most of those reviewers are morons then or don't understand how they were shot. #1 especially. McTiernan uses a very soft look for many of his films. ala predator and Die Hard. #3 looks LEAGUES better than it's dvd counterpart on it's best day.

Oh, it must be true then. ;)

But you haven't seen them yourself? I have all 4 and they look pretty good to me. Reviews also said Patton looked good, and we all know how that one turned out.

Funny how this Loaded Weapon manages to be more lethal than Weapons 3 and 4.

http://forum.blu-ray.com/attachment....0&d=1330122303

:cool:

There are a number of suspect reviews on this very site, but ssssshhhhhh, you didn't hear that from me, lol

This is wrong. The third film is still plagued by edge enhancement. Less than the DVD (which is really quite atrocious), but it's still there. I'm also pretty sure the second one could look better; of all four, it had the least effort put into it.

EDIT: I just went back through the thread and I saw PQ reviews for the discs based on the UK versions. One thing I want to add that has been pointed out for other WB titles is that, although the Blu-rays look great and significantly better than the DVDs, they do absolutely exhibit the studio's slightly irksome "teal and orange" look that they keep pushing on their remasters.

Yet, I don't have a problem with Patton....

i view 3D content on a regular basis, and i dont get any headaches or eye strain.

Donner has said time and again the theatrical releases of these films were his directors cuts, and he had nothing to do with the extended versions. The studio was the one who pushed for and created these extended "Directors cuts"
"
"

:eek:

Luckily most everyone else does, including Fox, so we should get a GOOD, FAITHFUL transfer later this year.

There's a bit of extremely minor 'ringing' going on in there, so much so that I don't think it's worth mentioning.
And I say that as someone that loathes EE.

If it was a Universal release, it would have a 5.0 rating on this site. ;) ;) ;) ;)

I received the UK set last week and since then have watched all four, including the commentary tracks on the first 3, which are new (2010), and watched the multi-part making of docu. It cost me $32 shipped, and although it's nice to have the movies on BD and the docu is pretty good (not so much the commentaries--LW 3 is ok, but especially on LW1, it's as though Donner doesn't know why he's there), I would be really perturbed if I had waited and paid twice as much for the US release in June. And my understanding is that the US release will essentially be the 2-year old UK release.

Agreed. Anybody who takes MSRP as Gospel needs to have THEIR head examined. Prices are ALWAYS ~30% lower than that. Currently Amazon has this set listed at $54.99 which is 31% off SRP. Still a bit high for catalog titles, but I wouldn't be surprised to see the price come down a bit more than that by release date. I mean look how much Game of Thrones came down in price from when it was first announced to release date. From around $54.99 to $39.99.

I finally got to watch all four films from my UK Lethal Weapon Collection this past weekend.
I was really disappointed with the audio of the first three films.
The sound seemed to be front speaker anchored with very little surround speaker presence.

However when I popped in Lethal Weapon 4...WOW!!!
Full blown DTS-HD Master Audio bliss from all five speakers.

It had been awhile since I've last seen these flicks.
The first two films and the fourth film were great.
Non-stop action, good stories and plenty of humor.
But the third film was just plain lousy.

That could be the way the soundtrack was original designed theatrically, because the audio on the DVDs were mostly outputted through the front channels as well, and the surrounds were sparingly utilized.

I completely agree! I though Rene Russo ruined the Lethal Weapon franchise, when she was cast in the third installment. It seems like her character, and presence was an irritant to Lethal Weapon 3. Lethal Weapon 4 was more tolerable because more supporting actors were included to carry the movie besides her. And speaking Rene Russo, she was terrible in The Thomas Crown Affair remake. It appeared in every other scene, she was topless unnecessary.

I could excuse her for ruining the franchise IF she was smokin hot.
But Rene Russo is ugly. :(

Um, yeah, hideous... :crazy:

http://my-autographs.de/images/Rene_Russo.jpg

Topless is NEVER unnecessary ;)

But I agree that she just didn't fit proplerly into the Lethal Weapon series.

I don't know what kind of women youre capable of pulling in but she doesn't look good there. At all.

To each their own.

She seems to have stolen my grandfather's eybrows