2226 replies to this topic

[Harmsway]

The last I purchased was WATCHMEN: THE ULTIMATE CUT. Sadly, the set itself seems like a bit of a fizzle--the extra features are hardly impressive, aside from a hopefully engaging commentary with director Zack Snyder and WATCHMEN co-creator Dave Gibbons--but hopefully the Ultimate Cut itself will be and interesting enough to warrant the purchase.

[00Twelve]

The Rocky Blu-ray collection. From what I've seen so far, only ROCKY BALBOA is a truly essential Blu-ray in terms of picture quality - the older films, while they doubtless look better than ever and just about as good as they're ever going to look, aren't mindblowing on a visual level. Still, as a Rocky fanatic, I'm more than satisfied.

I'd still be obsessed interested to see those colors pop in the final matches of the first two movies. I think the ROCKY II fight might look particularly swell in Blu-ray.

Well, heaven knows I'd never want to put anyone off buying Rocky films, but I gotta say I'm disappointed by what I've seen so far of the Blu-rays (barring ROCKY BALBOA).

I watched about half of ROCKY III yesterday and was struck by what seemed quite a large amount of grain, specks and glitches on the image. It's probably the single least impressive Blu-ray I've ever seen, actually.

It doesn't look as though the older Rocky films have been transferred to Blu-ray with any particular love or attention. Unlike the Bonds, it seems as though they've simply been whacked onto the Blu-ray format without any noticeable mastering into Blu-ray discs that are worthy of the name. Presumably, the Blu-ray consumer will be double-dipped with properly restored versions of the Rocky films on Blu-ray a few years from now, which is what we should have been given in the first place.

Yeah, they're better than the DVD transfers, but the improvements appear pretty marginal. Sadly, I'd recommend people spurn this allegedly super-duper Blu-ray box set and go for the considerably cheaper DVD versions instead.

Thanks for the advice. Preposterous that such a beautiful film got shorted like that (I mean the original, but that sucks about the others, too). I actually don't have anywhere near the necessary resources to make the Blu-ray plunge, so I'm perfectly content with my 2-disc ROCKY, barebones ROCKY II and BALBOA trilogy.

[bondrules]

Not my last, but my next DVD will be Inglorious Basterds.

[Professor Dent]

Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen on Blu-ray.

[DamnCoffee]

Mrs Mharkin just bought me some for christmas.

Batman '89.
The Starship Troopers Trilogy.
The Departed (2 Disc Special Edition)
The Shining (2 Disc Special Edition)
Halloween.
Dead Silence.

[Safari Suit]

The Beast: The Complete Series

[Harmsway]

Yeah, they're better than the DVD transfers, but the improvements appear pretty marginal. Sadly, I'd recommend people spurn this allegedly super-duper Blu-ray box set and go for the considerably cheaper DVD versions instead.

And I imagine many folks will.

Blu-Ray doesn't seem to be the hot format upgrade that DVD was. On CHUD.com, Devin argues that Blu-Ray is the new Laserdisc, that it's a must-have for a certain segment of the population, but not for everyone. At this point, I don't think I'm ever going to make the High-Def upgrade.

[Loomis]

I don't regret buying into Blu-ray. It's been worth it for Bond alone, even though only about half of the 007 titles have been released on the format.

However, I sure as heck have my gripes about Blu-ray. I particularly agree with Devin when he says: "What's really struck me about Blu-Ray is how bad it is for serious movie fans. ... More and more films - marginal films, weird films, unique films - are being left on the sidelines as we chase the hi-def dragon."

But it isn't just The Really Obscure Stuff™ - where, for instance, is LOST IN TRANSLATION on Blu-ray? Or 2046? Or dozens of other titles I could mention that would be wonderful in high definition?

Blu-ray has almost nothing at all to offer fans of "arthouse"/"foreign films"/"world cinema" (silly and irritating expressions, those, but you know what I mean). Oh, sure, the industry seems to consider it terribly important that you can always get the latest Vin Diesel flick or SAW sequel on Blu-ray, but the general availability of titles is appalling.

Also, surprisingly few Blu-rays even look all that incredible. I must have seen thirty or forty films on Blu-ray by now, yet only a handful linger in my mind: the Bonds, APOCALYPTO, BLADE RUNNER, WALTZ WITH BASHIR and, above all, the gold standard in high definition magnificence, BARAKA. With others, though, such as DIE HARD, FULL METAL JACKET, PREDATOR and ROCKY III, I'd have believed I was watching a standard DVD.

And, of course, some films simply don't demand the high definition experience. Standard DVD serves the Balboa saga perfectly well.

[Zorin Industries]

Interesting points there Loomis.

There is probably more visual care in one scene's cinematography in the likes of BASHIR or LOST IN TRANSLATION than there is in the whole of XXX III or TRANSFORMERS 2.

[Loomis]

There is probably more visual care in one scene's cinematography in the likes of BASHIR or LOST IN TRANSLATION than there is in the whole of XXX III or TRANSFORMERS 2.

I couldn't agree more. And I'd also say that there is probably more visual care in one scene's cinematography in QUANTUM OF SOLACE than there is in the whole of XXX III or TRANSFORMERS 2.

But then I believe that the Bonds - while they've always been mocked by some as the very definition of worthless popcorn fodder - have always been made to a much higher standard than most of the action/adventure competition.

[DamnCoffee]

Wait, there's a XXX III!?

[Joe Bond]

Just got my copy of the 50th Anniversary DVD of North by Northwest a day before the release date from Amazon.com and even though I have not seen the whole movie I checked out some of it. I am astonished how good this looks compared to the original DVD that ironically was remastered by Lowry back in 2000 but Warner's $1 million remaster blows that one out of the water. I thought the 2000 DVD looked good but this DVD has a film look to it compared to a somewhat digital look of the old DVD and its apparent that the old DVD was too light. For example, the opening titles in the 2000 DVD had an almost turquoise color for the background but on the new DVD its more green and the transition from the MGM logo to the main titles looks different since the dissolve lingers in white a little bit longer than the old DVD which looks better than the old DVD to my eyes. Anyone who is a fan of this movie must buy this DVD for the video quality itself plus I got it off Amazon.com for $12.49 with free 2-day shipping with the free trial of prime membership. I would assume the Blu-ray looks even better.

[Safari Suit]

Cube Zero
The Descent/Dog Soldiers/28 Days Later (only £3 for a second hand triple pack )

[jwheels]

G.I. Joe: The Rise of Cobra

[mrsbonds_ppk]

Kiss Kiss Bang Bang

[bond 16.05.72]

Public Enemies (Blu ray) and I'm chomping at the bit to get hold of my Heat Blu ray which is released next week, the word is the print is stunning and the soundtrack finally makes that famous gun battle sound incredible.

Unforgiven, Silence of the Lambs & Trick R Treat are on their way to me from Amazon.com.

[JackWade]

Yeah, they're better than the DVD transfers, but the improvements appear pretty marginal. Sadly, I'd recommend people spurn this allegedly super-duper Blu-ray box set and go for the considerably cheaper DVD versions instead.

And I imagine many folks will.

Blu-Ray doesn't seem to be the hot format upgrade that DVD was. On CHUD.com, Devin argues that Blu-Ray is the new Laserdisc, that it's a must-have for a certain segment of the population, but not for everyone. At this point, I don't think I'm ever going to make the High-Def upgrade.

I agree with that. It seems that it's not the huge leap that DVD was for most people. At this point it does appear to be a niche thing though Blu-ray sales are relatively strong and ahead of other formats at the same point in their release.

I, for one, love Blu-ray. The upgrades in picture and sound stomp DVD into the ground. For me, DVD quality is now unwatchable. It's simply not good quality when watching on a high-def television.

[DamnCoffee]

Bought Wall-E a few nights ago, for the wife.

[Safari Suit]

I didn't know you were married! Wow, you got hitched young

[bond 16.05.72]

Yeah, they're better than the DVD transfers, but the improvements appear pretty marginal. Sadly, I'd recommend people spurn this allegedly super-duper Blu-ray box set and go for the considerably cheaper DVD versions instead.

And I imagine many folks will.

Blu-Ray doesn't seem to be the hot format upgrade that DVD was. On CHUD.com, Devin argues that Blu-Ray is the new Laserdisc, that it's a must-have for a certain segment of the population, but not for everyone. At this point, I don't think I'm ever going to make the High-Def upgrade.

I agree with that. It seems that it's not the huge leap that DVD was for most people. At this point it does appear to be a niche thing though Blu-ray sales are relatively strong and ahead of other formats at the same point in their release.

I, for one, love Blu-ray. The upgrades in picture and sound stomp DVD into the ground. For me, DVD quality is now unwatchable. It's simply not good quality when watching on a high-def television.

I agree DVD just doesn't cut it anymore for me! Can't wait to get Inglourious Basterds on Blu, that is gonna rock!

[DamnCoffee]

I didn't know you were married! Wow, you got hitched young

Hahahaha! I'm not! She's my girlfriend, but she's basically my wife anyway.

[Tybre]

Yeah, they're better than the DVD transfers, but the improvements appear pretty marginal. Sadly, I'd recommend people spurn this allegedly super-duper Blu-ray box set and go for the considerably cheaper DVD versions instead.

And I imagine many folks will.

Blu-Ray doesn't seem to be the hot format upgrade that DVD was. On CHUD.com, Devin argues that Blu-Ray is the new Laserdisc, that it's a must-have for a certain segment of the population, but not for everyone. At this point, I don't think I'm ever going to make the High-Def upgrade.

I can certainly agree with that argument. No doubt some day HD will replace all things standard-def, but Blu-ray, at least right now, doesn't seem quite as hot as a lot of people thought, and no doubt companies hoped, it would be when they first started hitting the market. But this of course is just a backwards man who thinks HD has been nothing horribly special and John Barry is overrated by Bond fans speaking. Pay no mind to the Tybre. These aren't the droids you're looking for.

[bond 16.05.72]

My Heat blu ray is on it's way and I really can't wait to see how great Warners & Mann have converted this to the HD format.

I've read a handful of reviews of this so far regarding the transfer but it sounds like it will look better than it ever has, the film is the real deal and puts most films around to shame, a thriller with real intelligence.

When Micheal Mann gets it right like he does here, there's not many directors who can top him, Heat is a certified masterpiece and can't wait to be watching my Blu ray with Dolby HD sound.

Some might think Blu ray has been overrated but DVD never did this film justice I've a feeling this going to look out of this world, full review once I've watched it.

[dodge]

Just received the two-disc set of ALIENS--original version, Director's Cut and a disc of extras. A welcome addition to my growing library. Am looking forward to seeing the director's cut, which I notice is one minute shorter than the original...Hmm...I assume, therefore, that this is mainly a re-cutting job. Anyone know anything about this?

[Safari Suit]

Just received the two-disc set of ALIENS--original version, Director's Cut and a disc of extras. A welcome addition to my growing library. Am looking forward to seeing the director's cut, which I notice is one minute shorter than the original...Hmm...I assume, therefore, that this is mainly a re-cutting job. Anyone know anything about this?

Are you sure you mean Aliens and not Alien? The only Aliens Director's Cut I know of is 17 minutes longer than the theatrical version, however the 2003 Director's Cut of Alien was, indeed, a minute shorter than the original version. About which IMDB says:
Ridley Scott, for the Director's Cut, slashed 10 to 15 seconds off many scenes, which he felt dragged on a little too long. The result is a tighter, more tense version.

[Qwerty]

The Taking of Pelham 123

and

North By Northwest - 50th Anniversary Edition

[Professor Dent]

G.I. Joe: The Rise of Cobra on Blu-ray.

[Conlazmoodalbrocra]

One Flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest and Ray - seen both of them; loved both of them; both are presents for someone so I won't be removing the plastic covering any time soon!

[DamnCoffee]

The Taking of Pelham 123

and

North By Northwest - 50th Anniversary Edition

How is Pelham, Qwerty? I was debating whether to see that in cinemas but I didn't go in the end.

[Qwerty]

The Taking of Pelham 123

and

North By Northwest - 50th Anniversary Edition

How is Pelham, Qwerty? I was debating whether to see that in cinemas but I didn't go in the end.

Fairly solid film. The ending is a slight letdown (my biggest complaint), but it may be worth a rental if you're at all interested.