Jaws (Blu-ray) Official AVSForum Review - Page 2

Originally Posted by dan4081 


Then I guess everyone else who has actually seen this Blu-Ray have been giving ridiculous reviews also.
A couple quotes from some other reviewers:
From Hometheaterforum:
'Color looks accurate. At least to my eye, dead-on perfect.
Densities from the Cineric immersion scan of the OCN, are terrific.'

'....sounded superb -- created with a light and intelligent hand. A wonderfully immersive experience'

'Image - 5
Audio - 5 (On a scale of 1 to 5)
Very Highly Recommended.'

From Blu-ray.com:
'In my hardly ever humble opinion, this is certainly one of the finest high definition presentations of a Universal catalog release we've seen during this centenary year, which many readers of course will say is damning with faint praise.'

'This Blu-ray is simply stunning in all categories. A top notch restoration and transfer supervised and approved by Spielberg himself are augmented by a bevy of fantastic supplements (though it would have been great to have had a Spielberg commentary on this release). Highly recommended'

From Hi-Def Digest:
Video: 'Overall, this is a magnificent and splendid presentation of a great classic.'

Audio: 'Credit has to go to the engineers who worked on this because it's brilliant'

'As one of the most anticipated titles to hit Blu-ray, Spielberg's classic film arrives with a spectacular, reference-quality audio and video presentation that will more than satisfy movie lovers everywhere'

Originally Posted by rezzy 

Jaws is Jurassic Park under water, and JP is essentially Jaws on land. But I'm baffled how a single shark can be so much more terrifying than a '40 dinosaur..

Originally Posted by emgesp 

The film doesn't look, or sound amazing. The studios did a decent job with the lousy 70's film stock source material they had to work with.

Originally Posted by emgesp 

The movie is a classic, but your review for the PQ and AQ is ridiculous. Don't let your love for this film cloud your judgement when it comes to evaluating the film on a technical level. The film doesn't look, or sound amazing. The studios did a decent job with the lousy 70's film stock source material they had to work with.

Originally Posted by dan4081 

Then I guess everyone else who has actually seen this Blu-Ray have been giving ridiculous reviews also.'

Originally Posted by MrEastSide 

Funny, how every review that I've read is praising the video and audio quality. I guess all of these reviewers are letting their love for the movie cloud their judgment, even though they are willing to slam other classics on a daily basis when a studio screws up.

Originally Posted by emgesp 

You really think this is reference material that will show off the best that Blu-ray has to offer in terms of Video and Audio quality? You really think the perfect 100 score for Video and Audio is justified?
On a technical level the film looks very bland and it's rather soft. It's not like this Blu-ray is a revelation like some other restorations we've seen (e.g. Ben Hur, The Leopard French Edition).

Originally Posted by emgesp 

The video quality is very soft overall and DNR has been applied. Where is the grain?
I don't see anything reference about this shot.
http://www.blu-ray.com/movies/screenshot.php?movieid=7547&position=3

Originally Posted by emgesp 

The video quality is very soft overall and DNR has been applied. Where is the grain?
I don't see anything reference about this shot.
http://www.blu-ray.com/movies/screenshot.php?movieid=7547&position=3

Originally Posted by dan4081 

You mean the screenshot with this disclaimer below it?
'Disclaimer: Please note that this screenshot was captured at 1080p, resized to 720p and then compressed using JPEG to improve the loading time.
While it should give you a general idea of what a title will look like, it's not representative of the true quality that Blu-ray offers.'
Think I'll stick with the opinions of the people who have actually watched the Blu-Ray, not someone basing their opinions on a resized and downloaded screenshot.

Originally Posted by emgesp 

Actually, when you register to become a member on Blu-ray.com you get to see 1080p files. You are seeing the 720p file because you are obviously not registered.

Originally Posted by dan4081 

It doesnt matter. You are basing your ridiculous critique of the restoration on a single screenshot from a website whos own review
states:
'Of course, the picture still comes with a few age-related issues, like soft edges in certain scenes, but on the whole, the transfer is fantastic with spot-on contrast and stunning clarity into the far distance
Black levels are true and often sumptuous in several areas with excellent delineation of the various gradations and small background objects hiding in the shadows
The color palette receives a generous boost without feeling artificial, especially in the bold primaries.
The video displays sharp, distinct definition in the hair and clothing of the cast, revealing wrinkles and pores in the faces of actors
Overall, this is a magnificent and splendid presentation of a great classic.'
Besides that, you also stated above "The film doesn't look, or sound amazing.".
How you are able to judge the sound quality from a 1080p screenshot is still a mystery to me, but the reviewers I have read all agree that the sound is
amazing.
A couple quotes:
'This Blu-ray is simply stunning in all categories
Fidelity is superb and John Williams' towering score sounds magnificent. There's also a new clarity and precision to some of the foley effects ...'
'....sounded superb -- created with a light and intelligent hand. A wonderfully immersive experience'

Originally Posted by Veeper 

So basically, you're saying Ralph's opinion is wrong.
You tell a lot of people that their pizza topping choices are wrong too? Travel the internet being a fun-sponge, pointing out how someone's opinion of a movie is foolish?
Where are you hanging out this weekend, cause I hate fun too! /sarc

Originally Posted by Ralph Potts 

Greetings,
emgesp, thanks for posting. I have no problem with criticism either constructive or otherwise however I do ask that those offering it base their input on first hand experience. I have no problem with those who base opinions on screenshots as everyone is entitled to use whatever method they deem appropriate when making decisions about which films to buy or not. Personally I don't use them because capturing them isn't always representative of what I see onscreen.
As for your remarks regarding my review I find them baseless. You can't possibly expect me to accept a definitive statement/opinion from someone that hasn't looked at the same thing I have. You're also questioning my objectivity, maturity and experience as someone that has written well over a thousand Blu-ray reviews. If you disagree with my conclusions (for whatever reasons) I can accept that and am willing to listen. What I will not tolerate in this forum is the inflammatory tone with which you express it.
My advice would be to watch the disc and make a better informed decision. If you're not happy I am sure you won't have any problem reselling it.
This thread has been derailed enough. Thanks to everyone that has chimed in but let's move on.
Regards,

Originally Posted by rezzy 

Jaws is Jurassic Park under water, and JP is essentially Jaws on land. But I'm baffled how a single shark can be so much more terrifying than a '40 dinosaur..

Originally Posted by coolcat4843 

Jaws Film Restoration Video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hLWvXaeDzwU

Originally Posted by emgesp 

Fair enough. Though, I've yet come across a Blu-ray that looked outright superior to any screenshots provided by review sites. Maybe Jaws will be different, and perhaps the screenshots I've looked at are actually the DVD version upressed to 1080p. ( :

Originally Posted by emgesp 

The movie is a classic, but your review for the PQ and AQ is ridiculous. Don't let your love for this film cloud your judgement when it comes to evaluating the film on a technical level. The film doesn't look, or sound amazing. The studios did a decent job with the lousy 70's film stock source material they had to work with.

Originally Posted by emgesp 

You really think this is reference material that will show off the best that Blu-ray has to offer in terms of Video and Audio quality? You really think the perfect 100 score for Video and Audio is justified?
On a technical level the film looks very bland and it's rather soft. It's not like this Blu-ray is a revelation like some other restorations we've seen (e.g. Ben Hur, The Leopard French Edition).

Originally Posted by emgesp 

I'm not basing my critique off one screenshot. I've seen many screenshots and they have all been rather consistent in quality.
Ben-Hur looks amazing, Jaws looks average. Calling Jaws reference material on a technical level is such an exaggeration. It looks decent for a 70's flick, nothing more.
Every Blu-ray that I thought looked great in screenshots always looked great when watching the actual disk. Unless the guys at Blu-ray.com tampered with these screenshots I know what to expect when I eventually watch the actual disk.

Originally Posted by Skimanfz1 

No matter how good your home theater is, there is one thing that it cannot recreate, and that is the sound of a movie theater full of teenage girls screaming at the top of their lungs.

Originally Posted by haineshisway 

I am biting my tongue in respect to this forum. BITING my tongue and you know how difficult that is for me. If a transfer replicates what the film looked like in projection when it came out, that is all you should ever need or want. Period. This will not be "reference" material for those who only watch movies from the last decade. The transfer looks like the film. What else would you have it look like, for heaven's sake. Let's recap here: I don't think I'll be incorrect when I say you never saw Jaws on its initial release, therefore you have no, let me emphasize, NO point of reference for what this film actually looked like. Strike one. Any softness perceived is inherent to the film as it was shot with diffusion filters - apparently you don't know about diffusion filters or the look that results from the use of them. Strike two. Most importantly, you have not seen this transfer. Period and strike three, you're out.

Originally Posted by emgesp 

It looks pretty good for a 70's film, but not at all reference material.