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

+1

:rotfl: :rofl: :lolcry::D

A smokin hot babe like this one should have been cast instead of Rene Russo. :rock:

http://i248.photobucket.com/albums/g...t-girls-18.jpg

You need your A++ game with this chicky........:rock:

Unless you are a surgeon, then you can just offer a discount! :p

Quick question, I got the UK version yesterday, because...well, it will be the same transfer and everything, but I saw that the 5th disc, with extras is different on both editions.

Does anyone know if new features where recorded or something for the US version? or is it just the same with different names?

Thank you!!!


Gus

Got the answer already, if you must know, they are the same, they only have a different title.

cya



Gus

Or just some good game. Most of the hottest chicks on this planet have the lowest self esteem:D

Anyone else think the UK packaging sucks? I don't know if it's the same as US, but while I'm extremely pleased thus far with the BDs themselves, the stupid box they came in leaves much to be desired. One of the disc trays doesn't even stay in place and flops all around.

Time to hunt down a replacement 5-disc holder... :mad:

I'm planning on putting them in a MUCH smaller case too. Though, I'll have to find some coverart, as it doesn't look like the UK art can be trimmed optimally.

The UK case is one of the worst I've used, no doubt. It's big enough for 10 discs, and so awkward, it took me a minute just to figure out how to close it back up, including replacing one of the disc trays which just fell out when I opened it. The way the disc trays don't lay down flat makes it awkward to remove the discs too.

At least the disc hubs actually retain the discs, unlike the original thick 5-disc Viva Elites that Warner US used for Blade Runner and a TV series or two. With those you couldn't keep the discs snapped in place. It's also a bit better than cases that have discs stacked on top of each other, especially the super fragile jewel case variety with flimsy clips at the bottom.

Lethal Weapon Blu-ray set
 

Broke down and brought the Lethal Weapon set on Blu, and I am very disappointed with the picture quality on part 2. My DVD copies were way better, but I traded them as soon as I got this set. I mean 2 is almost unbearable to watch. It is just painful pq. Does anyone else have this problem? I know it is an old movie, but my god, where the love for this movie?

It doesn't look that bad at all...If you think that's bad, you should see the original blu-ray release. :cringe:

It looks very blurry through out the entire movie.

Is it possible that I have a bad copy of this blu-ray? Purchased at best buy.

How does the US set compare to the UK set? Does the US set use hubs for all of the discs and improve of the UK design?

The Alien Anthology packaging was so much nicer looking from the US and the UK accordion style is a pain to deal with, but I'll take hubs for each disc over other packaging flaws any day.

I guess it's possible. My copy of the second movie doesn't look blurry at all. :shrug:

You can't expect anyone to take you seriously after this...

LW2 has been freshly transferred and looks as it should (teal colour revision aside). I don't know what else to say.

I had the same problem. Try taking that tray and flipping it upside down. For some reason once I did that it sat in the case correctly, but still didn't make the thing any prettier.

Not likely. Blurred video isn't really a possible symptom of replication error. There would have to be two different disc pressings, using different video authoring for that to happen.

Part 2 is the only one in the set that I haven't watched, but anytime dvd looks "way better" than BD, you can almost guarantee it's not the disc, something sounds seriously amiss with your setup or memory. The initial BDs of 1 and 2 were seriously misproduced - messed up just about as badly as any home video release I've ever seen. Even WB has acknowledged that there was an authoring mistake. I compared that BD directly to the DVD, and in terms of actual resolution the dvd still wasn't remotely "better". The dvd looked far more compressed, as is inherent of the dvd format. But the BD did lose out overall; because of the wrong filter being applied (according to WB), not only did resolution suffer to a such significant degree that it could easily be mistaken for dvd even in larger home FP venues, but serious aliasing was introduced.

I just watched the UK edition of Lethal Weapon (1) the other day and WB definitely fixed the problem with it. I suspect the second is fixed too, but I can't say for sure, having not seen it yet. That said, it's also pretty clear that WB didn't go very far out of their way in updating these films. What improvement there is, while significant, could just as easily be the result of not totally messing up this time. But the resolution and grain structure is typical of WBs mastering practices in the early to mid 2000's, more so than what they're doing today.

That includes Lethal Weapon 4. It's clear it hasn't been properly restored. I'm not even convinced it's been optimally (genuinely) remastered. In fact, I'd bet against it. It's a far cry from what WB has been doing in recent years with new films and their genuinely updated catalog titles, as few as those may be. If the reviewer here actually believes otherwise, either the US and UK editions are NOTHING alike, or he desperately needs a new display, one capable of compulsory 1080p video evaluation, as, if they are the same, his perspective is being seriously skewed by more than mere inexperience.

I really didn't expect anything more from WB. But I'm eager to see the US set now to compare. I know a lot of people have claimed both editions are the same. It's understandable that someone reviewing on a more forgiving 60 inch or smaller display might not be able to distinguish between a truely reference master and an outdated one, as WB has all but perfected the art of the spit-shine. But, I can't see how even Mr. Brown could miss some of the problems I saw with my UK copy of LW4 last night, if they manifest on the US edition as well.

Starting at the scene when Gibson comes home to a pregnant Russo, through their walk on the beach and into at least the next couple scenes after that, there's some quivering of the video. At first I thought it was unstable camera work. And it's entirely possible that a different camera was used for those shots or something else that's related more to the production than the mastering and authoring of these films to HD disc, as the last time I watched LW4, it was a dvd on a more forgiving 65" as well. But the jittery video also speaks to an improper filtering algorithm. As the UK is known to censor violence, the possibility of a byproduct of compensation for something being cut, occured to me as well.

I'm going to try to do some digging before investing in the US edition too though - try to verify it's not either a problem with the photography or both editions, before investing more money.