The Silence of the Lambs comparison *PIX*

[ack_bk]

Originally Posted by FoxyMulder

I agree with his assessment that no destructive DNR took place but i do feel there is slightly more DNR than was necessary and possibly because the MPEG2 codec was used or maybe because it's on the master.

We'll probably see a better transfer in two years time so no point me moaning about it anymore.

As i said earlier in the thread i would still give it 7 out of 10.

I think you are spot on here. It is a good transfer IMHO. Could it have been better? Clearly. But I don't see any reason not to at least give this movie a rent if you are a fan.

And I suspect you are right. We will most likely see another version of this movie on Blu-Ray at some point down the road. For that reason alone, it is a rental for me.

[mhafner]

Originally Posted by MovieSwede

So here is my attempt. Couldnt match that heavy grain or the skincolor.

Trailer still sharper looking.

[MovieSwede]

Originally Posted by mhafner

Trailer still sharper looking.

Look at the left of the glasses.

[Oliver Klohs]

Originally Posted by Kram Sacul

So did he only watch part of the movie then give a PQ report? Doesn't that throw up a red flag there? That's not the only incident of him backpeddling. Remember his goofy tier list that kept on changing then finally got taken down because too many people were questioning certain titles on there.

I applaud him for speaking up about DNR issues but his inconsistency is frustrating.

It is hard to put oneself out there with a review even when it is called "a few words about" and especially with him working in the industry to the degree that he does. So I applaud him for that and also for finding the appropriate words when the **** hits the fan as it did with Patton and for me personally there was also a review about the DVD of El Cid that was very appropriate and much needed. For me it is good to know that when he writes about these things a lot more people listen. For my taste he might be a bit too positive about a movie or two that I find lacking but I can live with that as in the end there is nobody that I agree with 100% of the time anyway.

What is more important is that RAH brought us a few very nice restorations both on film and Blu-Ray and that is what really counts for me. I can make informed choices about Blu-Rays thanks to several other sources, too but I feel much better when I know that RAH is working with Paramount on The Godfather instead of the people who brought us such gems as the Blu-Rays of Con Air and Face Off

[Rob Tomlin]

Originally Posted by Oliver Klohs

It is hard to put oneself out there with a review even when it is called "a few words about" and especially with him working in the industry to the degree that he does. So I applaud him for that and also for finding the appropriate words when the **** hits the fan as it did with Patton and for me personally there was also a review about the DVD of El Cid that was very appropriate and much needed. For me it is good to know that when he writes about these things a lot more people listen. For my taste he might be a bit too positive about a movie or two that I find lacking but I can live with that as in the end there is nobody that I agree with 100% of the time anyway.

What is more important is that RAH brought us a few very nice restorations both on film and Blu-Ray and that is what really counts for me. I can make informed choices about Blu-Rays thanks to several other sources, too but I feel much better when I know that RAH is working with Paramount on The Godfather instead of the people who brought us such gems as the Blu-Rays of Con Air and Face Off

Amen to that!

[Vincent Pereira]

...

[cakefoo]

The bad-transfer-defense-force comes out every time, trying to put anyone who doesn't find the upgrade worth full msrp on a guilt trip for supposedly not being a true film lover or some bs. Spare me

[cakefoo]

Anyone ever see film look like this?

http://www.dvdbeaver.com/film2/DVDRe...20blu-ray1.jpg

Robert Harris also gave it a glowing review.

Kris Deering is one of the only reviewers out there who'll give these transfers the scores they deserve.


*p.s. I think the SoTL caps look pretty ok. This was just a little rant I had about the majority of the population who've plagued enthusiast forums, review sites, etc... but worst of all, at the root of the problem, the actual video crew themselves.

[FoxyMulder]

Originally Posted by cakefoo

Anyone ever see film look like this?

http://www.dvdbeaver.com/film2/DVDRe...20blu-ray1.jpg



Kris Deering is one of the only reviewers out there who'll give these transfers the scores they deserve.


*p.s. I think the SoTL caps look pretty ok. This was just a little rant I had about the majority of the population who've plagued enthusiast forums, review sites, etc... but worst of all, at the root of the problem, the actual video crew themselves.

Check out the review Kris did for The Thing. Then check the ad below his review and go hmmm like i did. Other than that i think his reviews are good.

[Art Sonneborn]

I think the difference between the detail in the BD trailer and the BD is sad.

Art

[MovieSwede]

Originally Posted by Art Sonneborn

I think the difference between the detail in the BD trailer and the BD is sad.

I dont really see more detail in the trailer, its more contrast so its percieved as more detail, but on alot of stuff I see a slight advantage of details on the BD.

If we look at the orginal screencap of Scott (not my tweaked) on the right side of his glasses were the highlight is shinging on the hinge? you see that the highlight is destroying some detail on the trailer, not much but its there.

[cakefoo]

Originally Posted by FoxyMulder

Check out the review Kris did for The Thing. Then check the ad below his review and go hmmm like i did. Other than that i think his reviews are good.

I didn't see any suspicious ad on the hometheatermag.com review, if that's what you're referring to, but I saw a link to buy the disc, which is there at the end of every review. Anyway, he may not be 100% spot on in every instance, but based on my research of reviews for several known offensive transfers (using CinemaSquid to streamline the process), Deering was by far the most consistent reviewer for catching heavily manipulated Blu-rays and giving them scores they deserve.

[Xylon]

Unfortunately the trailer footage is "very dirty". A re-remaster with AVC or VC-1 will yield much better results. I hope

[joeblow]

This Blu-ray is $15 at Amazon today.... is it worth it (based on AV quality)?

[Filmmaker]

Originally Posted by joeblow

This Blu-ray is $15 at Amazon today.... is it worth it (based on AV quality)?

God, yes. It'd be worth that price on SD-DVD, as packed as it is with goodies.

[Mr. Hanky]

Here's my quick swing at it. (Matching stuff really isn't my strength, here...true, I took a slightly different approach and attempted a more natural correction to the trailer version- sosume! ) I only present these in a "which one looks more appealing to you" sense, rather than arguing any preconceptions about which is closer or truer to the source.

[ThePrisoner]

I grabbed this one for $14.99 at Amazon yesterday. Very good deal since Best Buy wants $44.99!

[Ruined]

My guess is that noise reduction was used here to help prevent artifacting with the less efficient MPEG2 encoding this transfer uses.

[Xylon]

Originally Posted by Mr. Hanky

Here's my quick swing at it. (Matching stuff really isn't my strength, here...true, I took a slightly different approach and attempted a more natural correction to the trailer version- sosume! ) I only present these in a "which one looks more appealing to you" sense, rather than arguing any preconceptions about which is closer or truer to the source.

This "Hanky" shot reminds me of the way I added "film grain" on Patton. Nothing gained in terms of real detail but the "waxy" look is gone.

[Mr. Hanky]

On the contrary, on a pure file size basis:

trailer (original)--------2586 KB
br (original)------------2184 KB
br (enhanced)---------3848 KB
br (enhanced+noise)--4384 KB


There is certainly more "information" in my retouched samples. Visibility is certainly up to subjective influences, of course. I agree they look very similar as far as distinct ultimate detail, but something seems odd in the trailer (as if it came from an upscale of a lower resolution source).

[Mr. Hanky]

Here is the br sample with the aforementioned upscaled from 540p effect:




trailer (color corrected):

[Steven Good]

Picked this up last night @ Tower.com along with 40Year-Old Virgin for $12.99 each, with no tax and free shipping!

[dvdmike007]

UK disc with AVC encode and extras on its way
http://www.dvdactive.com/news/releas...he-lambs3.html

1.85:1 Widescreen Transfer (1080/24p AVC)
Audio: English DTS-HD Master Audio 5.1, Spanish DTS 5.1, French DTS 5.1, Thai Dolby Digital 2.0
Subtitles: English SDH, Spanish, Spanish Text, French Text, Korean, Cantonese, Mandarin, Thai, Thai Text
Breaking the Silence
Understanding the Madness
Inside the Labyrinth: Making The Silence of the Lambs
The Silence of the Lambs: Page to Screen
Scoring the Silence
Original 1991 Making-of Featurette
Deleted Scenes
Outtakes Reel
Anthony Hopkins Phone Message
TV Spots
Theatrical Trailer
Teaser Trailer

Looks like the Man On Fire effect all over again !

[Super-VHS]

The US blu-ray has all of those extras.

And I'll bet, dollar to donuts, that although the UK disc is announced as being AVC (the domestic disc was as well) it will turn out to be the same MPEG-2 that we have on our shores.

[DavidHir]

Do MGM/Fox UK releases ever contain different encodes than the US version?

[FoxyMulder]

Originally Posted by DavidHir

Do MGM/Fox UK releases ever contain different encodes than the US version?

Shame i'm in the UK and it'll be region coded since it's Fox ( or will it ? )

I'm sceptical about an AVC encode but it happened with The Descent so who knows maybe it will be and maybe the only reason the American disc was MPEG2 was the time factor in releasing it. We can but hope and hope that it's a better transfer but i doubt it.

[Xylon]

It looks like the EU guys have homework to do

[lgans316]

Originally Posted by FoxyMulder

Shame i'm in the UK and it'll be region coded since it's Fox ( or will it ? )

I'm sceptical about an AVC encode but it happened with The Descent so who knows maybe it will be and maybe the only reason the American disc was MPEG2 was the time factor in releasing it. We can but hope and hope that it's a better transfer but i doubt it.

Subtitles: English SDH, Spanish, Spanish Text, French Text, Korean, Cantonese, Mandarin, Thai, Thai Text

Inclusion of Korean, Cantonese, Mandarin, Thai Region A subs imply that the U.K BD will be Region Free. Same applies to any FOX/MGM BD with Region A subs.

[FoxyMulder]

Originally Posted by Super-VHS

The US blu-ray has all of those extras.

And I'll bet, dollar to donuts, that although the UK disc is announced as being AVC (the domestic disc was as well) it will turn out to be the same MPEG-2 that we have on our shores.

You are exactly right.

Who announces these things because you would think getting it wrong once is forgiveable but making the same mistake twice is just sloppy.

Review here and it is indeed the exact same MPEG2 transfer which i thought it would be.

[PRO-630HD]

This was clearly the same crap mpeg-2 transfer that was supposed to be released a few years back. Along with the SD PIP WTF!