Blu-ray News and Deals

[Gruesome Son of a Bitch 6,489]

The "flaws" like grain/speckles/scratches make it look more film-like.

I still stop A.I. during the scene where the guy is explaining that they can bring back humans for a day with the teddy bear's 2,000 year-old hair clipping since that's exactly what occurred during my screening on opening day. It not only feels more authentic, but since the ending just keeps getting worse and worse anyway...

[Dixon Hill 4,234]

Idiot!

[filmmusic 1,848]

Duel review:

http://www.blu-ray.com/movies/Duel-Blu-ray/56551/#Review

The 1.85:1 aspect ratio of Universal's Blu-ray of Duel will no doubt be a source of controversy, since it could be fairly argued that the film's original aspect ratio should be 1.33:1, which was its format on DVD. Then again, the OAR of this version of Duel, which was created for theatrical exhibition, was arguably 1.85:1; so it could also be said that the Blu-ray's presentation corrects the DVD's error. Spielberg was involved to at least some extent in the creation of the widescreen version, as evidenced by his shooting of the additional scenes and his reference in various interviews (including the "Conversation" in this disc's extras) to discovering that opening up the frame in some of the shots revealed that he was in the back seat of the car giving direction to Dennis Weaver. In a perfect world, two versions of Duel would be included, the 74-minute broadcast version framed at 1.33:1 and the 90-minute (technically, 89-minute) version framed at 1.85:1.

Always review:

http://www.blu-ray.com/movies/Always-Blu-ray/42410/#Review

[A24 4,357]

The "flaws" like grain/speckles/scratches make it look more film-like.

No, it makes it look old and damaged.

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

So the solution is to wipe out all evidence that it was photographed on celluloid by applying a digital finish in a revisionist effort to make it appear as though it was captured on a sensor and fart arsed around with in Photoshop?

That's movie magic!

[BloodBoal 7,538]

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

And sometimes, what some industry tech head know-it-alls think is a step forward is actually a step backward.

[BloodBoal 7,538]

[A24 4,357]

So the solution is to wipe out all evidence that it was photographed on celluloid by applying a digital finish in a revisionist effort to make it appear as though it was captured on a sensor and fart arsed around with in Photoshop?

That's movie magic!

The idea of 'restoring' it to bring something back to its original state. Yes, sometimes they erase flaws like a shadow of a camera, or a reflection of Indiana Jones, or a stunt double's face ... but mainly what you'll get is a version of a film that looks exactly how it looked during the original premiere. In a way, nostalgists (at least those who attended a film during the first week or two) have nothing to complain about.

Alex

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

So the solution is to wipe out all evidence that it was photographed on celluloid by applying a digital finish in a revisionist effort to make it appear as though it was captured on a sensor and fart arsed around with in Photoshop?

That's movie magic!

The idea of 'restoring' it to bring something back to its original state. Yes, sometimes they erase flaws like a shadow of a camera, or a reflection of Indiana Jones, or a stunt double's face ... but mainly what you'll get is a version of a film that looks exactly how it looked during the original premiere. In a way, notalgists (at least those who attended a film during the first week or two) have nothing to complain about.

Alex

Aside from the face replacements, that's all a restoration should be. But some films don't even get that, they just pull out and old master, slather it with DNR and release it for Joe Shmo to admire how smooth it looks on his HD panel.

[A24 4,357]

Yes, some films, some directors ... but not all.

[Marian Schedenig 8,237]

The "flaws" like grain/speckles/scratches make it look more film-like.

And the crackling of an LP makes the music sound more record like. Hence, all releases of classic soundtracks should be based on the master LPs.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

All classic score re-releases should sound like they were from an LP that was dragged along a gravel pavement.

All classic film re-releases should look like they scratched and faded prints of a popular movie after it's ran in the cinema for 3 months!

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

Ideally it should look like a new 35mm print.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

But what if the original film was shot on poor quality stock?

[A24 4,357]

How does the Blu-ray of Close Encounters Of The Third Kind look like? That was shot on bad quality film stock, I believe. In the beginning the print should've looked fine, it's only after a while when it started to disintegrate. In theory, of all Spielberg's movies, CE3K should look the worst.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

There's a thread about it on FSM. Appartently the blu looks dissapointing.

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

But what if the original film was shot on poor quality stock?

I'll make an exception there. Grain, specks, photochemical finish. It's beautiful!

[Gruesome Son of a Bitch 6,489]

Close Encounters looks awesome on Blu-ray!

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

There's a thread about it on FSM. Appartently the blu looks dissapointing.

I'm pleased with it.

[A24 4,357]

I don't trust you two. You love it when it looks deteriorated.

Nah, if FSM says it looks bad, then it looks bad.

Edit: Reviews says it actually looks good except for the FXs shots.

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

They look fine.

[Marian Schedenig 8,237]

How does the Blu-ray of Close Encounters Of The Third Kind look like? That was shot on bad quality film stock, I believe. In the beginning the print should've looked fine, it's only after a while when it started to disintegrate. In theory, of all Spielberg's movies, CE3K should look the worst.

Weren't the picture quality problems only due to multiple SFX passes which amped the grain? When I watched the existing Blu-ray, it looked fine though - but it was several years ago and one of my first Blus, so perhaps I was still lacking proper references.

[A24 4,357]

When it came out on DVD I remember that I was disappointed with the picture in general. I know Spielberg has used inferior film stock so I assumed it was during CE3K.

[filmmusic 1,848]

For anyone into Hitchcock this is the lowest i have seen this box!!

http://www.blu-ray.com/movies/Alfred-Hitchcock-The-Masterpiece-Collection-Blu-ray/52175/

27,80 English pounds for 14 films!!!

(region free as I read)

[filmmusic 1,848]

DUEL DVD vs Bluray comparisons:

http://caps-a-holic.com/hd_vergleiche/multi_comparison.php?disc1=4880&disc2=4881&hd_multiID=1993#auswahl

Just pick a picture and click " 1920x1080 Fullscreen Comparison"

[Mr. Breathmask 555]

That's Die Hard.

Duel is over here though.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Same width!

[filmmusic 1,848]

That's Die Hard.

Duel is over here though.

Oops. Corrected it!

Same width!

No it's not always.

See here:

http://caps-a-holic.com/hd_vergleiche/multi_comparison.php?disc1=4880&disc2=4881&cap1=45484&cap2=45496&art=full&image=1&hd_multiID=1993&action=1&lossless=#vergleich

or here which shows more on the left:

http://caps-a-holic.com/hd_vergleiche/multi_comparison.php?disc1=4880&disc2=4881&cap1=45485&cap2=45497&art=full&image=2&hd_multiID=1993&action=1&lossless=#vergleich

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Interesting

[Jay 37,442]

I like the BD framing more than the DVD framing in all those screenshots

[filmmusic 1,848]

I like the BD framing more than the DVD framing in all those screenshots

Maybe because you're used to widescreen films?

[Jay 37,442]

No, because I'm looking at all these screen shots and the wide screen shot looks better composed. The extra material on the top and bottom in the DVD caps are a lot of empty skies or other extraneous information. The BD framing looks natural.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

True.

[filmmusic 1,848]

There are others though that I believe are better in 4:3, and compliment the size of the truck.

second pair of screenshots here:

http://www.dvdbeaver.com/film4/blu-ray_reviews_63/duel_blu-ray.htm

[Jay 37,442]

Nah, the BD framing is better in all those screenshots too.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

The widescreen version simply looks more cinematic.

[Jay 37,442]

Yea, I agree

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

Is it necessary for a TV movie to look "cinematic"?

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Remember, Spielberg shot it with both a TV and possible cinema release in mind.

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

Then he should have used a wide squishy Panavision lens, pan and scanned it for TV, and released it wide for the cinema!

[filmmusic 1,848]

Remember, Spielberg shot it with both a TV and possible cinema release in mind.

are we sure about it?

Maybe the thoughts of a cinema release came after the success of the film on TV, and noone had ever thought of releasing it at the cinema at the time of shooting?

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

According to Steven Awalts book....

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

Nobody reads books anymore. We need an online citation!

[Jay 37,442]

We also still don't know if the DVD features the exact same framing as the original TV airing.

[fommes 154]

We also still don't know if the DVD features the exact same framing as the original TV airing.

The few shots I compared do have the same framing.

[filmmusic 1,848]

SUGARLAND EXPRESS review:

http://www.blu-ray.com/movies/The-Sugarland-Express-Blu-ray/56946/#Review

Looks quite good.

Now that I've seen screenshots of all the new films released in this box, I think Always and 1941 are the worst looking.

[filmmusic 1,848]

1941 review:

http://www.blu-ray.com/movies/1941-Blu-ray/42386/

[A24 4,357]

They love the picture quality, filmmusic.

[JoeinAR 1,949]

It was great looking in 79. I've seen it a few times recently and the picture quality was good. I can tolerate the film better than most. It's certainly loud.