AVS › AVS Forum › Blu-ray & HD DVD › Blu-ray Software › Gladiator Master Blu-ray Comparison and Review Thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Gladiator Master Blu-ray Comparison and Review Thread - Page 18

post #511 of 2845
8/26/09 at 9:42pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kram Sacul View Post

More screen capture comparisons at caps-a-holic.com.

More evidence of scratch removal gone amuck. WTF.

"Are you passing judgment without actually seeing it in person and in motion?

Are you a part of the pro HD-DVD hoard currently infesting the BD section at AVS (which includes both members and mods)?"

I think we can safely say this title is actually defective. We can clearly see missing arrows and spears that have now turned into bullets. You would have to be a complete moron to know ahead of time a release is defective like this and still purchase it.

Please, cry out to the studios and demand a remaster like we did with "The Fifth Element" and "Pirates of the Caribbean".

This is not just a matter of DNR and EE, because objects themselves have been removed (i.e. arrows).
Reply
Reply

AVS Top Picks

post #512 of 2845
8/26/09 at 9:47pm


Reply
Reply
post #513 of 2845
8/26/09 at 10:21pm
Do you all consider dvdbeaver.com a legitimate site? They seem to like it, although they don't "love" it. Why do you think this is?

Quote:


This is part of Paramount's new 'Sapphire Series' (as is Braveheart). You immediately get the choice of viewing the 2:35:01 long Theatrical Version from 'MM A.D.' or the 2:50:58, unrated, Extended Version from 'MMV A.D.' (very cute). There is an optional Introduction by Ridley Scott. These 2 versions are seamlessly branched and take up over 40 Gig of space on the first dual-layered Blu-ray disc. The image appears to surpass even the 1080i HD TV (1.78.1 open matted) - which skin tones look quite a bit redder. Paramount's MPEG4 AVC transfer seems to have improved in every single facet of the visuals although it's not without it's digital manipulations with some minor edge-enhancement and some DNR. The image is certainly brighter - perhaps more than it may have been intended to be. It's tighter all around and is pretty impressive looking and I hope the captures below support this because this is one of the most anticipated Blu-rays I've seen this year - although some will snub the manipulation. Strangely the 'extended scenes' seem to have had no digital tinkering. People who project to a very large screen will find the filtering more visible. The image is frequently dimensional. There is also a marginal amount more information shown in the side edges (compared to the DVD versions).

http://www.dvdbeaver.com/film/DVDCompare7/gladiator.htm
Reply
Reply
post #514 of 2845
8/26/09 at 10:26pm
IMO the only good thing on DVDBeaver are the screenshot comparisons. Their reviews of PQ have been consistently worthless.
Reply
Reply
post #515 of 2845
8/26/09 at 10:26pm


Reply
Reply
post #516 of 2845
8/26/09 at 10:27pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by MattGuyOR View Post

Do you all consider dvdbeaver.com a legitimate site? They seem to like it, although they don't "love" it.




They "loved" it a few days ago, before they changed their review.

Anyway, I do like their site. I like the screenshot layout they use for comparing releases across DVD and Blu Ray media, but their reviews themselves are pretty inconsistent (after all, some people aren't at all bothered by heavy DNR or EE, or they don't have a display of a high enough quality to really be hampered by it, and this includes people who write reviews.)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Xylon View Post




Ugh, it's like someone took a thick white crayon and outlined his helmet in the BluRay version.

Anyone who looks at the BEV version and then compares it to the BluRay version and claims that the BluRay version is anything less than disappointing is just being dishonest.

It should've been much, much better.
Reply
Reply
post #517 of 2845
8/26/09 at 10:36pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stinky-Dinkins View Post


Ugh, it's like someone took a thick white crayon and outlined his helment in the BluRay version.

Anyone who looks at the BEV version and then compares it to the BluRay version and claims that the BluRay version is anything less than disappointing is just being dishonest.

It should've been much, much better.

Agreed.
Reply
Reply
post #518 of 2845
8/26/09 at 10:48pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by ack_bk View Post

Everyone has different levels of sensitivity to DNR and EE. Some people just don't care as much as you about EE/DNR. Why does that offend you?

But if they don't care, then why are they even in a thread like this in the first place? That doesn't make any sense. If they like the transfer, enjoy the flick, then fine, move on to the next movie and thread. What can they possibly gain by arguing with people that see it differently?
Reply
Reply
post #519 of 2845
8/26/09 at 10:51pm
The Blu-ray looks like SHi7!!! Sorry for my language, but I'm really pissed off! This is one of my Fav movies ever.

First they take an original 6.1 track and drop the rear center channel for a 5.1 mix and now this....
Reply
Reply
post #520 of 2845
8/26/09 at 10:59pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scarfather View Post

I obviously want to enjoy it the best way I can, and right now this is it.

If there are actual elements of the movie MISSING, then perhaps this isn't the best option available. Just because it has higher resolution and bitrate, doesn't make it better. Would a 4:3 copy of this movie scanned at 4K be better than the OAR DVD? Not in my books.

Big fat PASS on this turd.
Reply
Reply
post #521 of 2845
8/26/09 at 11:11pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by fpconvert View Post

No direspect but except for the 30 people here complaining how they won't buy this "pile of crap", it will still sell a s**t load of discs. Most of those people won't even notice there are less flaming arrows and won't consider it a defect.
Not everyone spends their time toggling back and forth between grabs to count the arrows and fireballs.

Two words: catalog title. It won't sell that much at all actually.
Reply
Reply
post #522 of 2845
8/26/09 at 11:19pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kram Sacul View Post






Holyyyy s**t, that's hilarious! And the parts that aren't magic-markered out don't look all that more detailed anyways! What a farce of a release. This is worthy of Warn-A-Brother...
Reply
Reply
post #523 of 2845
8/26/09 at 11:35pm
If you buy this title knowing full well of all it's defects then you are just supporting the problem and you just be ashamed of yourself, because you obviously have very little respect for this film.

"I really love this film, so I'm going to buy the Blu-ray regardless of it's defects, because it's still a better presentation than the SD-DVD".

WRONG!!! The DVD is the better presentation of the film, because no objects have been erased.

If you actually love the film as much as some of you guys say you do then hold on to your DVD copies and do everything you can to try to get this release recalled.
Reply
Reply
post #524 of 2845
8/26/09 at 11:52pm
What concerns me now is the idea that, if Universal mastered this (badly) what does it say about the upcoming blu-ray of Hannibal?

There was a pretty weak German Blu-Ray from Universal with DNR http://whiggles.landofwhimsy.com/arc...pressions.html so now I'm wondering if Fox/MGM will just be re-using the same encode.

Might be time to start emailing on that subject, since it hasn't been released yet and has a better chance of getting pushed back and re-encoded sans DNR.
Reply
Reply
post #525 of 2845
8/27/09 at 12:15am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darth Lavender View Post

What concerns me now is the idea that, if Universal mastered this (badly) what does it say about the upcoming blu-ray of Hannibal?

There was a pretty weak German Blu-Ray from Universal with DNR http://whiggles.landofwhimsy.com/arc...pressions.html so now I'm wondering if Fox/MGM will just be re-using the same encode.

Let's not go overboard here. First we don't really know who mastered Gladiator, and second the German Hannibal is from Universum, not Universal. It's an entirely different company.
Reply
Reply
post #526 of 2845
8/27/09 at 12:25am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rigby Reardon View Post

Let's not go overboard here. First we don't really know who mastered Gladiator, and second the German Hannibal is from Universum, not Universal. It's an entirely different company.

It is? Great to know.

I just knew Universal & MGM had the same kind of international/domestic coproduction on Hannibal as Universal & Dreamworks (Paramount) had on Gladiator.


And Hannibal just happens to be one of my very favourite movies. It's less than the sum of it's parts, but the parts are pretty impressive.
Reply
Reply
post #527 of 2845
8/27/09 at 12:25am
i just checked and Gladiator is distributed by Universal Pictures in Europe, not Paramount, like it is in the States.
So there might be a slight chance that the european department of Univesal did a different encoding.
Just a slight chance, that's all...
Reply
Reply
post #528 of 2845
8/27/09 at 12:37am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darth Lavender View Post

It is? Great to know.

I just knew Universal & MGM had the same kind of international/domestic coproduction on Hannibal as Universal & Dreamworks (Paramount) had on Gladiator.

As I said, entirely different company. Universum Film (or UFA for short) is a German production company with a rich legacy (e.g. they produced Fritz Lang classics such as Metropolis or Dr. Mabuse back in the 1920s). Present company ownership is a bit complicated, but I believe the current majority holder is Bertelsmann AG.

Back to topic, it doesn't make sense to jump to conclusions about other movies from Gladiator. Mastering for a studio is often done by completely different people or even external companies, so you can't simply extrapolate from one movie to another.
Reply
Reply
post #529 of 2845
8/27/09 at 12:37am
Quote:
Originally Posted by private Angus View Post

i just checked and Gladiator is distributed by Universal Pictures in Europe, not Paramount, like it is in the States.
So there might be a slight chance that the european department of Univesal did a different encoding.
Just a slight chance, that's all...

I think it was confirmed as Region-B locked, though, so most of us would be SOL even it were a good transfer.
Reply
Reply
post #530 of 2845
8/27/09 at 12:49am
Quote:
Originally Posted by iron-and-wine View Post

I think it was confirmed as Region-B locked, though, so most of us would be SOL even it were a good transfer.

AFAIK, nobody has received it yet, so we don't know for sure. I think it would be the first region-locked Universal disc. Anyway, the chances that they actually used a different video transfer are unfortunately pretty slim.
Reply
Reply
post #531 of 2845
8/27/09 at 12:53am
Quote:
Originally Posted by MattGuyOR View Post

Do you all consider dvdbeaver.com a legitimate site? They seem to like it, although they don't "love" it. Why do you think this is?
http://www.dvdbeaver.com/film/DVDCompare7/gladiator.htm

To be blunt: Incompetence in technical matters of transfers and associated digitally created issues.
Reply
Reply
post #532 of 2845
8/27/09 at 12:55am
After looking at the screenshots, I don't think there is ANY question this is a defective release.
Hopefully, replacements will be available soon (and the numb-skulls responsible will be looking for new jobs...in another field).
Reply
Reply
post #533 of 2845
8/27/09 at 1:27am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rigby Reardon View Post

Let's not go overboard here. First we don't really know who mastered Gladiator, and second the German Hannibal is from Universum, not Universal. It's an entirely different company.

Just to interject briefly on this issue (and apologies for going slightly off topic): I own the German release of HANNIBAL from Universum Film and also have a review copy of the upcoming UK release from Universal on my desk. There's a hold on reviews going live until closer to the release date, but I don't think I'll be giving too much away when I say that the Universal BD looks practically identical to its Universum counterpart -- in other words, equally disappointing. As is the case with GLADIATOR, I suspect the master used for both originated from Universal, as it has their "look". The sad part is, it still looks slightly better than GLADIATOR, albeit not by much.

I'm hoping that MGM uses a different master for their upcoming release -- they'll presumably have to, given that the company logos at the start are in a different order for the US edition.
Reply
Reply
post #534 of 2845
8/27/09 at 1:33am
I tried watching this on my JVC HD350 on a 120" screen and man those Extended scenes really rubs it bigtime

Sapphire my a**.
Reply
Reply
post #535 of 2845
8/27/09 at 1:43am
Oh bum! I was hoping against hope that the UK version of Gladiator on Blu wouldn't have the same issues as the US version. So I just phoned Universal UK and spoke to some people there. They confirmed that it will look exactly the same as the US version because they use the same encode.

Will there be a Japanese edition coming out? Might that be done differently?
Reply
Reply
post #536 of 2845
8/27/09 at 2:00am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rigby Reardon View Post

As I said, entirely different company. Universum Film (or UFA for short) is a German production company with a rich legacy (e.g. they produced Fritz Lang classics such as Metropolis or Dr. Mabuse back in the 1920s). Present company ownership is a bit complicated, but I believe the current majority holder is Bertelsmann AG.

Now I feel particularly dumb. I actually know a bit about UFA (I'm a big fan of 20s German cinema) but just never realised that was Universum.
Reply
Reply
post #537 of 2845
8/27/09 at 2:03am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whiggles View Post

I'm hoping that MGM uses a different master for their upcoming release -- they'll presumably have to, given that the company logos at the start are in a different order for the US edition.

I always did find the logos (as I saw them in Australia) terribly jarring. We get a little bit of Hans Zimmer's music over 'Universal,' then we get the MGM Lion obnoxiously roaring over the top of it.

Makes sense that the logos were meant to be the other way around.
Reply
Reply
post #538 of 2845
8/27/09 at 2:14am
After reading through this thread I'm shocked that not only did this dreck pass QC, but it is being touted as part of a premium collection at a much higher price point. If I wasn't so pissed, I would have to laugh at this inaugural "Sapphire" release.

The DNR and EE are bad enough to warrant a recall, but erasing objects from the film is a whole new level of incompetence that simply bows my mind. The best thing is, like somebody already mentioned, the DVD is superior to the BD in this case.


This picture sums up the BD perfectly...


Reply
Reply
post #539 of 2845
8/27/09 at 2:24am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darth Lavender View Post

Now I feel particularly dumb. I actually know a bit about UFA (I'm a big fan of 20s German cinema) but just never realised that was Universum.

Well, no reason to feel dumb. The "old" Universum Film AG has been reorganized, partly sold off etc. numerous times, so it's not easy to understand the current company structures. Universum Film GmbH (the distributor of DVDs and BDs) is actually just a small subsidiary under the umbrella of the UFA holding company. But the label and brand has of course a great tradition here in Germany.
Reply
Reply
post #540 of 2845
8/27/09 at 3:07am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kram Sacul View Post


Still not enough reason for a recall?

I guess this means that the "Sapphire Series" has no meaning whatsoever. Braveheart looks incredible! It´s the same as with any other Blu-Ray release. What do we learn from this? Never trust a studio´s word.

The worst part is that this will probably sell well regardless and that´s what they are counting on.
Any news from the German version?
Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Blu-ray Software

AVS Top Picks

AVS › AVS Forum › Blu-ray & HD DVD › Blu-ray Software › Gladiator Master Blu-ray Comparison and Review Thread