or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Blu-ray & HD DVD › Blu-ray Software › Marvel's The Avengers
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Marvel's The Avengers - Page 12

post #331 of 463
Quote:
Originally Posted by subavision212 View Post

I'm betting another reason for the 1:78 is that the studio probably thought that there are thousands of 16:9 HD displays owned by the joe six packers who hate or don't get the black bars and figured this would help sell more copies of this incredibly popular film. Just a thought.
A thought with no evidence to support it. Whedon already said why. This is how conspiracy theories get started. Not everything needs to be scope.
rolleyes.gif
post #332 of 463
I saw it at CineMark XD theater and it was open matte. It used the Floor to Ceiling screen. I think it was the only movie that I've seen there that used that or its a really big 16 x 9 screen ?

mark
post #333 of 463
Quote:
Originally Posted by nathanddrews View Post

Director Joss Whedon stated that he wanted the 1.85:1 AR to accomodate the vertical size of Hulk without losing detail on the other heroes. Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
"The frame was composed for the 1.85:1 aspect ratio, a concept that was spearheaded by Whedon early on. Explains McGarvey, "Shooting 1.85:1 is kind of unusual for an epic film like this, but we needed the height in the screen to be able to frame in all the characters like Hulk, Captain America and Black Widow, who is much smaller. We had to give them all precedence and width within the frame. Also, Joss knew the final battle sequence was going to be this extravaganza in Manhattan, so the height and vertical scale of the buildings was going to be really important."
Those are his reasons. Whether we like it or agree with it doesn't really matter, I guess. It makes sense to me. And I must say that it looks GLORIOUS on my non-CIH setup. redface.gif
http://www.arri.com/news.html?article=950&cHash=6adfecc263fdc3b7765b4e2f93a73f81
MakeMKV. Problem solved.
I'm surprised more films with cityscape battles are not the same, I believe Cloverfield was done that way for the same reason.... I was very pleased and surprised to see Avengers filling the screen on my 65VT50 although I have to admit I'm a bit nieve when it comes to the purpose of a restricted height set-up... guess I need to read up.
post #334 of 463
Quote:
Originally Posted by subavision212 View Post

I'm betting another reason for the 1:78 is that the studio probably thought that there are thousands of 16:9 HD displays owned by the joe six packers who hate or don't get the black bars and figured this would help sell more copies of this incredibly popular film. Just a thought.
506213bdb3fc2.jpg

I'm getting to use Tommy Lee a lot, in this thread. biggrin.gif
post #335 of 463
I thought this movie was 'OK'.....I certainly have more liking of Iron Man (not #2). The PQ and AQ were fantastic, however the use of LFE was TOO pronounced; random rumbles everywhere. Don't get me wrong, I liked the film for what it was, but was expecting something different/better....
post #336 of 463
Quote:
Originally Posted by nathanddrews View Post

Director Joss Whedon stated that he wanted the 1.85:1 AR to accomodate the vertical size of Hulk without losing detail on the other heroes. Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
"The frame was composed for the 1.85:1 aspect ratio, a concept that was spearheaded by Whedon early on. Explains McGarvey, "Shooting 1.85:1 is kind of unusual for an epic film like this, but we needed the height in the screen to be able to frame in all the characters like Hulk, Captain America and Black Widow, who is much smaller. We had to give them all precedence and width within the frame. Also, Joss knew the final battle sequence was going to be this extravaganza in Manhattan, so the height and vertical scale of the buildings was going to be really important."
Those are his reasons. Whether we like it or agree with it doesn't really matter, I guess. It makes sense to me. And I must say that it looks GLORIOUS on my non-CIH setup. redface.gif
http://www.arri.com/news.html?article=950&cHash=6adfecc263fdc3b7765b4e2f93a73f81
MakeMKV. Problem solved.

Similar to what Steven Spielberg said about Jurassic Park; Dinosaurs are BIG! biggrin.gif
post #337 of 463
For a high profile release like this, they sure skimped on the extras. I'm sure there will be a double dip extended whatever edition is in the works. Sure am glad I got the target exclusive:D
post #338 of 463
Quote:
Originally Posted by mnc View Post

Similar to what Steven Spielberg said about Jurassic Park; Dinosaurs are BIG! biggrin.gif

But Hulk are not. He seemed to be about the same height as an Avatar, and that movie looked better in scope when I saw it in the cinema compared to at home.
King Kong worked very well in scope and so on
post #339 of 463
Quote:
Originally Posted by KBMAN View Post

... however the use of LFE was TOO pronounced; random rumbles everywhere. ....

Ok, that's just crazy talk! Did you get your flu shot yet? biggrin.gif
post #340 of 463
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Closet Geek View Post

Ok, that's just crazy talk! Did you get your flu shot yet? biggrin.gif
Quote:
Manager: That's Crazy Talk.
Bart: No, it's true.
Manager: No, I know, that's my brother, Crazy Talk. We're
all a little worried about him.
post #341 of 463
Quote:
Originally Posted by nathanddrews View Post

A thought with no evidence to support it. Whedon already said why. This is how conspiracy theories get started. Not everything needs to be scope.
rolleyes.gif
True, but these folks don't miss a trick when it comes to squeezing every last nickel out of film. Not complaining I loved the look of the film and was actually surprised when I first saw it in the theater and thought perhaps it was being projected the wrong way. It certainly looked amazing in my HT.
post #342 of 463
All I can say is I loved my movie going experience to see The Avengers regardless of how it was shot, who was in it, or what financing controls were implemented when making it. And I look forward to enjoying the same entertainment with my family in my home theater, again regardless of how it was shot, who was in it, or what the box looks like. Gonna enjoy the ride, more than once and hopefully come out dizzy at the end! biggrin.gif
post #343 of 463
Good luck finding the 3D version at most Targets for the rest of the week. Apparently the $19.95 pricing on the 3D set was a mistake and after many Targets reported runs yesterday w/people buying multiple sets of the 3D set at the same price as the 2D release, corporate instructed stores to pull the remaining 3D sets from shelves and to be made available only to people who did pre-order / in-store pickups.
post #344 of 463
Quote:
Originally Posted by Partyslammer View Post

Good luck finding the 3D version at most Targets for the rest of the week. Apparently the $19.95 pricing on the 3D set was a mistake and after many Targets reported runs yesterday w/people buying multiple sets of the 3D set at the same price as the 2D release, corporate instructed stores to pull the remaining 3D sets from shelves and to be made available only to people who did pre-order / in-store pickups.

Actually, the $19.99 price for the 3D release was a consequence of Target mis-printing in their weekly circular that the 2D version had a digital copy (which it obviously doesn't). Target's corporate office decided to "make things right" by selling the 3D version (that does have a DC) at the 2D release's price of $19.99 instead of the $24.99 that the ad stated.

As for withholding existing store stock due to the price differential, I haven't heard anything solid on that. However, I will admit to a little arbitage-based buying (i.e. 3 copies out of like 40+ they had in stock @ 10:30am Tuesday).
post #345 of 463
Quote:
Originally Posted by Partyslammer View Post

Good luck finding the 3D version at most Targets for the rest of the week. Apparently the $19.95 pricing on the 3D set was a mistake and after many Targets reported runs yesterday w/people buying multiple sets of the 3D set at the same price as the 2D release, corporate instructed stores to pull the remaining 3D sets from shelves and to be made available only to people who did pre-order / in-store pickups.


I just bought my copy today at a Ann Arbor Target for 19.99 ( the 5 disc including 3D set ) had about 50 on site !
post #346 of 463
Quote:
Originally Posted by AlexBC View Post

I did screencap comparison between the 2D and 3D disc, and the latter comes off better and less filtered.
One would think that if any of them would get filtered, it would likely be the 3D version (like Titanic). But it's definitely the other way around. The 2D disc is DNRed compared to the 3D.
The real shame about this is that in order to make a 2D copy of the 3D version you get some compromise with the aspect ratio as sometimes the left eye stream gets some thin pillarbox bars to make up for the angle shift of the 3D effect. mad.gif

Yes, the 3-D version has more detail:

http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/147702
http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/147704
http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/147705
post #347 of 463
3D has been sharpened, the 2D has not. Simple as that.

Best Regards
KvE
post #348 of 463
post #349 of 463
The 3d version looks terrible... in 2D
post #350 of 463
Just curious, In Canada, I bought the 2d version blu ray version of the Avengers and after hitting which language that I want I get the Frankenweenie movie preview. Does the 3d version have this also and does the 2d version in the states have it. Is there a way to stop this from popping up all the time ?

Thanks,
post #351 of 463
Quote:
Originally Posted by svenge View Post

Actually, the $19.99 price for the 3D release was a consequence of Target mis-printing in their weekly circular.

This ended up being a great deal for customers that pre-ordered through Amazon. I received an email from Amazon overnight that my credit card was being refunded $9.97 to bring my pre-order price for the 3D set from $29.96 down to $19.99.
post #352 of 463
Quote:
Originally Posted by LRS3 View Post

This ended up being a great deal for customers that pre-ordered through Amazon. I received an email from Amazon overnight that my credit card was being refunded $9.97 to bring my pre-order price for the 3D set from $29.96 down to $19.99.
And if you preordered with the $5 coupon like I did, the final cost after refund was $14.99. biggrin.gif
post #353 of 463
Quote:
Originally Posted by nathanddrews View Post

And if you preordered with the $5 coupon like I did, the final cost after refund was $14.99. biggrin.gif

Yes, you're right. I forgot about that. I did pre-order it using the $5-off coupon. So, like you, I got it for $14.99. Not too shabby. Almost forgives the rotten "stack the discs on top of each other" case.
post #354 of 463
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by NagysAudio View Post

I know smile.gif I just wanted to give Mike a hard time and liven him up!

No you argued to try and win some imaginary point got slapped down and cannot admit you are wrong
post #355 of 463
Seems like it would be better served using the right-eye image instead of the left, since it seems the right-eye is what was used to create the 2D version. That would yield a more consistent comparison, I think, considering the amount of processing done to create the left-eye image in post.
Quote:
Originally Posted by KMFDMvsEnya View Post

3D has been sharpened, the 2D has not. Simple as that.
Yes, I was actually coming here to mention this.. I did notice some sharpening effects here and there, in a couple shots I saw in 2D (on the 3D disc). I wasn't sure if it was the source or the player software (which I just installed and have done zero tweaking on). Not very obvious, though, I only saw them because I was looking for them.
post #356 of 463
Just an FYI, for those who want the 3D set at $19.99 and can't find it at any local Target but don't mind missing out on the Target bonus BR disc, Best Buy will price match at least through Sunday if you print out the Target ad and bring it with you when you make your purchase. This is the ad:


http://www.target.com/p/marvel-s-the-avengers-4-discs-includes-digital-copy-3d-2d-blu-ray-dvd/-/A-14178666
post #357 of 463
I think it's ironic that people with 2.35 screens are upset because this movie is offered in its Original Aspect Ratio, in accordance with the director's stated artistic intent, and not "formatted to fit their screens." rolleyes.gif
post #358 of 463
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jedi2016 View Post

Yes, I was actually coming here to mention this.. I did notice some sharpening effects here and there, in a couple shots I saw in 2D (on the 3D disc). I wasn't sure if it was the source or the player software (which I just installed and have done zero tweaking on). Not very obvious, though, I only saw them because I was looking for them.

The screens definitely show signs of sharpening.There's some harsh edges and minor halos in the cityscape that are certainly not part of the 2D image I just finished watching.

I will stand by and say I wasn't impressed with the look either. Very flat, bland color palette, and plenty of shimmering/aliasing. Awesome detail - no doubt - but for a production of this size/scale, it's rather disappointing. That said, the encode is just about perfect. It looked like this in theaters.
post #359 of 463
Quote:
Originally Posted by rdclark View Post

I think it's ironic that people with 2.35 screens are upset because this movie is offered in its Original Aspect Ratio, in accordance with the director's stated artistic intent, and not "formatted to fit their screens." rolleyes.gif

I was thinking the same exact thing.

LOL at all the 1.78 whiners.

I got this from Amazon for $14.99, BTW. We watched it Tuesday night and it looks great on my 60" Kuro. I'll probably watch it again this weekend.
post #360 of 463
With Whedon's bland, straight-from-TV compositions and staging it hardly matters what AR it is.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Blu-ray Software
AVS › AVS Forum › Blu-ray & HD DVD › Blu-ray Software › Marvel's The Avengers