AVS Forum banner

Star Trek (2009)

115K views 1K replies 280 participants last post by  Steeb 
#1 ·
#178 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scott Simonian /forum/post/17281565


Dual 12"er's in an IB, that's your problem right there.
Upgrade time, Robert.

After clicking the link in your sig, I knew that was coming
.


I will say, though, that I have lucked into a terrific fix for the bass in my room. I brought home a little digital signal processor from work (Behringer DSP110) that one of the commercial audio techs gave me a little instruction on today. I say "lucked into" because the amount of improvement I got without using an RTA or other test equipment was pure luck. I was obviously getting some cancellation at some of the same frequencies that were causing the IB to bottom severely. Note, I use the IB along with a Velodyne SPL1200. Adding the processor to the IB, using a subsonic filter, rolling off below 20 hz, and adding a small amount of compression, made the bass response in my room almost explode. All thoughts of adding another sub have evaporated. I had to re-calibrate and turn the LFE down quite a bit just to get the sub level only 10 dB over reference.


[/threadjack]
 
#179 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by sdurani /forum/post/17281787


Ever come out of a theatre after enjoying a movie and say to yourself 'Man, I can hardly wait till this movie is released on video'? Because you know that the image and sound will be better at home than what you just experienced at the local cinema. That's what was going through my head whenever any of the ships went to warp. From the feedback so far, looks like I'm going to enjoy this movie more at home than I did at the theatres.

same here... happens all the time.


last time it was really bad, was Star Wars EP2, the sound crapped out in theatre, was only stereo.. ugh

but this summer went to watch Terminator Slavation in DIGITAL and damn did not expect that the sound system would be upgraded too and that was insanely loud...


Star WArs sounded great in theatre and definetly reference DEMO material for home theatre !!!!
 
#180 ·
I can beat that. Last Indiana Jones film at the theatre went to left speaker analog only. Needless to say, it sounded better at home
I did get a free ticket at AMC.

John
 
#182 ·
I saw Star Trek at an IMAX about 4 hours from my house (I was just happened to be vacationing where they were showing it again on IMAX), and it was good, but not great. The high end was too harsh, and the lows weren't that impressive at all. It did have some crazy dynamics, but overall is sounded like it was just turned up too loud. Kind of disappointed in the sound, since that was all I was really looking forward to at the IMAX. Others say it sounded great in the theater they saw it in. Still love the hell out of this movie, though.
 
#183 ·
I am fortunate enough to have just seen the "bluray".


It is absolutely stunning. LITTLE TO NO DNR!!!! Perfect amount of grain present - barely noticeable, but it's 100% naturally there. It's a beautiful transfer - lush colors, outstanding black detail, and the soundtrack is probably the best I've heard of any bluray so fars. Detail is astounding - it's slightly better than Quantum of Solace and right up there with the Pixar flicks.


The low end is simply unreal when the Romulan ship jumps to warp in the final fight scene (we're talking about almost brown note stuff here!) and the surround mix is simply out of this world during the phaser fights. The surround ambiance on the bridge made me feel like I was literally there. Dynamics are phenomenal if you've got the system to realize them.


I don't care if they charge $100 for this disc, I'll be buying it the second it hits stores and throwing a movie party that night.


Quite simply, this movie reminds me why I so passionately love home theater. I was so afraid that they weren't going to do this title right, and I am just so ecstatic that they took the time to make something special.
 
#184 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by paradoxical3 /forum/post/17289595


I am fortunate enough to have just seen the "bluray".


It is absolutely stunning. LITTLE TO NO DNR!!!! Perfect amount of grain present - barely noticeable, but it's 100% naturally there. It's a beautiful transfer - lush colors, outstanding black detail, and the soundtrack is probably the best I've heard of any bluray so fars. Detail is astounding - it's slightly better than Quantum of Solace and right up there with the Pixar flicks.


The low end is simply unreal when the Romulan ship jumps to warp in the final fight scene (we're talking about almost brown note stuff here!) and the surround mix is simply out of this world during the phaser fights. The surround ambiance on the bridge made me feel like I was literally there. Dynamics are phenomenal if you've got the system to realize them.


I don't care if they charge $100 for this disc, I'll be buying it the second it hits stores and throwing a movie party that night.


Quite simply, this movie reminds me why I so passionately love home theater. I was so afraid that they weren't going to do this title right, and I am just so ecstatic that they took the time to make something special.

Man...you're killing me. Come on November 17th!!!!
 
#190 ·
I'm hoping the BD looks good but imho it was a really ugly looking, harsh film. Lots of blown out contrast, (a way overused look that I hate btw...) and deliberately lens flared, shaky, poorly focussed. I know that was the desired look but compared to watching Generations the other nite, that was a beautiful looking film. I know they wanted a new "look" but jeez...
 
#192 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by robertc88 /forum/post/17291589


Well at least we have previews on the Star Trek TNG discs.


I really never feared this one wouldn't be done with outstanding quality to tell the truth. And if I can get it early like I did with TDK, I'll pay the price I did as well for that one!

Are these trailers in DD or TrueHD?

John
 
#193 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave Mack /forum/post/17339051


I'm hoping the BD looks good but imho it was a really ugly looking, harsh film. Lots of blown out contrast, (a way overused look that I hate btw...) and deliberately lens flared, shaky, poorly focussed. I know that was the desired look but compared to watching Generations the other nite, that was a beautiful looking film. I know they wanted a new "look" but jeez...

I'd agree with this. But I have to admit, most films in the theaters look very washed out and grainy compared to HD at home, which I guess is why we all lover our HT's


John
 
#194 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave Mack /forum/post/17339051


I'm hoping the BD looks good but imho it was a really ugly looking, harsh film. Lots of blown out contrast, (a way overused look that I hate btw...) and deliberately lens flared, shaky, poorly focussed. I know that was the desired look but compared to watching Generations the other nite, that was a beautiful looking film. I know they wanted a new "look" but jeez...

I would have to disagree with your opinion,as I happend to see ST in an all digital presentation off of the D-cinema master in a private screening room,and it was stunning!

The contrast was not blown out to my eyes at all,colors were rich and the blacks were very deep especially during the interior shots of nero's ship and the shots of outer space.

I did not notice any out-of-focus shots....
 
#195 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by HollyMan.1 /forum/post/17342790


I would have to disagree with your opinion,as I happend to see ST in an all digital presentation off of the D-cinema master in a private screening room,and it was stunning!

The contrast was not blown out to my eyes at all,colors were rich and the blacks were very deep especially during the interior shots of nero's ship and the shots of outer space.

I did not notice any out-of-focus shots....

well what you saw must have looked better than the filmprint i and my friends saw. and there were others too as evidenced by this clip and the reactions too it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iAaX8Aq6smQ
 
#196 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave Mack /forum/post/17342978




well what you saw must have looked better than the filmprint i and my friends saw. and there were others too as evidenced by this clip and the reactions too it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iAaX8Aq6smQ

Yes it is entirely possible.... a great many issues can and will arise when you are dealing with film and mass-produced prints.

In either case I'm expecting the BR to look great!

p.s. that clip is very good....
 
#197 ·

Quote:
well what you saw must have looked better than the filmprint i and my friends saw.

I saw ST in 2K D-Cinema on a large-ish screen (twice) and it looked stunning. Some of the hand held stuff is obviously going to have some motion blur, by design knowing Abrams' style, but the more conventional static and dolly shots are gorgeous. The BD is going to be REALLY gorgeous based on the 1080p rip I have seen. The soundtrack is insane.
 
#198 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by robertc88 /forum/post/17291589


Well at least we have previews on the Star Trek TNG discs.


I really never feared this one wouldn't be done with outstanding quality to tell the truth. And if I can get it early like I did with TDK, I'll pay the price I did as well for that one!

Speaking of the preview on the Star Trek TNG movies, did you notice that it says available now on DVD and BD?
I guess they goofed on that one.
 
#199 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by Saturn94 /forum/post/17344320


Speaking of the preview on the Star Trek TNG movies, did you notice that it says available now on DVD and BD?
I guess they goofed on that one.

Actually, the TNG set was created in the year 2010 and then sent back in time to 2009 using red matter. This would explain why the preview says that the new movie is "now available." Of course, now we're all living in an alternate timeline, but what can you do? These things happen.
 
#200 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert George /forum/post/17343769


I saw ST in 2K D-Cinema on a large-ish screen (twice) and it looked stunning. Some of the hand held stuff is obviously going to have some motion blur, by design knowing Abrams' style, but the more conventional static and dolly shots are gorgeous. The BD is going to be REALLY gorgeous based on the 1080p rip I have seen. The soundtrack is insane.

My sentiments exactly,some of the outer space shots were gorgeous.

The D.P. on this show is the great Dan Mindel,he also shot MI:3 for Abrams and has also worked with Tony Scott on Enemy of the State.

He has a very distinct visual style....one of my favorite D.P.'s.
 
#201 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by HollyMan.1 /forum/post/17344441


My sentiments exactly,some of the outer space shots were gorgeous.

The D.P. on this show is the great Dan Mindel,he also shot MI:3 for Abrams and has also worked with Tony Scott on Enemy of the State.

He has a very distinct visual style....one of my favorite D.P.'s.

I'm looking forward to it. It could very well have been the film print. Just looked really washed out, jacked up contrasty...

 
#202 ·
I saw this at the DLP theater I always go(never had a picture issue) to, and there were definitely a lot of out of focus shots...not motion blur mind you(which doesn't bother me). But every few cuts a shot will be out of focus. I know for a fact I saw it
Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show) Spoiler  
Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show) when kirk gets beamed back up onto the ship...or was it when he got kicked out, it was when he was arguing with Spock on the bridge during one of those two parts
, there was camera movement but nothing fast enough where blur would become an issue.


Other than that beautiful photography...too much lens flare though. Yes lens flare can work(as it did here, mostly), but it was overdone just a enough to where it became a joke. Some one want to turn it into a drinking game?
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top