AVS › AVS Forum › Blu-ray & HD DVD › Blu-ray Software › Buena Vista's and others latest round is unimpressive. (Mini review)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Buena Vista's and others latest round is unimpressive. (Mini review) - Page 2

post #31 of 64
1/14/08 at 10:43am
Thread Starter 
I hope the person who insulted me pubically, and thus my emotional reply to them, was also penialized.
Reply
Reply

AVS Top Picks

post #32 of 64
1/14/08 at 10:51am
Quote:
Originally Posted by b.greenway View Post

You'll choke on those words when you see the remastered Bond's.

If you're referring to the remastered SD-DVDs, I completely agree. My jaw dropped when I watched Goldfinger (one of my favorites). Even though the movie is like 40 years old, it looked and sounded beautiful. They did an extremely good job, and can only hope that a transfer to HD is done as painstakingly and cleanly.
Reply
Reply
post #33 of 64
1/14/08 at 10:59am
Quote:
Originally Posted by b.greenway View Post

You'll choke on those words when you see the remastered Bond's.

Hey man, I hope so! I guess my point is, to my eye even the best of the older movies, like Blade Runner, don't look as good as say, Pirates of the Caribbean.

And really, I'm not expecting them to. I'm just pointing out to the OP that, with older movies, I lower my expectations a bit. I say things like "Wow, for an older release this looks fantastic!"

Hopefully I will "choke on my words" as you say when more older movies come out.
Reply
Reply
post #34 of 64
1/14/08 at 11:22am
Didn't the Bond films go through the LOWRY 4k digital scan clean up?
Reply
Reply
post #35 of 64
1/14/08 at 1:30pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pixelsmack View Post

I hope the person who insulted me pubically, and thus my emotional reply to them, was also penialized.

LOL
Reply
Reply
post #36 of 64
1/14/08 at 3:45pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pixelsmack View Post

I hope the person who insulted me pubically, and thus my emotional reply to them, was also penialized.

Pubically insulted and penialized?
Reply
Reply
post #37 of 64
1/14/08 at 3:48pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pixelsmack View Post

I hope the person who insulted me pubically, and thus my emotional reply to them, was also penialized.

Yeah, I didn't really want to touch that one. There are times when spell-check is a nice feature, and then there are times when it's absolutely crucial.
Reply
Reply
post #38 of 64
1/14/08 at 4:12pm
I think the OP needs to ANALyze the situation.
Reply
Reply
post #39 of 64
1/14/08 at 4:15pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by GamerGuyX View Post

I think the OP needs to ANALyze the situation.

I actually groaned out loud at this.
Reply
Reply
post #40 of 64
1/14/08 at 5:28pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by cdhender View Post

Dude these movies are OLD. They're not gonna have that POP you're looking for. Not every movie can be like Pirates of the Caribbean. Might as well accept it now.

By the way, there are plenty of brand new movies that look like total garbage. For ex I watched '28 Weeks Later' last night. Looked downright average. You'd think the movie was 10 years old or something.

wow, I totally disagree, I thought 28 Weeks Later looked great.
Reply
Reply
post #41 of 64
1/14/08 at 5:46pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by lgans316 View Post

Shoot Em Up may be immaculate but waxy DNR-ed PL ain't.

The movie sucked.
Reply
Reply
post #42 of 64
1/14/08 at 6:05pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pixelsmack View Post

As you see I quickly saw that folks over at the duplication center merely threw in the master, hit play, record and walked off for a coffee break.

I can't stop laughing at this line.
Reply
Reply
post #43 of 64
1/14/08 at 9:54pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by wormraper View Post

a review is fine if you get facts straight and you understand the history of the film. Otherwise just say "I didn't like it cuz....". You made it sound like the studios did a bad job transferring the movie. The only way you can know that is if you know how the film was shot and what directorial intent was utilized on said film.

GOD! I'm not used to seeing this kind of response, and so quickly. Thank you so much! It's nice to know there's still hope for the human race !
Reply
Reply
post #44 of 64
1/14/08 at 9:57pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by cdhender View Post

Dude these movies are OLD. They're not gonna have that POP you're looking for. Not every movie can be like Pirates of the Caribbean. Might as well accept it now.

By the way, there are plenty of brand new movies that look like total garbage. For ex I watched '28 Weeks Later' last night. Looked downright average. You'd think the movie was 10 years old or something.

Good film though -- looked great to me !
Reply
Reply
post #45 of 64
1/14/08 at 9:58pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by wormraper View Post

that was because they shot it on a camcorder that only allowed I believe a 720x526 resolution on it. Directors intent.

Wasn't that '28 Days later'?
Reply
Reply
post #46 of 64
1/14/08 at 9:59pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by GamerGuyX View Post

Sudden Death. But wait, that wasn't directed by McTiernan.

I enjoy that film though!
Reply
Reply
post #47 of 64
1/14/08 at 10:08pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by cdhender View Post

I'm talking about the sequel, 28 Weeks Later. It's gotten average reviews in PQ from places like high def digest ( see http://bluray.highdefdigest.com/842/28weekslater.html ) and I agree with those reviews.

I know it's a dark movie and all, but I would think movies released in the last year would look better than this one does. I was disappointed.

You need to stop concerning yourself with your expectations of how a movie "should" look, and simply allow a film to look as it does. Until you do that, you will have difficulty enjoying films period!

The directors are not in any sense beholden to you and your expectations. The film on the disc you pick up and choose to play is an artistic event! You are being given the opportunity to enjoy the event just as the director originally designed it. If you decide it ultimately doesn't meet your "standards", then kindly recognize the fault is with your expectations, not the film or transfer!
Reply
Reply
post #48 of 64
1/14/08 at 10:34pm
To me 28 Weeks Later looked excellent though not reference by any means. We need to consider the the movie has mixed usage of film stocks.
Reply
Reply
post #49 of 64
1/14/08 at 10:54pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by TrevorS View Post

You need to stop concerning yourself with your expectations of how a movie "should" look, and simply allow a film to look as it does. Until you do that, you will have difficulty enjoying films period!

The directors are not in any sense beholden to you and your expectations. The film on the disc you pick up and choose to play is an artistic event! You are being given the opportunity to enjoy the event just as the director originally designed it. If you decide it ultimately doesn't meet your "standards", then kindly recognize the fault is with your expectations, not the film or transfer!


+1
Reply
Reply
post #50 of 64
1/14/08 at 11:51pm
Perhaps the fact that these titles are Disney's first pre-2000 releases other than Enemy of the State (if I'm not mistaken) has something to do with it.
Reply
Reply
post #51 of 64
1/15/08 at 5:58am
Quote:
Originally Posted by SirDrexl View Post

Perhaps the fact that these titles are Disney's first pre-2000 releases other than Enemy of the State (if I'm not mistaken) has something to do with it.

I would guess not. It may have to do with the unreasonably expectation that every film will be remastered before getting encoded to Blu-ray.
Reply
Reply
post #52 of 64
1/15/08 at 6:54am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pixelsmack View Post

I hope the person who insulted me pubically, and thus my emotional reply to them, was also penialized.

Cant you just delete this thread? Rather than suffer through all these negative responses.
Reply
Reply
post #53 of 64
1/27/08 at 1:46am
Con Air looked excellent on my setup. I thought my plasma caught on fire and Nick Cage jumped out of it!
Reply
Reply
post #54 of 64
1/27/08 at 10:50am
What I'm most impressed with is people who actually remembers how Die Hard looked 20 years ago in a theater.http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/image...s/rolleyes.gif
Reply
Reply
post #55 of 64
1/27/08 at 11:32am
Quote:
Originally Posted by TrevorS View Post

You need to stop concerning yourself with your expectations of how a movie "should" look, and simply allow a film to look as it does. Until you do that, you will have difficulty enjoying films period!

The directors are not in any sense beholden to you and your expectations. The film on the disc you pick up and choose to play is an artistic event! You are being given the opportunity to enjoy the event just as the director originally designed it. If you decide it ultimately doesn't meet your "standards", then kindly recognize the fault is with your expectations, not the film or transfer!

I didn't like the way the movie looked. Whether it was the directors intent or not, I don't know.

I love how people feel personally insulted if others don't agree with them. I mean please, I didn't like the way it looked. Get over it

Edit: By the way, it's not like I'm talking out of my *** here. Just read the review from high def digest. They gave it 3.5 stars out of 5. Sounds pretty average to me.
Reply
Reply
post #56 of 64
1/27/08 at 3:07pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by cdhender View Post

I'm talking about the sequel, 28 Weeks Later. It's gotten average reviews in PQ from places like high def digest ( see http://bluray.highdefdigest.com/842/28weekslater.html ) and I agree with those reviews.

I know it's a dark movie and all, but I would think movies released in the last year would look better than this one does. I was disappointed.

28 Weeks Later was shot on 16mm, 35mm, and HD camcorders, the inconsitent picture was intended from the director.
Reply
Reply
post #57 of 64
1/27/08 at 3:12pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by TrevorS View Post

You need to stop concerning yourself with your expectations of how a movie "should" look, and simply allow a film to look as it does. Until you do that, you will have difficulty enjoying films period!

The directors are not in any sense beholden to you and your expectations. The film on the disc you pick up and choose to play is an artistic event! You are being given the opportunity to enjoy the event just as the director originally designed it. If you decide it ultimately doesn't meet your "standards", then kindly recognize the fault is with your expectations, not the film or transfer!

Couldn't agree more. There is a difference between bad transfer and directors intent and clearly 28 Weeks Later on Blu-ray is the latter.
Reply
Reply
post #58 of 64
1/27/08 at 4:12pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by FarewellToArms View Post

Couldn't agree more. There is a difference between bad transfer and directors intent and clearly 28 Weeks Later on Blu-ray is the latter.

How exactly is it clear? I'm interested to know this. How does everyone know what the director intended? Did 28 Weeks Later look this average in theaters or something?
Reply
Reply
post #59 of 64
1/27/08 at 5:28pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by cdhender View Post

How exactly is it clear? I'm interested to know this. How does everyone know what the director intended? Did 28 Weeks Later look this average in theaters or something?

Yes a theatrical showing is the best way to determine how a film is intended to look. Also you should try to listen to the director's commentary every once in awhile. Many times it goes into great detail into the film making process for a particular movie.

For the record: I also think Con Air looks amazing! Especially considering the source material. Not everything is going to look like Crank.
Reply
Reply
post #60 of 64
1/27/08 at 6:38pm
Quote:


You'll choke on those words when you see the remastered Bond's.

DR. No. Completely changed my opinion of what was possible with older films. There is a scene near the beginning where Bond gets out of a car on a busy street and all I could think was "God this could have been a well done period piece shot this year".

Big, big thumbs up for the crew that did the clean up and transfer work. Truly top notch.
Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Blu-ray Software

AVS Top Picks

AVS › AVS Forum › Blu-ray & HD DVD › Blu-ray Software › Buena Vista's and others latest round is unimpressive. (Mini review)