The New PQ Tier thread for Blu-Ray - Discussion - Page 510

Having finally watched my Blu-Ray copy of 2012, I'm not nearly as disappointed as some of you seem to be. Although for the most part I'm in agreeance with what has already been said for the most part.

With that said... it's probably because I split the movie anyway. Which, 2012 might need to be split to be accurately rated for the tiers.

From the destruction scene standpoint, 2012 would make a fine addition to Tier 0 in my opinion.

Everything else? Tier 1.5- Tier 2.

If someone was using 2012 as demo material and strictly focused on action scenes, Tier 1.Anything would pretty inaccurate imo... Tier 0 would be the only thing suitable.

I'm gonna go ahead and point out, I couldn't tell you what the hell 2012's story was about. I didn't really pay much attention to the movie unless something was getting destroyed.

So thinking about what most people will probably buy 2012 for, how would you who have seen it rate it? Just as you have (Tier 1.5-2?) or higher?

Funny People

This is one of those films where you pretty much have a certain perception of how the PQ looks overall, but once in a while the light seems to hit right and you're hit with a high Tier 1 shot. Color-wise, this is a pretty subdued presentation aimed at, IMO, the subject matter. Blacks are stable with a somewhat average contrast. Some scenes do go the other way and gets a bit on the hot side.

Facial details are above average and some hitting High Gold quality. Grain is moderate at times, but not too distracting. Skin tones are faithful and some of the scenes do offer good depth, specially medium shots. One thing to note are the numerous instances of ringing. However, I didn't find them too distracting. Shadow details are also well-rendered.

All in all, this just gets into Tier Silver for me.

Tier Recommendation: 2.25

Not a huge Sandler fan, but did like this one. There are lots of funny moments. The pacing is deliberate and is a tad long for this genre.

ln46a650 - 1080p/24 - 8'

I watched this again a few nights ago with friends. It's a great looking BD with amazing detail. Some may confuse the sun-drenched/bleached look of some scenes with boosted contrast but that was the same look it had in the theater. It's ranking in Tier 0 seems appropriate.

I don't know that it got softer - there just weren't as many closeup shots since they were all older and it would've really shown their makeup.

Good movie, very odd. But that's Kaufman for you I still think it's mid to top tier Gold.

I don't know if there is confusion. If there is sun-drenched/bleached look that is bothersome enough to detract from an otherwise excellent PQ, it's really irrelevant (for the purposes of this thread) where it came from - the master, the transfer, encode, post-prod tweaking, etc. So, if anything those shouldn't get a pass just because it's faithful to the intent.

I, for one, didn't find it all too distracting and was on the fence between 0 and 1. And for me, when that is the case, I would 99.99% vote for Tier 1. Because if it is tier 0, it would have screamed that and I wouldn't be in the fence in the first place.

Wow - my experience with this disc was so unlike your review and that of djoberg. I was so disappointed with this special edition BD that I recently sold it on eBay, it was that bad. The overall look was soft with ho-hum blacks. My rating would be to bury it in Tier 3 somewhere, but because my opinion so different from what others are saying I am really confused as to what the problem was on my system, so I will not rate it. By contrast I just re-watched The International and it was razor sharp so the cause of the problem with 2012 is puzzling.

Sorry, I didn't mean to imply that there is confusion. The scenes mentioned are too brief to affect my overall rating.

Is there a mechanism to move titles down or out of Tier 0? I know the original placement is based on an average of impressions.

The mechanism would be for more people to review it, and/or for people who have reviewed it in the past to revise their viewpoints on it, and for the results of said reviews to be different from it's placement on the list. Things have moved around a lot on the list; IIRC for example, both Kill Bill's used to be in Tier 0 until more reviews & revised opinions were added.

In my review I did say that some of the movie was *average* (because of crushed blacks and some flat scenes lacking detail and depth), which would indeed put it in Tier 3. But I also experienced some very sharp scenes, like the one I alluded to where John Cusack arrives in Yellowstone with his children. That was quite sharp with amazing detail and depth. The disaster scenes were also impressive to me, as were a few others. So, in making my placement recommendation I had to weigh these differences and come up with an average, which, to my eyes, was around the 2.0 mark.

Let me just say that if you didn't see *any* sharp scenes with impressive detail and depth, there was either something wrong with the disc, your display, or your eyes. I hope it's not the latter!

Let's just say it was my (former) disc and leave it at that. It would have been a shame if the movie itself wasn't such a dud. Glad I was able to sell it for what I paid.

Flame And Citron (UK import)

recommendation: Tier 1.75

An entertaining movie from 2008 about the Danish Resistance in World War II in the vein of Inglourious Basterds, the British distributor Metrodome gave Flame & Citron a region-free Blu-ray release on June 29, 2009. The 135-minute film is encoded in AVC on a BD-25. BDInfo calculates the average video bitrate as 17.97 Mbps. Two significant problems prevent me from ranking the BD higher in tier one, where it probably belongs. It still easily qualifies for inclusion at the bottom of tier one with them, and less picky viewers might be inclined for a slightly higher placement.

The first significant problem which lowers my assessment of the picture quality is the inadequate compression, which produces visible posterization in multiple scenes. Fitting a movie of this length, on a BD-25, was a disastrous decision by Metrodome. The only thing that mitigates the problem is the relative lack of grain for a movie shot on film. The best detail in shadows and darkened scenes are affected, to a minor degree. There are no major instances of macroblocking, but several instances of noise in the transitions between lighted and dark shots are apparent. But the vast majority of the movie is well-lit, and high-frequency information is not affected at all in those scenes. The compression is really the lesser of two evils in the transfer, as it only visibly affects a handful of frames.

The master used for this BD shows absolutely no sign of detail-robbing post-processing, like the use of digital noise reduction. Production standards look very high and indistinguishable from any big-budget Hollywood production, which leads to a level of astonishing clarity in most scenes. But the transfer does not escape from the negatives of edge enhancement. The persistent ringing produces intrusive halos throughout much of the movie. That is the main reason for this fine-looking Blu-ray to be placed a fair distance from where it rightfully should sit in the tiers. A touch of aliasing is also evident in spots.

Contrast is impeccable in a film that favors the darker shades of blue and gray on the streets of Copenhagen. The image is razor-sharp and demonstrates incredible amounts of detail and definition. It has an appreciable sense of dimensionality and pop, though not in comparison to the best Blu-rays. Many of the close-ups are worthy of being called reference-caliber in the general clarity and resolution frequently shown. Flesh-tones are pleasingly natural and neutral in color. As briefly mentioned before, shadows are not finely resolved as the better examples in tier one. Black levels display consistency in their dark uniformity and are generally as inky as each scene demands. Much of the picture quality recalls the best-looking scenes from Public Enemies for some reason in my mind. The period setting of the film possibly gave me that idea.

At first my inclination was to rank Flame & Citron in the middle of tier one. A majority of the movie probably deserves that assessment for its excellence. The thick ringing at times degraded the pristine picture enough to lower my final score to the bottom quarter of tier one. It still pleases the eye though, and many viewers are likely to overlook the halos.

Watching on a 60 Pioneer KURO plasma at 1080p/24, fed by a 60 GB PS3 (firmware 3.15) from a viewing distance of six feet.

I picked this up for under $20 last week and I wished I had rented it. Having said that, I still thought it was worth watching (when one suspends their disbelief and goes along for the ride) and I may just use it to demo some of the disaster scenes for friends. The PQ and AQ are quite good in these, IMHO.

Without even looking at where 9 is at, I'll just say that I watched it recently and I would not even consider it for Tier 0. Personally, I would not even make any comparisons to ABL, I was totally disappointed with it. I think of it a lot like "The Wild", where characters were well defined, though much better in The Wild than in 9. But in both movies, backgrounds were very poor, imo, almost to a point of distractingly poor.

I'd probably place 9 a good bit lower based solely upon the content. I don't think The Wild belongs where it's at but it has some very compelling facials that keep my mouth shut about it.

On a side note, I thought both movies positively sucked. I gave both 1's on Netflix, and it's a shame they don't have a 0.

Phantom, thanks for another interesting review. There are so many titles you have reviewed I never even heard of, yet I welcome viewing them someday. A search of your posts would be an excellent way for many to check out the wealth of films you have seen and reviewed the many of which aren't the typical Hollywood releases. I think we are very fortunate to have you in this thread and participating the way you do.


Thanks again,

Hugh

Thank you for the compliment. Many here would probably like Flame & Citron, if they have no problems with subtitles. Almost of the imports I interject into this thread are blind purchases, aside from brief plot synopses. Since many of them have little discussion as to their Blu-ray quality, I do my part to give them a little feedback. A search in this thread of "phantom import" would likely produce the placements of mine you mention.

If you like diverse selections, wait for my next review coming up of Shigurui: Death Frenzy, a brutal anime series. The more eclectic selections need a little attention on occasion.

I am really enjoying this PQ thread. I am on the verge of building a decent HT in a new house. So, I want the very best to demo to my wife.

The consensus is that I, Robot and the PotC trilogy have the best PQ for real movies? Not animation of course. Are they the sharpest, clearest looking?

I'm glad. Since I already own them and a few of the animation as well. Looking forward to seeing what a good calibrated system looks like.

To Be or Not to Be

It is amazing how wildly different movies in the same collection can look, and I'm not just basing that on film stocks. Where History of the World and Twelve Chairs have their grain retained in the Mel Brooks Collection, To Be or Not to Be shows some clear signs of hastily applied DNR. Pink flesh tones, unnatural (and digital) grain structure, and waxy faces are problems throughout.

Intentional blooming is utilized regularly, further eliminating any detail or sharpness. Some stock footage looks as expected. Black levels are fine.

Tier 3.75

It's good to read that you're enjoying the thread! And congratulations on the HT being built....we'll look forward to seeing some reviews from you.

The titles you mentioned are topnotch, but I would add Prince Caspian, Live Free and Die Hard, Transporter 2 & 3, and Baraka to the list, to name a few. In fact, any titles you see listed in Tier 0 have the best PQ.

And I would definitely use the animated titles to WOW your wife as well. They are at the top of the list for a good reason.

Don't place too much faith in where something falls in the thread. At least not to the point of saying, Tier 0 is X% better than anything else. Down through Tier 1, it's a fine line and there is plenty of differing opinions that titles there belong higher, titles in 0 belong lower. It's a democratic arrival at a livable compromise. Many titles with lower ranking may just not be as consistent as those above it. Since you have I-Robot and PotC, they're good choices. Give them a shot for sure.

All the titles in Tier1 and 0 look pretty amazing.

yeah i have a hard time seeing how "man on fire" looks better than "the international," even though it's higher on the list. and likewise i must say that i don't really understand why so many animated flicks are at the top. IMO, animated is already a *fake* reality if you will, so the crispness of animation doesn't really make the quality of the blu-ray look better to me, it just makes me think the animation is better. BUT, i've never been a huge animated-movie watcher either. i think seeing real life people on screen depicts image quality more than artificial images do.

i also personally don't find "a bug's life" impressive any whatsoever as far as PQ goes, even in comparison to other animated films. why it's unanimously on the top, i'll never know. i think there needs to be kind of a "dummy that doesn't know anything about blu-ray" tier list, because i know a little bit about blu-ray and of all the movies i've seen, "a bug's life" was certainly not memorable as far as PQ goes, and i think that's important. "the international" is probably the best PQ i have personally seen, and i would put "iron man" up there as well. i own "man on fire" and "live free or die hard" and both are in the top tier and i didn't really think they were all that spectacular in quality (read: not memorable); "live free" was way too dark of a movie. i haven't seen "i, robot" or the "pirate's" movies on blu-ray yet (seen them once, don't really care to see again), so am not sure if they would be *memorable* either.

Your post serves to illustrate what we have been saying on this thread since its inception...WE ALL HAVE OUR OWN PERSONAL OPINIONS! But a title is placed according to a consensus that has been formed and like it or not, one must respect the opinions of others, even if you don't agree with them.

Regarding animated films, I continue to stand in awe of the progress that has been made in today's best titles. The detail, depth and color of titles such as Kung Fu Panda, Coraline, Monsters, Inc., et al. are unparalleled compared to titles in the early days of animation. And this most certainly includes the title at the top of the heap (i.e., A Bug's Life). The Blu-ray format enables these amazing advancements to be seen in all their splendor.

As the thread's token woman, I would have to say if your wife is anything like the masses out there, Twilight, Harry Potter 6, or, IMHO, MAMMA MIA are great ones to help show off to a woman to wow them on home theatre.

I know, I know... sucking it up and being forced to watch Twilight is a special sort of torture for most men out there, but I still think if they had released Twilight last year on Blu Ray only for the first week, or had special features available ONLY on Blu Ray, there would have been millions of women out there "forcing" their husbands to upgrade their home theatres.


If her tastes are more classical than mainstream, I would suggest Sleeping Beauty (people can say what they want about whether or not Sleeping Beauty belongs in Tier 0, no matter what it's a gorgeous restoration that has been meticulously done and can still help showcase just how much better Blu is to DVD) and Becoming Jane. Also, while I have not reviewed it for the thread yet, the restoration work they did on the 1995 Colin Firth edition of the BBC Pride and Prejudice, is positively STUNNING; in the general terms of the PQ thread, it *might* hit Tier 2.75 when I do a formal review, but the previous versions on DVD are just so positively horrendous in comparison, anyone who is a fan of this classic series will appreciate the work that has been done to it.


Take it for what you will, I just offer these words of advice as a woman and the type of thing that I've suggested to other women that have helped sell them on "letting" their husbands upgrade to Blu Ray. The #1 movie that has helped me on this score is Sleeping Beauty, followed by Twilight and 1995 Pride & Prejudice.


Edited to add, and if she's a sci-fi fan at all... STAR TREK 2009.

my experiences with people watching animated blu-ray on my tv is that "yeah it looks good, but it's hard to tell that it's good blu-ray quality and not just good animation." that's all i'm trying to say. i don't see how that isn't a more universal opinion.

Thank you GGG! I appreciate your feedback. I already own most of these Blu-Rays, so it makes it much easier on my part.

And thank god, my wife read book 1 of the twilight series and threw it away! She certainly does like a few chic flicks, but I have been spared the worst. She really isn't interested in Sci-Fi, but watches with me anyway. So I reciprocate.

I am waiting on the Harry Potter series to all be out on Blu-ray before I even start. Just snatch the set when it's available. I already made that mistake on DVD. I really want to wow her with Elton John. I've never seen it, but most reviews are very good. Too bad there isn't any Sarah McLachlan Blu-Ray. That would sell her 110%

Man of Fire (and Domino) are awesome Blu-rays. They have great contrast and intact grain with tons of detail. They are also very consistent, which is one thing that I personally look for in Tier 0 titles. There are plenty of titles that have Tier 0 shots and scenes in them but are not in that tier because they have no consistency. Two notable examples are Apocalypto and District 9. I dare someone to find better (non-CG) demo material than parts of those movies, but other parts were pedestrian. I, Robot, another very quality and consistent transfer for a crappy movie, at that, lol.

I agree with A Bug's Life, though. As well as the fact that there are too damn many CG movies in Tier 0. I said it a few months ago but that Tier should be split! Also, we are using different criteria to judge these movies than the live action ones. We are arguing over the source rendering since every one of these transfers is perfect digital-to-digital

Up in the Air

I'll admit I'm the type that immediately zones in on facial details, and disc that does that well will win me over. That's Up in the Air.

Simply awesome high fidelity detail going on here. An interview with J.K. Simmons is the highlights, amazingly well rendered with a natural grain structure, bright contrast, deep blacks, and every single possible pore visible. This holds in the mid-range too. Environments are equally impressive at times.

Colors are mostly cool but still saturated. Some pretty bold primaries. A few scenes show some inconsistency, enough to drop this slightly. Softness and very minimal ringing are frustrating, but ever so minor. Some may find the thick grain over the credits bothersome as well, but it clears up for the rest of the film into a more natural state.

Tier 1.0

This is good feedback we are getting on A Bug's Life. It will be knocked down from the top spot posthaste in the next update, unless someone rises to defend its honor. That naturally leads to the next question...what is the best Blu-ray? Which BD deserves the right to sit atop the tiers? Suggestions would be appreciated, or I might just move 28 Days Later to the top. My personal preference would be Cars or Ratatouille, but in the end the decision is left up to everyone.

seriously, whoever is in charge of making the good blu-ray discs should teach their trade to someone with a better taste in movies. hell, noone has even made a blu-ray version of one of my favorite movies ever: SNEAKERS!!

Thanks, sounds good and looking forward to it tonight. Netflix was kind!