Gladiator Master Blu-ray Comparison and Review Thread - Page 3

But the reason to buy a BD when you have the DVD is PQ.

Which is always x times better, no matter how much EE or NR has been applied.

Nope... 6X increased resolution of Blu Ray is of greater importance than the actual PQ. PQ obviously varies within the Blu Ray medium - but the 6X increased resolution of Blu Ray is a constant with their 1080P24 releases.

Yup. People clamored to have HD go mainstream (as opposed to staying niche, for the enthusiasts), and yet when the inevitable dumbing down of the content to appeal to the clueless masses rears it's ugly head, the same people act surprised. I have always said that the music industry is a perfect model, what with their MP3 downloads (which is where HD distro is headed). You can't have your cake and eat it too, unfortunately.

This just keeps getting better and better. Over in the Lord of the Rings thread, several posters would prefer that the audio not be 7.1 24 bit DTS-HD MA on the extended versions because it would barely fit on a single platter (and on an enthusiast forum, no less?!?). Or, they would prefer that the audio be less than optimal so the picture quality doesn't suffer. I long for the days when we could agree on both optimum PQ and AQ: split it into two discs (as the EEs are now), and keep the best AQ and PQ available. But then some people would have to get off their butts and switch the disc (interrupts the "theater experience"). Oh well...

Resolution may be X better, but that doesnt follow that PQ gets the same X factor.

Even if I would get a minor PQ upgrade, it doesnt motivate the cost (for me).

Do I have $30 spare? Actually, yes.

But I absolutely will not buy this release, just on general principle.
I don't want to encourage this kind of behaviour, it's that simple.
Just as I will sometimes pay $30 or even $40 for a really deserving release; even knowing I probably won't have time to watch it for months.
I will pay absolutely nothing for this, even though it is a favourite movie.

I MIGHT look into buying it second-hand, just to make sure the studios don't get any of my money.
And, before anyone asks the obvious; moral questions aside, piracy just isn't an option for me on dialup.

I can respect that reasoning.

The unfiltered screens look really nice. I'm not sure why it was deemed necessary to DNR them when the grain is so fine it's practically not noticeable.

I think it becomes distracting when people have their sharpness cranked up to max.

Thanks for the very comprehensive comparison, eric.exe!


Tell-tale sign of automated digital scratch reduction. It's how they painted out all the little specks you see missing on the Blu-ray, and it's how the arrows, spears, etc. got disappeared.

Looks like they threw every form of processing they had at this. It's blurred, edge enhanced, temporally noise reduced (moving objects leave smeared trails behind), and scratch-painted...

The extended scenes look comparable to Braveheart given the different visual style of the films. Wonder when they were transferred.

Let's all buy 10 copies of Braveheart and skip Gladiator; maybe that will help send a messsage.

EDIT: I see the extended edition DVD was released in 2005 so I guess that's when those clips were transferred.

Well, that does it. I am cancelling and sticking with my DVHS recording. They clearly have used the now very old HD master, which was filtered and DVNR'd with DVD in mind. If the BD cannot top an old low bitrate HD broadcast, then it is not worth buying.

Anyone claiming the BD looks great is absolutely blind and the extended clips prove it. They are so vastly superior in detail that it is mind blowing. DVNR should flat out be banned from use. It is an abomination.

A shame that 6x increased resolution is being wasted on junk transfers like this.

Agreed.

Are there any DVHS (recorded OTA/from cable/from dish, or otherwise) vs Blu-Ray comparisons for this yet?

I think we should keep generalizations out of this discussion. Almost noone can tell a well done MP3 or AAC (like e.g. the 256kpbs "Itunes Plus" files) from the uncompressed original in a properly conducted blind test. The flaws in the Gladiator screenshots, on the other hand, are glaringly obvious defects. The criticisms of this release shouldn't be minimized by equating them to the typical "audiophile" hyperbole, since most sane people don't take that stuff too serious.

Have you seen the first post?

I didn't realise it was that bad. The seventh pic down at the top of the page with the arrows flying through the air and some fire looks horrendous. Half the spears and fire are missing in the Blu Ray release so that points to some aggressive DNR and then some aggressive sharpening to compensate for the stupid DNR.

Whats the actual mailing address for this studio so people can write a complaint. This is one of the biggest releases of the year and it should have had a new transfer.

Is it just me or does the Blu Ray look to have a bluer cast on a lot of the scenes. As if someone has boosted the color blue in the image ?


If Warner screw up The Lord Of The Rings and i think thats a possibility then this forum is going to explode with complaints. It's going to be civil war

My bad... I feel pretty ridiculous right about now.

Was there ever a commercial Gladiator release on DVHS? I think that was what I was thinking, or confusing, here.

Resolution isn't everything: a DVD can be upscaled to 1080 but it doesn't buy you anything except more pixels. It's the information content in those pixels that is important: the more information the better (within the limits of the codec).

I thought the whole point of HD codecs was to maximise the information whilst minimising artifacting.

DVD was never utilised to its maximum potential (always filtered for interlaced displays and generally bit-starved when not necessary, could have been superbit progressive) and now it looks like Bluray is going the same way.

So disappointing.

Yes upscaling will use the same number of pixels but the BD 1080P picture will have 6X the information... and that does make a difference. Especially on a large screen.

Using that 6x the information is not a guarantee. There are plenty of discs that don't even have HD definition (above 720p in real detail).

This is too bad. The unfiltered screen shots, to me, really look the best. I will just wait for this to hit $9.99 or under..

I take it Ridley and John Mathieson didn't sign off on this? Seems odd that Ridley would let some thing this big out the door with out giving it a look.

i wouldn't pay $1 for this crap

sorry but my DVD will hold me over until a bluray with excellent PQ is released

I think contacting Ridlet Scott's production company would get more results regarding a new transfer. I'm sure Ridley won't be happy if people notify him of this.

Contacting both Paramount/Dreamworks and Scott's production company and making sure Amazon reviews get 1 stars would do more than just writing on this forum. I believe consumer power and negative reviews can actually stop these bad releases happening in the future. I believe that because negative word of mouth affects sales.

This has been a very disappointing year for Blu Ray quality releases with only Sony really giving us consistently great catalog releases. Yes ok a few may have been bad but overall consistent with a number of old releases.

What really sucks about this release (aside from the obvious) is that you know it's going to be a minimum 2-3 yr wait before it's re-released (assuming they don't use the same encode).

There's the small hope that the UK version will look better, but if Universal was the one who encoded this to begin with, all bets are off. Only other hope is an import from an non-english speaking country which is fine if subtitles arent forced.

Not to say I'd want Braveheart to look like this, but I would've preferred that this get the better treatment only because Gladiator is more rewatchable ( I like them both about the same). Looks like I'll be buying Braveheart though...

Perhaps. But this disc clearly 1080P detail (plus other garbage).

Easy big boy ! It is only a movie.

The problem it that very few people outside of a few select videophiles here at AVS (and other similar forums) are going to notice EE/DNR and be upset enough to boycott a movie or protest to the studio and or director.

The vast majority of people out there will probably think this looks great....

If you or someone else can get us an email address, contact website, or mailing address, i'm sure many would be willing to do this.


I'm willing to put up with imperfections, but when a big release like this is screwed up, 3+ yrs into the format, it's just unacceptable.