Look guys, I want to counter the points to that some are claiming, but if we keep this up and it has already begun, thread closed. We either need to not go there or what is the other obvious option, ban any HD DVD mention from the BD forum? but some insist on hanging on so onward.
I will say this, since it was brought up, if King Kong was one of the pinnacle videos of HD, I would think Prince Caspian, POTC's and a few others on BD had to have surpassed it.
I can also add that some of the movies, like Clint Eastwoods from the 70's that I have seen on HDnet movies, make the tv presentations of King Kong average PQ wise and those movies on HDnet have healthy grain intact and are very film like.
It is like Kram Sacul is saying it is the studios encode and transfer, just like what I see as a huge difference with HDnet and HBO or Starz. Occasionally other HD movies stations get it right with OAR, grain etc, but unfortunately not always and sometimes they are horrible to watch.
I would wager the BD is far better than the tv presentations for King Kong.
For those who have fiber and or an "uncompressed" HD signal, how did the HD DVD of King Kong compare to the tv presentations? It had to be better than what I saw. It wasn't horrible or bad, but I could see it looking better.