and contrast are also excellent. Perhaps because it was a Tony Scott film, I expected a totally tweaked image, with blooming whites and whacked-out colors. But while still stylized, the image is relatively natural. Colors are very vivid, but still clean. And despite some use of color filters and harsh lighting, fleshtones remain accurate throughout.

Detail is also terrific. I've often found MPEG-2 encodes to have a harder, more coarse look, but 'Enemy of the State' is one of the smoothest I've seen. Rare is a shot not flush with depth. Shadow delineation impressive, with fine details still visible even in the darkest scenes. I often partly judge a truly great transfer by how realistic skintones look, and here I could see individual pores on Will Smith's face. Noise is also surprisingly minimal, given how rich colors are. Aside from maybe two or three shots where I saw a slight bit of fuzziness in solid patches of color, this transfer is artifact-free. An overall superb effort by Buena Vista.

I read that review before starting this thread. The pores on Will Smith's face do not look anywhere as detailed and sharp as, for example, the pores on Laurence Fishburne's face in MI3.

Was anyone else hopig to see this would be the new cut of the film that was recently released on DVD? I guess next year that version will come out for the double dip.

the new cut was total ****, don't lose sleep over it, nothing removed and nothing added but stupid extended dialog at the end of a couple scenes that cut earlier, maybe 30 seconds worth of stuff and it was much lower image quality and didn't match

total joke :mad:

we have all we need when it comes to Enemy ;)

-Gary

the new cut was total ****, don't lose sleep over it, nothing removed and nothing added but stupid extended dialog at the end of a couple scenes that cut earlier, maybe 30 seconds worth of stuff and it was much lower image quality and didn't match

total joke :mad:

we have all we need when it comes to Enemy ;)

-Gary

Good to know. I have never seen the extended version, but I remembered it very recently came out. Sucks to hear about the image quality getting worse, actually that's very surprising to me considering the original DVD is fairly old.

Good to know. I have never seen the extended version, but I remembered it very recently came out. Sucks to hear about the image quality getting worse, actually that's very surprising to me considering the original DVD is fairly old.

just the added stuff looks bad, sorry to confuse, the image on the new SD-DVD was stellar, still haven't got my BR yet

-Gary

watched sections on my sammy and the entire film on my ps3. It looked superb to me, the original poster needs to understand the different looks different movies have me thinks.

exactly... Enemy of the State is an OUTSTANDING transfer.

watched sections on my sammy and the entire film on my ps3. It looked superb to me, the original poster needs to understand the different looks different movies have me thinks.

If you're telling me that you saw this in a theater, and that this is the way it looked, that's fine. I didn't see it in a theater, so I don't know how it looked there.

I though the transfer was incredibly flim-like and not soft at all.

Marc.

I just watched some scenes tonight on the PS3.

It looks VERY soft to me too.

Far shots even look blurry at times, like a standard DVD.

On my 119" screen and 720p FP, it was lacking for sure.

The BD version looks good...and sounds even better.

The sd dvd version is full of EE....which could be perceived as sharper by some.

I though the transfer was incredibly flim-like and not soft at all.

Marc.
I picked this up when it came out and the first thing I thought once I watched through the whole thing was how incredibly film-like it was. I don't know how to explain it but something about the picture just looked very appealing.

For those who don't think Enemy of the State looks soft, try watching Hulk on HD DVD to see what high definition is capable of.

Even Willy Wonka (Wilder) looked MUCH better than Enemy of the State.


It was really lacking compared to other HD material (HD DVD, .TS files, and DirecTV)

Filmlike should not be blurry and out of focus (well, maybe at most theaters these days it is...LOL)

Filmlike should not be blurry and out of focus

If it was shot that way, it should be.

If it was shot that way, it should be.

Some of us would not be interested in titles that were shot to be blurry and out of focus if we knew that ahead of time.

Good description of the video portion is here... http://www.hometheaterspot.com/htsthreads/dvd-review.php?sequence=1729

Good description of the video portion is here... http://www.hometheaterspot.com/htsthreads/dvd-review.php?sequence=1729

That review does not correspond at all to my viewing experience. It is the disparity between reviews like this and my viewing experience that prompted me to start this thread. In general, the reviews seem often to be highly generous to the material being reviewed, and as a result, more and more, it seems like the reviews are basically worthless.

I thought the movie looked good (3/5) mostly due to age. I did not notice shots of softness.

Just for the record in this thread, I posted that I considered the transfer/encode for the Enemy of the State BD to be "second tier". I find much (most) of the transfer to be a bit soft. Certainly less sharp than several of the BD titles of films that would fall into the same general age/budget category as Enemy of the State.

While I understand that with these new hi-res video formats we can now discern even minor variations in film stocks, lighting, and filming techniques, however, we should not fall into the trap of calling everything that isn't crisp and sharp as being "film-like". Film can be, and usually is, quite sharp and detailed. A mediocre transfer or encode is just that, mediocre. I'll fall back on my many years of evaluating laserdisc and DVD for reviews and call this one what I think it is. Weak is weak, and the Enemy of the State Blu-ray disc is, relative to the format, weak.

Just for the record in this thread, I posted that I considered the transfer/encode for the Enemy of the State BD to be "second tier". I find much (most) of the transfer to be a bit soft. Certainly less sharp than several of the BD titles of films that would fall into the same general age/budget category as Enemy of the State.

While I understand that with these new hi-res video formats we can now discern even minor variations in film stocks, lighting, and filming techniques, however, we should not fall into the trap of calling everything that isn't crisp and sharp as being "film-like". Film can be, and usually is, quite sharp and detailed. A mediocre transfer or encode is just that, mediocre. I'll fall back on my many years of evaluating laserdisc and DVD for reviews and call this one what I think it is. Weak is weak, and the Enemy of the State Blu-ray disc is, relative to the format, weak.

What did you think of Devil Wears Prada on this issue? I thought Devil Wears Prada looked even worse than Enemy of the State.

What did you think of Devil Wears Prada on this issue? I thought Devil Wears Prada looked even worse than Enemy of the State.

To answer your question, I pulled out both discs to get a fresh look. First off, I'll say that looking at Enemy of the State on an updated PS3 instead of the Samsung player, I'd give that one another half point. Still not first tier, but top of second tier. That said, Devil Wears Prada is definitely first tier Blu-ray. One of the best looking MPEG-2 encodes I've seen on Blu-ray so far. Enemy of the State has a few shots that look very good, but the problem with that tranfer is consistency. One shot will look pretty good then the next shot will look like a good DVD.

To answer your question, I pulled out both discs to get a fresh look. First off, I'll say that looking at Enemy of the State on an updated PS3 instead of the Samsung player, I'd give that one another half point. Still not first tier, but top of second tier. That said, Devil Wears Prada is definitely first tier Blu-ray. One of the best looking MPEG-2 encodes I've seen on Blu-ray so far. Enemy of the State has a few shots that look very good, but the problem with that tranfer is consistency. One shot will look pretty good then the next shot will look like a good DVD.

Based on my viewing, the good shots in Enemy were few and far between. One that comes to mind is an aerial shot looking down at a park where the Will Smith character is meeting someone. The facial closeups were never sharp.

Prada was more consistent, but not Tier 1 to my eyes. To me it looks softer than Batman Begins.

Sorry but there is no way Enemy is even second tier...

I still need to check out more BD titles but even fourth tier HD DVDs look better than Enemy IMO.

It's a very weak transfer and whoever approved it should be fired IMO.

It's more or less a recent movie so age has nothing to do with it.

Sorry but there is no way Enemy is even second tier...

I still need to check out more BD titles but even fourth tier HD DVDs look better than Enemy IMO.

It's a very weak transfer and whoever approved it should be fired IMO.

It's more or less a recent movie so age has nothing to do with it.
Wow... it is NOT that bad. Yes, it was rather soft, but I found it highly watchable and film-like and I think that's the best way to judge PQ. For example, Terminator 2 is probably low Tier 2 at best but I found it to be much easier on the eyes than I expected given it's age and what more can you really ask for?

Wow... it is NOT that bad. Yes, it was rather soft, but I found it highly watchable and film-like and I think that's the best way to judge PQ. For example, Terminator 2 is probably low Tier 2 at best but I found it to be much easier on the eyes than I expected given it's age and what more can you really ask for?

I found the lack of sharpness in facial closeups in Enemy exceedingly irritating. For me that gets in the way of watchability.

T2 and Speed arrive on Monday so I hope they are better! :)

Sorry to go off, I just love Enemy and and was really let down by it.

If you're telling me that you saw this in a theater, and that this is the way it looked, that's fine. I didn't see it in a theater, so I don't know how it looked there.
You guys are lucky to have good theaters. Movies look like sh$t in theaters around here.

I did not like Speed from a video perspective, but once again this is an older movie (I preferred Enemy of the State) and it may be the best representation currently available.

Enemy of the State looked great when I watched it last night. I was very impressed with it. Fantastic detail, color and overall presentation. I watched Kiss of the Dragon a few nights earlier and thought it was nice, but not as impressive as Enemy of the State. Great job BV!


The blowing snowflakes are one of the many things I love in that movie.

If you like blowing snowflakes, Assault on Precinct 13 has plenty of snow and looks great in HD-DVD. I hope I can share that without anyone geting too angry around here. :)