or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Blu-ray & HD DVD › Blu-ray Software › Heat
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Heat - Page 9

post #241 of 562
DVDBeaver has their review up of Heat.. Based on those caps, I will be adding this to my wishlist.
post #242 of 562
I can't BELIEVE how stretched the DVD is. Never would have noticed without the side-by-side with the BR but boy is it noticible in those caps.
post #243 of 562
Well the BD doesn't look much better than the DVD judging by those grabs. Better be a flawless print.
post #244 of 562
Seems to look quite good. No Braveheart but what is... I'll live with it.
post #245 of 562
Quote:
Originally Posted by gnj1958 View Post

Well the BD doesn't look much better than the DVD judging by those grabs.

Yeah, I noticed that.
Other than the lack of vertical stretching, nothing really stands out.
post #246 of 562
Looks like a pretty sizeable upgrade from where I sit (in relation to my TV). Obviously not on par with a new movie scanned from original negatives but looks quite like a good theatrical exhibition.
post #247 of 562
The caps looks underwhelming to me. Will cancel the order and pick up when the price hits rock bottom.
post #248 of 562
I hate it when a reviewer says that the Blu-Ray looks better than the DVD. That is true 99% of the time, and therefore is not useful information. It's like saying that a color movie is more colorful than a black and white one. Let's have higher frames of reference.
post #249 of 562
People complaining about what Heat looks like on Blu-Ray can't have seen it before, because it's always had that gun-metal blue look to it - at the theatre, on VHS, DVD and now Blu-Ray. It looks a lot sharper than it's ever looked on home video, that's for sure.
post #250 of 562
Quote:
Originally Posted by stwrt View Post

People complaining about what Heat looks like on Blu-Ray can't have seen it before, because it's always had that gun-metal blue look to it - at the theatre, on VHS, DVD and now Blu-Ray. It looks a lot sharper than it's ever looked on home video, that's for sure.

That's fine but we need to know if this has been remastered and the transfer has been approved by the director by properly viewing the entire movie not just parts of it. This looks to be another classic example of artistic intent and the bland 90s filming style resulting in an average High Definition experience. At least the colors could have been improved as rest looks to be acceptable at the moment. For the time being purists may say its true to source and it has never looked this great in home video but who knows, these Studios and Directors may revisit and do a full fledged restoration like Wolfgang Petersen & Warner did for Troy. When this happens the purists community may say its significanty altered from the theatrical presentation despite looking dramatically better than the original installment.
post #251 of 562
Looks like a nice transfer to me.

Subtle color and tone , not crunched and over-cooked.
post #252 of 562
I thought I read Mann supervised this transfer. On any rate, the screencaps look pretty solid for this film - this film is not meant to look like eye candy.
post #253 of 562
Colours look a little better on the blu ray. I have always thought that the film looked washed out on every format I have owned, be that VHS off the TV, retail VHS and DVD. Probably was a photography decision I imagine, though I suspect that the master used was slightly undersaturated. The BR does still look a bit soft, I guess only a full re-master would be of any kind of benefit, still at least there is no hideous EE or artifical sharpening.


Unfortunately I passed on the opportunity to watch this great film at the cinema, despite my mate offering to take me.
post #254 of 562
Would have expected a bit more from a completely new transfer, but it's not bad. Definitely keeping my pre-order.
post #255 of 562
Looks like a good clean transfer with no egregious filtering. The DVD was actually pretty good for its day, just stretched and washed out a bit.
post #256 of 562
I wasn't too fixated on just how good it would look. If the BD was even a subjective 1% better than the DVD in both audio and video, I was buying it. This movie is worth it to me.
post #257 of 562
The problems for me are the usual filtering and inefficient encode from Warner.

It's not terrible, but it could have looked great.
post #258 of 562
Quote:
Originally Posted by oink View Post

Yeah, I noticed that.
Other than the lack of vertical stretching, nothing really stands out.

It's much darker too, lots of detail lost to that, look at De Niro's face in the coffee shop talking to Amy, half the face is in the "shadow" now. Why WB feel the need to mess with this title repeatedly is just beyond me.
post #259 of 562
Cant find anything wrong with the transfer. It looks like most other movies shoot with Anamorphic.

The lights they used, also seemed to go after a more natural look.
post #260 of 562
Michael Mann supervised the transfer. Only the encoding would be out of his control, so the black levels, etc. are all up to the director, who is very hands on with this stuff.
post #261 of 562
considering the way so many catlog titles get a contrast boost nowadays to have more "PoP!", I'm glad that wasn't done.
post #262 of 562
Quote:
Originally Posted by benes View Post

Do we really need an announcement every time just because you get a disc early? Why not wait until you've actually watched it and give us some real info.

Envy much?
post #263 of 562
Quote:
Originally Posted by benes View Post

Ok then let me make up a list of all the blu-rays I plan to buy in the next year. I'll start a blank thread for each one and I'll add the reviews when I get around to watching them. In the meantime you can discuss how much fun the anticipation is.

Go ahead - your time - your dime.
post #264 of 562
The caps seem to make the transfer look dark in the dark.
Hope the Kuro is up to the task.
And here's looking to that Tom Cruise Mann epic next.
post #265 of 562
Still no word on any of the changes to the film? There was speculation about the running time being shorter from a picture of the back cover of the BD a while back.
post #266 of 562
Quote:
Originally Posted by dave mack View Post

considering the way so many catlog titles get a contrast boost nowadays to have more "pop!", i'm glad that wasn't done.

+1
post #267 of 562
Looks awesome and that first screencap with Pacino is priceless!

KT
post #268 of 562
Looks like the colors have that aqua tone that many recent transfers have these days. DNR looks like its at standard Warner levels.
post #269 of 562
Quote:
Originally Posted by thehun View Post

It's much darker too, lots of detail lost to that, look at De Niro's face in the coffee shop talking to Amy, half the face is in the "shadow" now. Why WB feel the need to mess with this title repeatedly is just beyond me.

What catches my eye right of the bat is the apparent lack of more detail (according to the screenshots).
I have a 1920x1080 monitor and the shots show little difference.
That isn't a good sign.
In the past (on my setup), screenshots usually are a good indicator of the difference between DVD and BD.
post #270 of 562
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave Mack View Post

considering the way so many catlog titles get a contrast boost nowadays to have more "PoP!", I'm glad that wasn't done.

Agreed, but it's funny how some people are complaining it's too dark. The studios can never win.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Blu-ray Software
AVS › AVS Forum › Blu-ray & HD DVD › Blu-ray Software › Heat