I thought the movie was even worse than the picture quality. The visuals and sets look amazing, but it's basically Dawson's Creek in China with even more plot holes.
It is definitely better than the DVD. It is soft and there is noise in some areas as well as contrast issues. Overall, it's the best version of the film you can own. If you can find it for $12 or so (or through the Best Buy deal) I think it's worth it.
It is definitely better than the DVD. It is soft and there is noise in some areas as well as contrast issues. Overall, it's the best version of the film you can own. If you can find it for $12 or so (or through the Best Buy deal) I think it's worth it.
I agree with that. The video is certainly better than the DVD, and the audio is outstanding. The uncompressed PCM is well worth the price of admission.
I have the uncut import out of Hong Kong with DTS-ES 6.1 surround track, and it has picture issues too. You'd think being an Asian film from a large Asian distributor it would be from the best sources... well, you'd be wrong!
However, some of the problems are not only the poor interpositive used, but a bad authoring job as well.
Even if Sony did a bang up re-mastered version I'd still pass until the original cut was released in the States.
I don't think its as bad some make it out to be. Some of the movie can be quite stunning but most of the scenes that take place in the fog don't fare so well but like the other posters stated the PCM is reason enough alone for this one. If you liked the DVD this IS the best version available regardless of its faults.
On a Sunday last June, I saw POTO in HD DVD. I thought, well, Blu-ray will be good, but can it really be any better than this?
On the following Thursday night, I saw a good part of HOFD. I was physically ill and disoriented. The PQ was TERRIBLE. I could not believe that Sony would present such quality in their Blu-ray launch titles.
I went to a video store and rented HOFD and took it home to check out the DVD against my memory. In some ways, the DVD actually looked better I thought. It was more consistent.
It was some weeks before I saw the Samsung demo disk and realized that Blu-ray was probably not the problem. It was about two months before the Warners disks confirmed that Blu-ray (and the Samsung player) was capable of good results.
For many people, this was a defining moment in the format war. I think that a lot of the "better PQ for HD DVD" statements we hear today come from those early Sony titles.
To be fair, I am planning on renting the title and checking it out on my own system again. I suspect that my reaction was colored by the fact that I was really expecting a demonstration piece and got something else. I also think that many of these issues are actually about the source material rather than the transfer, encode, or format.
I don't know. I have the Edko DTS ES 6.1 and that was pretty awesome. Best use of rear channels (not side surrounds) that I have ever heard. I am somewhat disappointed that Blu-ray is only 5.1 PCM. I am doubly disappointed that I can't even make use of this with my current PS3 setup.
The Sony BD is digitally censored to erase blood. This destroys the key moment in the film. It's truly sad that Sony did this all for a stupid PG-13 rating.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt_Stevens /forum/post/0
The Sony BD is digitally censored to erase blood. This destroys the key moment in the film. It's truly sad that Sony did this all for a stupid PG-13 rating.
To be fair this is mostly due to the source material. If you've seen any of the HD broadcasts of the film you'll know this. This isn't a great looking movie to begin with.
Sony's biggest mistake was in choosing this as one of their launch titles. Its not a movie that you would ever want to use to show off HD.
I HD DVRed it off of Starz and and I disagree. The BD does look terrible, but everytime I read on AVS about HOFD looking bad I take exception and feel the need to disagree. I can tell you it looks excellent on the Starz broadcast. I have FIOS cable and I know my HD pic quality is better than when I had Direct tv. The movie is soft in general and softer in some areas more than others, but overall the colors and detail are stunning. The opening scene with the dance and drums are amazing looking. I have also downloaded the trailers off of the PS store onto my PS3 and they looked like crap there too, almost half the quality of the Starz broadcast. I would like to see a good transfer of this.
I picked this up today along with Kung Fu hustle as the BB freebie. I have not seen the domestic DVD but I have seen multiple import versions. None of the DVD releases I've seen are stellar. The BD does over slight PQ improvement IMO, very slight however (the best scenes are quite Taladega Nights-ish). The BD would rate as only a mediocre DVD and therefore is a quite poor BD in my book. For me, the uncompressed PCM (along with the FREE offer) is what pushed me over the edge. The PCM track does not dissapoint!
I am still up in the air about whether or not to buy this on BD. I own the dvd version already. I love the movie and audio is important. But, if it is actually worse PQ than the dvd version I think I will pass. There seems to be some disagreement on this point. So can I have some more opinions from people who have viewed both?
A lot of these asian martial arts imports wouldn't be viable economically for theatrical release in the US if they didn't tone it down to PG-13. It simply cuts off too much of what would otherwise be an interested audience.
I like purity in filmmaking, but for that, you get the original.
Frankly I think it's a net positive for the industry that we get these titles in our theatres at all (whether toned down or not), such that a greater set of people are 'exposed' to this style/subset of film - of which I personally am a big fan of.
By the way, I bought the BD myself today at Best Buy; glad I did.
I have to caution you as I could be totally delusional. I have Kingdom of Heaven on BD and asked my kids what they thought. They said it looks really good, better than HD broadcasts of varying movies that I thought looked good. I guess although I know KOH looks really good, I was so used to the look and/or quality of movies on my HD FIOS cable taking up the whole screen, BD didn't looked as good. I do like OAR though, so..who knows.
I was referring to #12 who said that in some ways it was worse than the dvd transfer, and some other post that said the BD version would rate only as a mediocre dvd transfer. I know they are in the minority so far in this thread, but I wanted to make sure.
Yes. the Blu-Ray version would not fall under even a mediocre SD-DVD transfer when viewed side by side with any tier 0,1 and 2 SD-DVD on a 100 inch screen... I cannot believe how terrible the transfer was.. It needs Lucasfilms people who re-did Star Wars to work to get rid of the grain and washed out look this film has....Not worth it even if it is free...
Got it for free and I still think it is not worth it. Looks worse than some of the SD I have seen.
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Related Threads
?
?
?
?
?
AVS Forum
34M posts
1.5M members
Since 1999
A forum community dedicated to home theater owners and enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about home audio/video, TVs, projectors, screens, receivers, speakers, projects, DIY’s, product reviews, accessories, classifieds, and more!