I got it at Circuit City (which came with a free deck of Ocean's 13 playing cards) and went home right away to play it. It looks great in HD! A bit grainy but not bad. It was a combo disc, so I looked at the DVD side and it looked HORRIBLE! The dvd version has, so far, been the ugliest thing put through my HD-A2. Lots of pixelation!. Looked like a streaming on-line video. Thank God for the HD copy! hadn't looked at the special features yet but they are suppose to be in HD too!


I got my HD-A2 hooked up through HDMI to my 32" Sanyo.

I can't WAIT to get the boxset tonight after work. I love the Ocean's Trilogy. I'd much rather have this than Close Encounters or anything on either format today. I'm not into those other movies. I'm still young.

Thanks for the review.

I watched Ocean's 13 this weekend on HDDVD.

The picture was wonderfully clear! I did notice some strangely saturated colors on the outdoor shots. I'm sure this was deliberate artistic choice, but it looked strange at times. Blue sky that can't possibly be that blue -- or that 5-minutes-of-sunrise orange light that photographers look for, except at noon (by the shadows)!

However, I learned to like it. Vegas is an unreal place anyway, which tries to assault your senses. Saturated colors work here.

The clarity is awesome! The sound was good -- nothing to really comment on, as it wasn't an action movie.

As for the movie itself -- I liked it. It will be confusing for someone who hasn't seen at least one of the previous movies, however. They spend zero time introducing any characters. The introductions were more by fire -- here someone doing something -- you figure out if they are a good or bad guy, and how they fit into the convoluted plot.

The plot had holes that did get filled -- but with such quick reference that you might miss them. You can't watch this movie tired. Some of the cut scenes in the extras basically explain some of the plot holes.

I enjoyed the movie, and I liked the extras about Vegas (having been there recently). The image quality on the extras are noticeably degraded. There is little noise, and is high resolution, but has very noticeable blocking artifacts on the Vegas outside view shots.

I hated Ocean's 12 (just a bunch of hollywood stars hamming it up for their few minutes on camera -- no plot).

This one, I would recommend getting. Enjoy -- just not late at night ;)

Can anyone with the boxset tell me if the third one comes in a combo format? I know it does come that way as a single.

Or if the first 2 do as well?

The fiance wants it on blu-ray, but agreed to get it on HD DVD if any come in a combo :D

Will 11 and 12 be sold seperately like 13 is? I just picked up 13, but might wait to get the box set if they aren't available stand alone.

They all only have DD at 640k, not even DD+ at 1.5 !!!! Oceans 11 was great, 12 was horrible, didn't see 13 yet.

I just picked this up at lunch and will watch it when i get home. i was going to pick up shrek 3 but all my video store had was the sd-dvd. the hd version was still "in transit." i was ticked but figured i was gonna buy 13 anyway. i love ocean's 11 and the comedic timing, 12 was worth watching, but i never saw 13. i'll buy 11 when i can get it cheap. 12 is fine in SD considering it was not my fav.

When it was first released on DVD, I turned off 12 about twenty minutes through and never put it back in. I think that of the three, 13 was my favorite. I am looking forward to watching it again if Amazon ever decides to ship my boxed set.

I picked up "13" today. I'm going to wait to get "11" seprately when/if Warner makes it available. I cannot stand watching "12".

I picked up "13" today. I'm going to wait to get "11" seprately when/if Warner makes it available. I cannot stand watching "12".

I wonder how long that will be. Matrix still isn't out yet.

They all only have DD at 640k, not even DD+ at 1.5 !!!! Oceans 11 was great, 12 was horrible, didn't see 13 yet.

:(

This is ridiculous. I think that stupid Robin Williams wedding movie had TrueHD, why is Warner skimping on their major 4Q release?

Will 11 and 12 be sold seperately like 13 is? I just picked up 13, but might wait to get the box set if they aren't available stand alone.

You can hope that they are, but as og now there has been no announcement made to say that they will be released as seperates. For the time being the only way to get the other 2 would be to get the boxset, or try to get it on Ebay or a seller on a forum trying to split the boxset.

I watched the standard DVD last night and wondered if the indie video store had a bootleg, it looked THAT bad. Looked like something from 1998, but worse. Glad I wasn't hallucinating about this.

Just watched the HD DVD version tonight, never saw it in the theatre. This movie was definantly shot in a particular manner, almost as if it were trying to replicate the feal of an early 70's flic. Intentional color saturation, heavy dark almost blurry shadow effects in dark scenes, and odd sky coloration with grain. Hard to describe really. I even checked the menu part way through just to be sure I hadn't put the dvd version in. I won't comment on the artistic merits of the film style, but if the someone were to tell me the film was not specifically shot to look like this, then I would say it is the poorest HD DVD I've viewed yet.

Then scene where the guy is jumping through the elevator is a good example of the shadows playing havoc with screen.

I just finished watching 13. Great movie, enjoyed it immensely! Definitely better than the previous 2.

''Analog players in a digital world...'' I thought that was brilliant.

Found this review link from the blu side, and while not specifically about the HD DVD version i'll go out on the limb and assume the two are very similar.

http://www.***************.com/fusionbb/showtopic.php?tid/139385/


Also, if memory serves, didn't Soderbergh direct Traffic, and did it not also have a very grainy purposly styled way of being filmed?

They all only have DD at 640k, not even DD+ at 1.5 !!!!

The HD DVD versions have DD+ at 640 kb/s. Blu-ray is regular DD at 640 kb/s. Sound quality will be equivalent at this bit rate, but the HD DVD format spec does not allow standard DD at 640.

I wonder how long that will be. Matrix still isn't out yet.

You mean the solo one? I just bought the uber-Ultimate pack for $48 shipped (B&N Membership + single item -50% code) which I consider a steal...

You mean the solo one? I just bought the uber-Ultimate pack for $48 shipped (B&N Membership + single item -50% code) which I consider a steal...

Indeed a great deal.

Yes, I was referring to the movies individually.

Different company I know, but we've been able to buy the MI movies individually for a while now.

I picked up "13" today. I'm going to wait to get "11" seprately when/if Warner makes it available. I cannot stand watching "12".

FWIW Ocean's Eleven is available separately on amazon.co.uk. However, European prices are so insane you might be better off buying the American boxset and forgetting Twelve even existed.

I think the odd filming has to do with the fact that it is a remake and they are trying to capture some of the originality.

I thought it looked pretty good actually. Check out the scene where Linus says that he thinks he's being followed. It seemed really sharp there and other places. It looks like it did in theaters and is hardly as bad as the bobbed titles like the Fugitive, ect.

Just watched the HD DVD version tonight, never saw it in the theatre. This movie was definantly shot in a particular manner, almost as if it were trying to replicate the feal of an early 70's flic. Intentional color saturation, heavy dark almost blurry shadow effects in dark scenes, and odd sky coloration with grain. Hard to describe really. I even checked the menu part way through just to be sure I hadn't put the dvd version in. I won't comment on the artistic merits of the film style, but if the someone were to tell me the film was not specifically shot to look like this, then I would say it is the poorest HD DVD I've viewed yet.

Then scene where the guy is jumping through the elevator is a good example of the shadows playing havoc with screen.I haven't seen the HD yet, but this is how I would describe it as seen at the theater, so I imagine The HD version is true to the theater version and directors intent

I picked up the Ocean's Boxset yesterday at Best But for $60 (Ocean's Thirteen was half that), and watched Ocean's Eleven last night... I was really impressed with the PQ of it, didnt notice much grain or anything. I was thinking that all 3 films were shot exactly the same but you guys are saying Thirteen looks different, so ill will check it out ton. Overall, it is a great boxset (YES, I like Ocean's Twelve).

Watched it last night, I totally had to check the menu make sure I didn't put it in upside-down. I understand directors have a "look" and a "style" they are going for, but I really did not appreciate the over saturation and film grain. Not only was I turned off by the PQ, but the movie left me under-whelmed. It had its funny parts, but it seemed long and just felt sparse somehow like something was missing. Movies like this usually grow on me over time the more I watch them, but right now I wish I bought the box set because I like 11 and 12 better. Well, here’s hoping my video store will finally get their shipment of Shrek 3 hd-dvds.

I put "13" on last night to check it out. It really looked bad in my opinion. I could not believe how grainy it was throught the film.

I watched the standard DVD last night and wondered if the indie video store had a bootleg, it looked THAT bad. Looked like something from 1998, but worse. Glad I wasn't hallucinating about this.

That's funny. The last time I watched my Ocean's Eleven SD DVD, it was just after watching an HD DVD. It was almost unwatchable (meaning the video quality, the movie itself is excellent). So maybe it's something to do with the franchise on SD DVD.

Will Ocean's Eleven be available separately on HD DVD? 12 is worthless, so I really don't want to buy the box set just to watch 11 and 13.

I thought it looked great, but then I also think Miami Vice looks great. I watched XMen 3 (BD) that the day after and it looks much better than that on my system.

well it looks like Ken Brown at HDD agreed with most of us. 3 star PQ rating, which i think is a little generous. maybe 2 1/2. i just did not enjoy the look that Soderbergh was going for. i think going for a style or look is an excellent idea for a film. i also think they screwed the pooch on this one.

well it looks like Ken Brown at HDD agreed with most of us. 3 star PQ rating, which i think is a little generous. maybe 2 1/2.

It sounds to me like you don't agree with him.

Well, i agreed with his technical critique, about over-saturation, excessive film grain, and bad lighting. the rest is just a number.

Well, i agreed with his technical critique, about over-saturation, excessive film grain, and bad lighting. the rest is just a number.I agree. After all that, it doesn't make much difference that it is in HD. Very unimpressive. Movie wasn't that great also. Sure glad it was a rental.

I put "13" on last night to check it out. It really looked bad in my opinion. I could not believe how grainy it was throught the film.

So it looks just like it did in the theater.

Ummm, I just got back from BB and I have to questions I hope you guys can answer for me.
The Ocean's Box Set has 11 & 12 in HD, but the back of the box says "13" is 480p ONLY?? Why would they sell an HD-DVD box set with an SD-DVD for the newest release?
My other question is why is the BR "13" $5 less than the HD-DVD "13" at BB?
Thanks guys.

Ummm, I just got back from BB and I have to questions I hope you guys can answer for me.
The Ocean's Box Set has 11 & 12 in HD, but the back of the box says "13" is 480p ONLY?? Why would they sell an HD-DVD box set with an SD-DVD for the newest release?
My other question is why is the BR "13" $5 less than the HD-DVD "13" at BB?
Thanks guys.

I had to read the back of the box about 10 times before I made sense of it. They put Ocean's 12 and 13's specs (HD) in the same row and never specified that the 480p part of the 13's disc was the flipper (SD) + some extras. The combo disc is also why Ocean's 13 costs $5 less on Blu-Ray individually.

Saw the disc last night. Loved the movie, hated the PQ. Terrible orange saturation to everything, the film grain somehow had morphed into an overwhelming layer of "noise," and detail was lacking in all but a few scenes.

I have never seen a more overly saturated mess than this. I understand stylistic intent, but this was just ugly.

If this is how it looked in the theaters, then so be it. Ugh...

I think this title shows inadequacies in displays like no other. Scaling, sharpness filters, over saturated displays will amplify everything people dislike about the way it looks.

I think this title shows inadequacies in displays like no other. Scaling, sharpness filters, over saturated displays will amplify everything people dislike about the way it looks.

Ding!

Give that man a cupie doll.

Why would a director choose to make a film look like this?? I can see wanting the a film to have the look of a certain time period, but there is no need to make it look so terrible. I really don't think he intended the film to look this poorly. Movies like Casino, Goodfellas etc. all looked great and still had a certain look to them, that made you feel you were watching something from a generation past.

I don't think it looks terrible at all. Overall I really like what the director has done and for me at least it enhances the movie. You can almost smell Vegas watching it.

I just watched Oceans 13 and agree with what many here have said. I wish I read this thread before I opened the box. I stopped half way through as I thought my A2 was set at 480i.

Horrible PQ with awful color saturation. I can see a director going for a certain look but I feel it did not work here. What gets me is in certain scenes the PQ is very clean and noise free with natural colors. Then in the next scene it has over saturated colors and excessive grain/noise.

Thumbs down for sure. I will be reading more HD-DVD/Bluray disc reviews from now on before I buy any more discs.

Bill

I am sure WHV will double dip Oceans in future like what they did for Troy.

While I didn't watch this on HD-DVD (rented it) The BR copy is awful. Whats the point of a hidef movie and make it look worse that SD.

I feel sorry for the ppl that buy this in a HD format when it should just be bought in SD.

To those who have seen them on HD DVD, how do 11 and 12 look as far as PQ?

I watched it in SD, and also thought it was a web video. I had to switch back to HDNet just to check if my receiver was botching the upconvert. No other SD DVD has ever looked anywhere near this bad on my Sony A2020. We eventually decided to watch it anyway, but the PQ was terrible. No detail, little contrast, over saturated reds and oranges, and skin tones were horrific.

I liked the movie though :)

TK

Studios should release 2 versions of a movie when the director's intentions are cruel.
One version for pleasing the HD fans and other for pleasing the director.

They all only have DD at 640k, not even DD+ at 1.5 !!!! Oceans 11 was great, 12 was horrible, didn't see 13 yet.

Blu-ray supporters complain about Warner giving them "low bitrate" encodes of the video, but tend to ignore that the HD DVD versions' DD+, and mandatory TrueHD hardware support for audio often gets crippled by Blu-ray's DD at 640k limit.

Studios should release 2 versions of a movie when the director's intentions are cruel.
One version for pleasing the HD fans and other for pleasing the director.

The director's intentions please this HD fan.

Saw the HD-DVD this weekend with my wife. Loved the movie, but even my wife commented about the oversaturated colors.

I wonder if he was trying to comment on the 'bright lights candy-colored' aspect of Vegas with the wacky color timing.

Odd grain choices too---when Pitt and Clooney are talking in the airplane early on, the main picture's not too grainy....but the blue-screen element seen through the window is insanely grainy. It really draws the eye to it even though there's nothing there to see.

Tons of edge enhancement throughout, which is annoying, and probably makes the grain issues worse.

Yeah...the colors are outrageous. Also, I found there to be a lot of picture noise in many of the scenes. I'm watching on an Avia-calibrated Sharp Aquos, fyi.

Studios should release 2 versions of a movie when the director's intentions are cruel.
One version for pleasing the HD fans and other for pleasing the director.

What an awful thing to say. Seriously.

I'm pretty shocked at what a bad reception this release is getting. I got it as soon as it hit stores, it looked just about exactly the way it did in the theater, and I couldn't have been happier. Then I saw everyone and their brother complaining because they simply can't fathom a visual style that isn't expressly designed to allow them to show off their home theater system. I shudder to think about what'll happen if Pi or Nadja ever show up on a hi-def format.

I remember when I saw Oceans 13 in the theater. I thought to myself, and even to my friend I was with, that the picture looked bad in the theater! He agreed and we came to the conclusion that their equipment was just messed up for the entire movie.

I bought the HD-DVD on release but didn't watch it until last night. Like others, I was very disappointed. The PQ is horrible. I know they were going for a certain feel, but even taking that into consideration the PQ was still horrible. Lots of static in a lot of shots, the colors were way too off for their own good, and it wasn't as sharp as many other HD-DVD's.

I am still very disappointed. Obviously, though, it still looks a 100 times better than the SD DVD. And the movie itself is still great and I'd rate it a 9/10.

It's a shame that the PQ is so bad, though. The worst looking HD-DVD in my whole 50+ title collection by far.

We watched the SD version tonight (on an HD-A2) and were horrified at how bad the picture quality was at either 1080i upconvert or native 480P. The colors, especially the reds and browns, were so over-saturated that I had to jack down my Tv's color level to close to the zero level and raise the brightness well beyond normal. Only then was the movie barely watchable. Directors these days seem to make some very odd choices of lighting and color palettes that tend to look worse when transferred to DVD. Give me a movie that's shot in natural realistic color over any of this junk any time. The HD release of Casino shows how it should be done. It's PQ is brilliant.

I saw a reference '70's filmaking' earlier in the thread. Is 13 a prequal?

I don't recall 11 & 12 looking retro or degraded on DVD.

I'm expecting a lot from the Oceans Trilogy because 'Out of Sight' looked so incredible in HD, not just in terms of PQ but in terms of what's on-screen.

People are talking about 13 like it was shot like Traffic....why the style change?

I really disliked the movie. 2/5.

I hated the oversaturated colours and the graininess. I thought it added nothing to the movie, especially with its predecessors were a very, very different style. I actually thought something was wrong with my projector.

Plus, there were a couple of scenes that just looked out of focus, or like bad 480p upconversion or something. One is the scene where Danny and Rusty were walking outside by the water and reminiscing about the old Las Vegas. Yeah, it looked like 70s TV, but in a bad way.

BTW, I liked the artistic effects on Traffic (on DVD - didn't see in HD), because somehow the effects seemed appropriate. It may have helped that I actually liked Traffic though. Like I said, I didn't like Ocean's 13.

P.S. I saw The Fast and the Furious: Tokyo Drift the same day. I actually thought it has better overall than Ocean's 13, but that's not saying much.

While I didn't watch this on HD-DVD (rented it) The BR copy is awful. Whats the point of a hidef movie and make it look worse that SD.

I feel sorry for the ppl that buy this in a HD format when it should just be bought in SD.

Oh PLEASE. I watched this yesterday and it looked fine to me. Yeah it has the oversaturated colours and stuff but it is clear it is SUPPOSED TO LOOK LIKE THAT...and the resolution/detail was clearly superior to dvd. Anyone who thinks this looks worse than SD is smoking something funky.

This thread amuses me...so a movie is released in high def looking how it is supposed to and people complain. I mean sheesh, email/write the director if you don't like how a movie is shot (and see if he/she even cares) rather than complain about the disc saying it is worse than dvd or whatever other silly comments.:rolleyes:

I am actually amazed at all the complaining in this thread...makes me see just how little I can put value in PQ opinions here and how many seem to not care or grasp that directors have their stylistic intent. If a disc faithfully reproduces the way it is to look then how does one bust on the disc?:confused:

Oh and I thought the movie was great.

Here's hoping that directors do not put much value in what the masses feel and will continue to make movies look whatever way they want to look. Yes, I enjoy movies that look natural as much as the next guy but I also enjoy stuff like this that look different.

Anyway, I say good job to warner for releasing a movie the way it is supposed to look and not thinking most will harp about it and try and change the look to please the masses.

We watched the SD version tonight (on an HD-A2) and were horrified at how bad the picture quality was at either 1080i upconvert or native 480P. The colors, especially the reds and browns, were so over-saturated that I had to jack down my Tv's color level to close to the zero level and raise the brightness well beyond normal. Only then was the movie barely watchable. Directors these days seem to make some very odd choices of lighting and color palettes that tend to look worse when transferred to DVD. Give me a movie that's shot in natural realistic color over any of this junk any time. The HD release of Casino shows how it should be done. It's PQ is brilliant.
I liked this movie, but in a way I also agree with natural realistic colors, just like I see on DiscoveryHD, I feel like I'm right there at the location where its filmed, but in this movie it just doesn't happen. On a side note, I see you loved Casinos PQ, I was underwhelmed with this release, seems it was made to look soft or maybe cause its an old movie, but there is almost a white blurryness, which can be seen easily when they show white lights, certainly not natural lighting, unless thats how things look in those dark casinos. I'm guessing this version is much better than the regular dvd version.

If you like glowing orange faces and poor lighting, this is the film for you.

I was tempted to sue the studio for my time back.

I often wonder about the logic of paying major actors big $ to make a really bad looking movie.

If you like glowing orange faces and poor lighting, this is the film for you.


Exactly!

The first scene I noticed things looked REALLY bad was when Bank and Ruben were at the top the still in construction casino, and you could see what looked the end of his makeup on his neck. Really horrid. Also, the worst had to be at the end where it looked like Pacino's face was on fire from the bleeding reds on his face.

On a side note, I see you loved Casinos PQ, I was underwhelmed with this release, seems it was made to look soft or maybe cause its an old movie, but there is almost a white blurryness, which can be seen easily when they show white lights, certainly not natural lighting, unless thats how things look in those dark casinos. I'm guessing this version is much better than the regular dvd version.

I've never seen the SD DVD version so I have no direct way to compare but the HD-DVD disc is (to me) stunning. The image is pristine with rich but not over-saturated colors and excellent balance between outdoor and indoor scenes. It's a pleasure to watch

I don't think it looks terrible at all. Overall I really like what the director has done and for me at least it enhances the movie. You can almost smell Vegas watching it.

I found the color saturation a bit strange at first (orange dawn lighting outdoors at noon?), but learned to embrace it. If your display is over-sharpened, or the color setting is Vivid, you will greatly dislike the PQ. However, it your display is close to correct, I think it is possible to take the PQ as a stylistic choice, and go with it.

I found the plot a bit complex, with many items missing. The acting was very low-key. However, it is growing on me. I actually think I like this movie best of the trilogy.

I agree -- the color saturation and cinematography just screams VEGAS.

I could live w/ the off colors and grain. I just did not like the movie. There was no suspense, everybody was too flippant - you never felt anybody was in danger. A chunnel machine in vegas is absurd, but a second one at a moments notice is absurd beyond a cartoon.

1/5 for the movie. My wife left the room after an hour, 0/5 for her. Crazy thing is I liked the first one, and even thought the second was ok. Waste of a rental.

I can't comment on the HD-DVD since I'm on the Christmas purchase moritorium, but I can say when I saw the previews for the movie originally I thought the image was oversaturated and dark, to the point where I thought there was a problem with the commercial. Imagine how surprised I was when I went to the theater and found that the movie was actually as I'd seen it in the commercial. Interior scenes are color oversaturated in the orange direction and seem to have a bit of black crush. Outdoor scenes tended to be overly vibrant as well. So, based on what I'm seeing here, I can with reasonable certainty saw that for good or bad the HD-DVD is faithfully showing what the director intended.