http://hddvd.highdefdigest.com/alphadog.html

"Visually speaking, 'Alpha Dog' rarely rates above the level of disappointment."

Good thing I am using Netflix for this one... That and because it is a UNIVERSAL title...

Good thing I am using Netflix for this one... That and because it is a UNIVERSAL title...

I pre-ordered this from Amazon and it's shipped already. Oh well.

When will I learn? Will this be my last Universal HD DVD purchase?

This might be the 1st HD DVD that's going back to Amazon without opening it...

For once that they had TrueHD... :(

When will I learn? Will this be my last Universal HD DVD purchase?

Don't be so harsh. Out of over 75 Universal HD DVDs I own, only one, CoM, gives me trouble with XA2 and 1.5 firmware but works great with my A1 and A2 (it even used to work with firmware 1.3 on the XA2). And for transfer quality, I'll take 98% of Universal's HD DVDs over most Blu-Ray titles. HD DVD's transfer quality has been a lot more consistent than for Blu-ray, and blaming Universal for the odd few is a bit excessive.

Don't be so harsh. Out of over 75 Universal HD DVDs I own, only one, CoM, gives me trouble with XA2 and 1.5 firmware but works great with my A1 and A2 (it even used to work with firmware 1.3 on the XA2). And for transfer quality, I'll take 98% of Universal's HD DVDs over most Blu-Ray titles. HD DVD's transfer quality has been a lot more consistent than for Blu-ray, and blaming Universal for the odd few is a bit excessive.

I agree that Universal has generally done an outstanding job with PQ. However, it seems that currently, there is a serious problem with something in more mundane areas relating to actual playability of the discs that are being produced. I personally have had playback problems with two of the last three Universal discs I bought (COM and SA; I have not had problems with GS, but I haven't tried the special features on that one). The best possible PQ is worthless if the disc won't play.

http://hddvd.highdefdigest.com/alphadog.html

"Visually speaking, 'Alpha Dog' rarely rates above the level of disappointment."

That's the quote/ rating of the month! About the way I felt with T3.

Wait for it ...

Wait ...

RENTAL!

The movie was extremely low budget and shot this way... The transfer looks pretty decent to me and is better than the way it looked in theatres. Peter Bracke is extremely hit and miss and I think he screwed the pooch on this one... it doesn't look AMAZING but that's how it was shot, it will never look the way he wants it to.

The movie was extremely low budget and shot this way... The transfer looks pretty decent to me and is better than the way it looked in theatres. Peter Bracke is extremely hit and miss and I think he screwed the pooch on this one... it doesn't look AMAZING but that's how it was shot, it will never look the way he wants it to.


Exactly.

i really enjoyed this movie in theaters, the only thing stopping me from buying it is the fact that its a combo

The movie was extremely low budget and shot this way... The transfer looks pretty decent to me and is better than the way it looked in theatres. Peter Bracke is extremely hit and miss and I think he screwed the pooch on this one... it doesn't look AMAZING but that's how it was shot, it will never look the way he wants it to.


Right, I don't quite get the complaint about the film grain. That's a natural characteristic of film in low lighting conditions and completely lies with the source material, not the transfer. I wonder if he would like War of the Worlds or what he thought of An American Werewolf in London's transfer.

I've about had it, with this "review" business for HD.

Kinda reminds me of a lefty and a righty arguing about our current president. You just can't believe that they're talking about the same person.

I wouldn't put too much faith into any of Bracke's reviews when it comes to PQ seeing as how he is pretty biased when it comes to filmmakers taking artistic liberties. He seems to want everything to look natural and clean, and even kind of admits to this himself in his Closer BD review.

"Regular readers of this site may recall that I had some issues with a couple of recent Sony titles (namely 'The Holiday' and 'Rocky Balboa') which I felt sacrificed naturalism for pumped-up artificiality. 'Closer' is, well, closer to my personal preferences, which is for a more realistic and unadorned presentation."

I watched this movie today good PQ and AQ. As far as the movie it take a bit to get going but turns out alright.

Anybody notice the Xbox in a few spot. Which came out in 2001

I watched this movie today good PQ and AQ. As far as the movie it take a bit to get going but turns out alright. I agree with the PQ/AQ it was decent...but I did not care for the movie itself.

Special thanks to Mr. Peter "I hate Reservoir Dogs therefore I'm lame" Bracke for spoiling the movie by revealing key information in the second paragraph of the review. :rolleyes:

He officially sucks.

Nothing wrong with the picture.
No glitches either.

Dunno about the PQ, but I turned this movie off 30 minutes into it. I'm glad I rented it for free from work. Ick.

The movie was extremely low budget and shot this way... The transfer looks pretty decent to me and is better than the way it looked in theatres. Peter Bracke is extremely hit and miss and I think he screwed the pooch on this one... it doesn't look AMAZING but that's how it was shot, it will never look the way he wants it to.

Having watched about half of this movie last night, I agree that once again Peter Bracke is wrong on PQ. I thought the PQ looked very nice. Far better than Dreamgirls, for example.

I must admit, this movie had an emotional impact on me. It was better than I thought, and to think that a life was snuffed out in this way made me upset, angry. Crazy world.

Some of you might like to read up on the true-life events surrounding this film either before or after you watch it:

http://www.crimelibrary.com/notorious_murders/celebrity/jesse_james_hollywoo/1.html

Just put it in my A2. PQ is not as bad as the review might suggest. It's quite sharp and detailed. Filmgrain was in the source and was not added by the transfer. Contrast is a little boosted so darker areas are a little less detailed.

I wouldn't rate it as brilliant, but it was good average and above "The Holiday" which was released as HD-DVD here in Europe.

Better ranking as 3,5 to 4 than the 3 stars.

Reviewer must be mistaken. Got it from Netflix and it's at least 4 or more out of 5.

It seemed to be he was reviewing the choices of the DOP and Director more than anything.

If he's not familiar with how it looked in theaters, it makes the PQ grade almost worthless (IMO).

Were there compression artifacts? Banding? Out of whack black or white levels? If not, chances are it's the source. The question becomes should these reviewers be reviewing the source or the encode. I think it's safe to say that most HD titles are accurately representing the source and any shortcomings are at the source level. That's just my opinion though, and of course it's not always the case.

It seemed to be he was reviewing the choices of the DOP and Director more than anything.

If he's not familiar with how it looked in theaters, it makes the PQ grade almost worthless (IMO).

Those of us who have posted here disagreeing with the reviewer about the PQ grade probably haven't seen it in a theater either. I certainly haven't. It is not necessary to see it in a theater to conclude that a PQ rating of 3 on a 5 point scale is wrong.

Having watched about half of this movie last night, I agree that once again Peter Bracke is wrong on PQ. I thought the PQ looked very nice. Far better than Dreamgirls, for example.

I'll have to rent Alpha Dog then,cause if it's far better than Dreamgirls it must be tier 0.

I watched the SD version last night. I was a little disappointed in the image. I found it flat and lacking in a nice black level.....though i'm sure it's consistent with the theatrical image from what others have said. I thought it was interesting in the scene in the park area towards the final act of the film. The director would cut back and forth between "Elvis" and the stolen boy with Frankie (Justin T.) and the image of Elvis was consistent with the night scenes before and after.....when the two shot of stolen boy and Frankie had a haze over it...light gray vs the "black" levels of the Elvis shots in the same scene. Artistic intent or bad transfer?

Ron

Well you should watch the HD DVD version before judging it.

Well you should watch the HD DVD version before judging it.

My comments were relating to the SD and in no way reflecting on what the HD may or may not reflect...but I thought my comments might be relevent in terms of the overall look of the film and the fact it seemed to be similar in the finding from High Def digest.

One shouldn't have to state this, but each person's set up is different....screen, projector, calibration, room conditions...all play a factor in what one sees on the screen and their own personal perceptions, likes and dislikes etc...so that being stated, comments by anyone are merely one person's opinion and should be taken in the context as such.

BTW: I wasn't judging the HD version, nor did I state that I was. You should read to comprehend, instead of reading to back up your assumptions.

Peter Bracke totally missed the boat on this one. The image on the ALPHA DOG HD-DVD is as good as I've seen on any discs. It is a 100 percent faithful representation of how the film looked. Everything he criticizes the transfer for (like the overly processed look in some sequences) was completely intentional. To downgrade the disc for that is baffling.

My comments were relating to the SD and in no way reflecting on what the HD may or may not reflect...but I thought my comments might be relevent in terms of the overall look of the film and the fact it seemed to be similar in the finding from High Def digest.

One shouldn't have to state this, but each person's set up is different....screen, projector, calibration, room conditions...all play a factor in what one sees on the screen and their own personal perceptions, likes and dislikes etc...so that being stated, comments by anyone are merely one person's opinion and should be taken in the context as such.

BTW: I wasn't judging the HD version, nor did I state that I was. You should read to comprehend, instead of reading to back up your assumptions.
Wow, simmer down man. All I'm saying is that you should not be using the SD version to back up why the HD version could be a bad transfer. There is no need to get all upset about it. :)

Wow, simmer down man. All I'm saying is that you should not be using the SD version to back up why the HD version could be a bad transfer. There is no need to get all upset about it. :)

Not upset...just having a hard time getting you to understand just becuase I commented on the SD version in this thread does not mean I am commenting on the HD version (or it's potential)....pretty simple statement. Don't know how much clearer I can make it.

Cool I get that. I just don't understand why you were reviewing the SD version in a HD thread about PQ quality. That's all. And I'm sorry if I made you feel like I was attacking you or anything, because that was not my intent.

I thought it was interesting in the scene in the park area towards the final act of the film. The director would cut back and forth between "Elvis" and the stolen boy with Frankie (Justin T.) and the image of Elvis was consistent with the night scenes before and after.....when the two shot of stolen boy and Frankie had a haze over it...light gray vs the "black" levels of the Elvis shots in the same scene. Artistic intent or bad transfer?

I was wondering the same thing about the HD DVD transfer, so it was not just an issue with the SD DVD. Was it that way in theaters too?

Not upset...just having a hard time getting you to understand just becuase I commented on the SD version in this thread does not mean I am commenting on the HD version (or it's potential)....pretty simple statement. Don't know how much clearer I can make it.

Since you are the forum police, maybe you should have started a thread in the DVD discussion forum down at the bottom of the main page as this is the HD-DVD Software forum...

;)

PQ on this is miles ahead of what Peter said. He must be bitter that this isn't on BD or something. :rolleyes: And I liked the film.

I watched this one tonight and have to agree that this one is around a 3 for PQ.

Does anyone have a rough idea of the size of the department at Universal who does the HD-DVD encodes? I ask because I get the feeling they may be overworked right now as it seems a larger then normal percentage of Universal HD-DVD releases are suffering in terms of PQ. It almost seems as though they are rushing these releases to hit all of the announced street dates.

It seemed that the releases from Universal in 2006 were consistently better in terms of PQ.

Does anyone else feel that Universal may be rushing their encodes to hit these release dates?

~Josh

I watched this one tonight and have to agree that this one is around a 3 for PQ.

Does anyone have a rough idea of the size of the department at Universal who does the HD-DVD encodes? I ask because I get the feeling they may be overworked right now as it seems a larger then normal percentage of Universal HD-DVD releases are suffering in terms of PQ. It almost seems as though they are rushing these releases to hit all of the announced street dates.

It seemed that the releases from Universal in 2006 were consistently better in terms of PQ.

Does anyone else feel that Universal may be rushing their encodes to hit these release dates?

~Josh
The look of the film appears to be director's intent. It is encoded perfectly fine.

Another TrueHD sound track win for me. I switched back and forth between DD+ and TrueHD (using the remote button, not the menu) and found a distinct positive difference. If only all movies would include TrueHD or other lossless audio track.

The picture quality of this HD-DVD seemed to be a very good representation of the movie. This is not a brilliantly sharp mega-bucks movie, but it is not supposed to look that way either.

haven't seen the hd version but SD was downright awful in certain scenes. The last part at night had horrible banding in the sky, i thought it was my DCDI causing it but played on the xbox and had same awful banding.

how bad can Amber Heard in HD be.. meow!

how bad can Amber Heard in HD be.. meow!


LOL.. I watched the movie (SD version) and about the movie.. I thought it was going to be lame since it had Justin in it but man was I wrong.. It actually had my wife and her friend all emotional.. I thought it was really sad the way that it all went down.. I hope his brother has a terrible life and everything goes wrong for him.. Afterall, he was the main reason why everything went down.. RIP

Interesting, disturbing movie. Seems like some of the characters, like the brother and the caretaker (Justin Timberlake) had their looks exaggerated (all the tattoos, etc.). But, otherwise the movie seems to be a reasonably accurate betrayal of what happened.

Out of touch parents, upper middle class kids playing gangsta, a whole bunch of middle to upper class moral emptiness all leads up to an innocent kid being whacked over a lousy $1200 or so.

Sadly, as a HS teacher, I see kids every year on the road to nowhere b/c of the need to be "cool" and party as opposed to learning, especially some macho guys who take being a "player" too seriously. Fortunately, this is a small percentage of the teen population, but they are out there in middle to upper class neighborhoods all over.

Often Hollywood glorifies this, and at times this movie almost does, too, but by the end it certainly does not.

I thought the PQ was fine for the film, which needed to be a bit gritty.

LOL.. I watched the movie (SD version) and about the movie.. I thought it was going to be lame since it had Justin in it but man was I wrong.. It actually had my wife and her friend all emotional.. I thought it was really sad the way that it all went down.. I hope his brother has a terrible life and everything goes wrong for him.. Afterall, he was the main reason why everything went down.. RIP


Wow. If you believe that, then you missed the point. How is it the brother's fault? Sure, he got in some trouble owing a friend money, and a feud developed that went back and forth. But, the responsibility for the killing was for those who killed him. There is NO excuse for kidnapping and killing someone. Fact is, 1 guy ordered it, and 3 carried it out (though 1 guy did the actual physical act).

And apparently dozens of others at the parties had some sense that the kid had been kidnapped, and NO ONE alerted authorities or parents. How about those who saw the kid beaten and his mouth being duct-taped??

Oh, and if you check the real life story, 2 people who saw the beating and abduction immediately reported it to the police. The police had a description of the van and its license plate #, yet they apparently did nothing with that info. The movie doesn't go into that aspect of the true story.

Blame the guys who killed him, the guy who ordered it, the others involved in the kidnapping. Then, in a more general sense, middle to upper class kids with no real serious sense of right and wrong, way out of touch parents, and a lethargic police response.

I have 2 younger brothers. If I owed a guy $1200 or $1500 dollars and that guy then kidnapped and killed one of my brothers, I'd have a horrible sense of guilt alright (but probably also a sense of vengeance). But the true blame goes to the kidnappers and MURDERERS who carried it out.

Wow. If you believe that, then you missed the point. How is it the brother's fault? Sure, he got in some trouble owing a friend money, and a feud developed that went back and forth. But, the responsibility for the killing was for those who killed him. There is NO excuse for kidnapping and killing someone. Fact is, 1 guy ordered it, and 3 carried it out (though 1 guy did the actual physical act).




I know his brother wasn't the one who pulled the trigger but if his brother wasn't such a low-life none of that would've happened.. And I wouldn't exactly say that was his friend he owed money to. They were a bunch of drug dealers.