Buena Vista's and others latest round is unimpressive. (Mini review) - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 64 Old 01-13-2008, 02:21 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
Pixelsmack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: West Hollywood, CA.
Posts: 103
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
So we're finally getting some of the classic Disney action flicks and other movies on Bluray. Crimson Tide, The Rock, Con-Air, Die-Hard, etc.

I was thrilled when they all arrived and I quickly inserted the discs, hit play and prepared myself for visual/audio orgasms.

I wasn't too concerned about the uncompressed PCM only 5.1 audio but it should have been a red flag for how these were made. As you see I quickly saw that folks over at the duplication center merely threw in the master, hit play, record and walked off for a coffee break.

Sure I appreciate them not having to apply Dolby Digital compression to the master audio track and giving me uncompressed 5.1 Sure I appreciate the 1080p resolution. But what I didn't appreciate was the absolutely ZERO modern day post processing before or while they did the transfer!

Die Hard especially is guilty of this. The movie sounds pretty good. SoundFX are dynamic, dialog is clear but the movie looks like a fourth generation transfer from 16mm! YUK. And it's not because Panavision lenses and the film at the time were that soft. I have seen movies OLDER than these look better thanks to post processing/remastering.

The Buena Vista ones are not as bad but they don't *pop* that is for sure.
I guess maybe we can hope for a special edition or something.

Armageddon was never released anamorphic on DVD. Not even the Criterion one. So I looked forward to not only seeing it 2:35:1 but in HD. But now I am worried that it too will be a PLAY-RECORD-GO-GET-COFFEE transfer. :\\

Kevin "Q" Quattro
Lead Artist, Inhance Digital

Pixelsmack is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 64 Old 01-13-2008, 02:35 PM
AVS Special Member
 
wormraper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Tucson Arizona
Posts: 4,096
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 38
sigh. Have you seen Die hard in the theater. It was filmed very soft and "oily" (best way I can describe it) on purpose. It does a great job of mimicing the original film. Understand directors intent before you start looking at how high a movie should be in the highly over rated tier model.
wormraper is online now  
post #3 of 64 Old 01-13-2008, 02:50 PM
AVS Special Member
 
GamerGuyX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Kentwood, Michigan
Posts: 1,473
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
lol. What kind of "post-processing" do you want? Edge Enhancement? DNR?

Yeah that will make the film look a lot better.
GamerGuyX is offline  
post #4 of 64 Old 01-13-2008, 02:52 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Deviation's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Coon Rapids, MN
Posts: 2,780
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Die Hard is from Fox, not Disney. Also, it has DTS-MA audio, not PCM. And if they're accurately reproducing the original theatrical experience, I see no reason for them to go back and add a sharpen filter or some ******** like that. Edge enhancement is a BAD thing. And considering its' age, I thought Die Hard looked pretty good on Blu-ray.

Just watched The Rock last night - and the presentation was fantastic. It's really cool that Disney brought along all of the supplemental material from the Criterion release and stuck with the director approved master for the transfer.
Deviation is offline  
post #5 of 64 Old 01-13-2008, 02:55 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
Pixelsmack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: West Hollywood, CA.
Posts: 103
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Okay I am sorry. I will never post a review ever again. I am obviously not qualified.

Kevin "Q" Quattro
Lead Artist, Inhance Digital

Pixelsmack is offline  
post #6 of 64 Old 01-13-2008, 03:07 PM
AVS Special Member
 
wormraper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Tucson Arizona
Posts: 4,096
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pixelsmack View Post

Okay I am sorry. I will never post a review ever again. I am obviously not qualified.

a review is fine if you get facts straight and you understand the history of the film. Otherwise just say "I didn't like it cuz....". You made it sound like the studios did a bad job transferring the movie. The only way you can know that is if you know how the film was shot and what directorial intent was utilized on said film.
wormraper is online now  
post #7 of 64 Old 01-13-2008, 03:08 PM
AVS Special Member
 
RDarrylR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,252
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
The Rock and Con Air both look really good on Blu-ray considering their age. Die Hard not as good as them but still pretty good for its age.
RDarrylR is offline  
post #8 of 64 Old 01-13-2008, 03:12 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Gary Murrell's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Kentucky
Posts: 10,927
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pixelsmack View Post

SoundFX are dynamic, dialog is clear but the movie looks like a fourth generation transfer from 16mm! YUK. And it's not because Panavision lenses and the film at the time were that soft. I have seen movies OLDER than these look better thanks to post processing/remastering.

go away, you don't know jack

-Gary
Gary Murrell is offline  
post #9 of 64 Old 01-13-2008, 03:24 PM
Advanced Member
 
paul nyc's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 672
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
I thought CON AIR looks pretty damn good. ROCK as well. ROCK was the best i've ever seen it (had the laser, non-anamporphic DVD, Criterion).

DIE HARD was so typical John McTiernan back in the day. Soft, anamorphic look. Remember that crappy VanDamme Hockey movie? Forgot the name. Looks just like it.
paul nyc is offline  
post #10 of 64 Old 01-13-2008, 03:34 PM
Advanced Member
 
Arpeggi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 506
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pixelsmack View Post

So we're finally getting some of the classic Disney action flicks and other movies on Bluray. Crimson Tide, The Rock, Con-Air, Die-Hard, etc.

I was thrilled when they all arrived and I quickly inserted the discs, hit play and prepared myself for visual/audio orgasms.

I wasn't too concerned about the uncompressed PCM only 5.1 audio but it should have been a red flag for how these were made. As you see I quickly saw that folks over at the duplication center merely threw in the master, hit play, record and walked off for a coffee break.

Sure I appreciate them not having to apply Dolby Digital compression to the master audio track and giving me uncompressed 5.1 Sure I appreciate the 1080p resolution. But what I didn't appreciate was the absolutely ZERO modern day post processing before or while they did the transfer!

Die Hard especially is guilty of this. The movie sounds pretty good. SoundFX are dynamic, dialog is clear but the movie looks like a fourth generation transfer from 16mm! YUK. And it's not because Panavision lenses and the film at the time were that soft. I have seen movies OLDER than these look better thanks to post processing/remastering.

The Buena Vista ones are not as bad but they don't *pop* that is for sure.
I guess maybe we can hope for a special edition or something.

Armageddon was never released anamorphic on DVD. Not even the Criterion one. So I looked forward to not only seeing it 2:35:1 but in HD. But now I am worried that it too will be a PLAY-RECORD-GO-GET-COFFEE transfer. :\\


Embarrassing post.
Arpeggi is offline  
post #11 of 64 Old 01-13-2008, 03:51 PM
Senior Member
 
cdhender's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 493
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Dude these movies are OLD. They're not gonna have that POP you're looking for. Not every movie can be like Pirates of the Caribbean. Might as well accept it now.

By the way, there are plenty of brand new movies that look like total garbage. For ex I watched '28 Weeks Later' last night. Looked downright average. You'd think the movie was 10 years old or something.
cdhender is offline  
post #12 of 64 Old 01-13-2008, 03:56 PM
AVS Special Member
 
wormraper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Tucson Arizona
Posts: 4,096
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by cdhender View Post

Dude these movies are OLD. They're not gonna have that POP you're looking for. Not every movie can be like Pirates of the Caribbean. Might as well accept it now.

By the way, there are plenty of brand new movies that look like total garbage. For ex I watched '28 Weeks Later' last night. Looked downright average. You'd think the movie was 10 years old or something.

that was because they shot it on a camcorder that only allowed I believe a 720x526 resolution on it. Directors intent.
wormraper is online now  
post #13 of 64 Old 01-13-2008, 03:58 PM
AVS Special Member
 
GamerGuyX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Kentwood, Michigan
Posts: 1,473
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by paul nyc View Post

I thought CON AIR looks pretty damn good. ROCK as well. ROCK was the best i've ever seen it (had the laser, non-anamporphic DVD, Criterion).

DIE HARD was so typical John McTiernan back in the day. Soft, anamorphic look. Remember that crappy VanDamme Hockey movie? Forgot the name. Looks just like it.

Sudden Death. But wait, that wasn't directed by McTiernan.

Quote:
Originally Posted by wormraper View Post

that was because they shot it on a camcorder that only allowed I believe a 720x526 resolution on it. Directors intent.

You are thinking of 28 Days Later.
GamerGuyX is offline  
post #14 of 64 Old 01-13-2008, 05:50 PM
AVS Special Member
 
lgans316's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Barking, Essex, London
Posts: 6,803
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 17
I understand your frustrations but your impressions on these excellent titles is wrong. Die Hard-1 looks soft and hazy because of the filming style. Rock and Con Air looks and sounds terrific. It was better than newer releases to an extent. The LFE on The Rock is way too deep and can ruin your Subs if you cook it overtime.

Blu-ray : 340
lgans316 is online now  
post #15 of 64 Old 01-13-2008, 08:19 PM
Advanced Member
 
paul nyc's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 672
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
[quote=GamerGuyX;12802429]Sudden Death. But wait, that wasn't directed by McTiernan.

Crap, You're right. It was Peter Hymes (sp). But had that soft, vaseline lens look like DH.
paul nyc is offline  
post #16 of 64 Old 01-13-2008, 09:47 PM
Advanced Member
 
MRMOTA's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 745
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I have watched the Rock and Con-Air and I think both are a vast improvement over the previous SD incarnations. I've watched Die Hard 1 and currently watching Die Hard 2 and so far I think these look fairly clean. I would think that the 3 stars received from High Def Digest are a little on the low side. I would give these both another half star to put them as 3 and 1/2 out of 5.
MRMOTA is offline  
post #17 of 64 Old 01-13-2008, 09:57 PM
AVS Special Member
 
shadowrage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 3,780
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
You dont want a better transfer man. You want to direct the movie yourself.

The Director's vision is what I want on the disc, always. No DNR, No EE, and No matrixing from mono. Kudos to Sony for releasing 20 million miles in color and black and white btw.

Buena Vista is pretty much the studio to look to for top notch transfers.

Ridiculous codec tier sig gone. Still AVC/24bit lossless fanboy.

Studio quality tier
Most Major studios>Small Studios>dogs>cats>Warner(the guys that do new movies)
shadowrage is offline  
post #18 of 64 Old 01-13-2008, 10:53 PM
AVS Special Member
 
wormraper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Tucson Arizona
Posts: 4,096
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by shadowrage View Post

You dont want a better transfer man. You want to direct the movie yourself.

The Director's vision is what I want on the disc, always. No DNR, No EE, and No matrixing from mono. Kudos to Sony for releasing 20 million miles in color and black and white btw.

Buena Vista is pretty much the studio to look to for top notch transfers.

New line is doing a damn fine job too.
wormraper is online now  
post #19 of 64 Old 01-13-2008, 11:06 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Deviation's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Coon Rapids, MN
Posts: 2,780
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by wormraper View Post

New line is doing a damn fine job too.

I've heard good things about Rush Hour 3 (PQ-wise, that is) and Shoot 'Em Up is just fantastic (easily deserves the Tier 0 rating) but Pan's Labyrinth suffers from over-use of DNR. Hopefully, we won't see too much of that from them from here on out.
Deviation is offline  
post #20 of 64 Old 01-13-2008, 11:07 PM
Advanced Member
 
TheSimplePanda's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 554
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by wormraper View Post

New line is doing a damn fine job too.

Word. Shoot 'em Up and Pan's Labyrinth = immaculate.

That said, using DTS:HD MA is bothering me. I was hoping that Fox was just experimenting with it and would eventually go to TrueHD but it seems that's just not going to happen and New Line seems to be following suit.

Bring on the Panny BD50.
TheSimplePanda is offline  
post #21 of 64 Old 01-13-2008, 11:15 PM
AVS Special Member
 
wormraper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Tucson Arizona
Posts: 4,096
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deviation View Post

I've heard good things about Rush Hour 3 (PQ-wise, that is) and Shoot 'Em Up is just fantastic (easily deserves the Tier 0 rating) but Pan's Labyrinth suffers from over-use of DNR. Hopefully, we won't see too much of that from them from here on out.

haven't seen Pans unfortunately, but Rush hour 3 is amazing, Shoot 'Em Up is abso-fing-lutely incredible and Hairspray is also amazing. I'm dying for them to get their butts in gear with LOTR (extended of course) and the Blade Trilogy.
wormraper is online now  
post #22 of 64 Old 01-13-2008, 11:37 PM
AVS Special Member
 
lgans316's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Barking, Essex, London
Posts: 6,803
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 17
Shoot Em Up may be immaculate but waxy DNR-ed PL ain't.

Blu-ray : 340
lgans316 is online now  
post #23 of 64 Old 01-14-2008, 12:25 AM
Senior Member
 
Brad Ley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 233
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I happened to see Die Hard in a theater a few days before Christmas last month. I had actually held off watching the Blu-ray because I knew I was going to see it theatrically. Let me tell you, not only is the Blu-ray of Die Hard as good as the theatrical presentation... it's better. All the things you're complaining about (black levels, color correction) match the theatrical presentation. But the high def transfer used for the BD has been quite wonderfully cleaned up beyond what they did theatrically. The credit sequence had specs of black dirt matted when the opticals were laid in. All of that has been removed. And that weird blur that people have frequently wondered about (the one that appear at the very beginning when Willis nods his head to the "fists with your toes" comment), it's also visible in the theatrical print.

Bottom line, after the screening I rushed home to compare the new BD to my fresh memories of this theatrical showing and I can tell you first hand, the BD can go pound for pound against the theatrical (other than the awesomeness of seeing something in commercial theater vs. home theater).
Brad Ley is offline  
post #24 of 64 Old 01-14-2008, 06:22 AM
AVS Special Member
 
robertc88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Central NJ
Posts: 3,639
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
May I asked of the OP to please list specifically what equipment you are using.

I was not satisifed with what I was seeing and hearing from BD, especially when most agree some were top notch. Long story short, I needed to buy new equipment. I agree most of the time now! Now I know this isn't feasible for most to run out and buy new equipment but maybe calibration may help.

From your list, The Rock and Con Air are very very good! Use that feedback to guage what you are seeing and hearing from BD!
robertc88 is offline  
post #25 of 64 Old 01-14-2008, 08:17 AM
Advanced Member
 
BStecke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 588
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by cdhender View Post

For ex I watched '28 Weeks Later' last night. Looked downright average. You'd think the movie was 10 years old or something.

I think most would disagree on this . . . are you sure you're not talking about 28 Days Later?
BStecke is offline  
post #26 of 64 Old 01-14-2008, 08:30 AM
Senior Member
 
cdhender's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 493
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by BStecke View Post

I think most would disagree on this . . . are you sure you're not talking about 28 Days Later?

I'm talking about the sequel, 28 Weeks Later. It's gotten average reviews in PQ from places like high def digest ( see http://bluray.highdefdigest.com/842/28weekslater.html ) and I agree with those reviews.

I know it's a dark movie and all, but I would think movies released in the last year would look better than this one does. I was disappointed.
cdhender is offline  
post #27 of 64 Old 01-14-2008, 08:34 AM
AVS Special Member
 
b.greenway's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 3,332
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by cdhender View Post

Dude these movies are OLD. They're not gonna have that POP you're looking for.

You'll choke on those words when you see the remastered Bond's.
b.greenway is offline  
post #28 of 64 Old 01-14-2008, 08:53 AM
AVS Club Gold
 
Ian_Currie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Holliston, MA
Posts: 1,338
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by b.greenway View Post

You'll choke on those words when you see the remastered Bond's.

Oh, have you seen these somehow?
Ian_Currie is offline  
post #29 of 64 Old 01-14-2008, 09:09 AM
Advanced Member
 
BStecke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 588
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by cdhender View Post

I'm talking about the sequel, 28 Weeks Later. It's gotten average reviews in PQ from places like high def digest ( see http://bluray.highdefdigest.com/842/28weekslater.html ) and I agree with those reviews.

I know it's a dark movie and all, but I would think movies released in the last year would look better than this one does. I was disappointed.

While the look of the film is somewhat inconsistent (due to the different methods of filming), I would have to disagree with that review . . . Film grain was intact, didn't notice any EE or DNR, and the colors, while muted, looked great. I honestly don't know how he could say he "forgot he was watching a BD." Probably the same reason he gave Halloween 1.5 stars
BStecke is offline  
post #30 of 64 Old 01-14-2008, 09:10 AM
Senior Member
 
Pjtan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Seattle, living with the snobs of high tech
Posts: 377
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pixelsmack View Post

Okay I am sorry. I will never post a review ever again. I am obviously not qualified.

psmack,

Don't get down about the hash. The thread actually gave me impetus to check out The Rock and Con-Air. I didn't realize they came out.

Like all of us, learn and get better. By the 5,000 post, you'll have the same attitude as the rest.
Pjtan is offline  
Reply Blu-ray Software

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off