There is little faith I can put in a reviewer when the original problem from the HD version isn't even mentioned, and then says it looks the same on BR. If one is so blind as to not be able to see what is effectively a half-resolution picture, then I'm not too inclined to believe anything else they have to say with respect to anything visual.
That is not to say he's wrong about the versions being the same though. That is a fair assumption anyone could make just by looking at WB's track record regarding re-using encodes. I'll wait for someone else with keener eyes, to confirm what I'm hoping against hope isn't true.
Last year, WB's original excuse was that the BRs were already done by the time the problem was brought to their attention. That is just not going to cut it now with a release some 9(?) months later. If this release is borked like the original, that will just prove they are just being lazy and cheap.
As an aside, for those thinking the 1080i master is the problem and that a new 1080p one needs to be made, that is not the problem. The problem is the tool they used to produce progressive frames did simple line-doubling, instead of proper de-interlacing, before feeding it into the MS encoder which (at the time) could only take in a progressive source. They would have been better off just encoding an interlaced stream like the master.
Personally, I consider it a rip-off to be paying for something allegedly in 1080 and getting essentially half that.