Batman Anthology, Who's getting this?, Thoughts?, Pictures Thread

[KaineKinetic]

Originally Posted by MifuneFan

You realize WB has also released..

Blade Runner
Ben Hur
Casablanca 70th Anniversary
The Exorcist
Wizard of Oz
Citizen Kane
Gone with the Wind

..right?

Many of those are considered reference quality transfers. The fact is, no one really agrees with you here. I doubt you'll find a single person here besides yourself who's willing to argue that the Batman Anthology set is no better than their DVD counterparts. . Maybe you're a troll, maybe you're not, but I know one thing for sure, I disagree wholeheartedly with your opinions, and will likely ignored them now on. I'll just leave it at that.

I'm not agreeing with either side, but of course WB would give these a better transfer compared to "Comic Book Movie Fodder" CBM's are RARELY treated with respect.

[MifuneFan]

Originally Posted by Kinetic_Blue

I'm not agreeing with either side, but of course WB would give these a better transfer compared to "Comic Book Movie Fodder" CBM's are RARELY treated with respect.

My point wasn't to compare these Batman movies to those.. I'm just referring to his statement that "They are notorious for releasing BDs with terrible transfers". Warner is notorious for a few things, namely milking anniversaries and re-releasing movies, but they aren't "notorious" for terrible transfers as far as I, and I'm sure most people here are concerned.

[MrHT]

Originally Posted by MifuneFan

I guarantee you not a single person in that thread would claim the BD has no improvement from the DVD. I also guarantee that whatever improvement is on a re-released DVD, it is still inferior to the BD. It's just absolutely ridiculous to claim otherwise at this point. Even if you look at the screencaps for the BD, there's simply no way any DVD, no matter how well it has been mastered will look as good as it. Keep on claiming otherwise though, and keep questioning why it is that people don't tend to agree with what you have to say. That's really all I have to say on this

The thing is... yeah, "Batman" may possibly look better than the DVD. However, the transfer is dull and lifeless. The contrast and colors don't pop like your normal HD video does. Watch "Batman" and then watch "Spider-Man 3" or an episode on one of the "Lost" BDs and then tell me that BATMAN looks great. Watching Spider-Man 2 or 3 and "Lost" on BD is just, wow!! But then you pop in "Batman" and it's like meh. Heck, I even just bought "Deadwood" on BD and I was amazed at the clarity of the picture. It's so crystal clear and the picture pops! If "Batman" looks so great, I'm not sure why I don't get the same reaction.

[RJ Smoove]

Originally Posted by MrHT

The thing is... yeah, "Batman" may possibly look better than the DVD. However, the transfer is dull and lifeless. The contrast and colors don't pop like your normal HD video does. Watch "Batman" and then watch "Spider-Man 3" or an episode on one of the "Lost" BDs and then tell me that BATMAN looks great. Watching Spider-Man 2 or 3 and "Lost" on BD is just, wow!! But then you pop in "Batman" and it's like meh. Heck, I even just bought "Deadwood" on BD and I was amazed at the clarity of the picture. It's so crystal clear and the picture pops! If "Batman" looks so great, I'm not sure why I don't get the same reaction.

But those have nearly 20 years on Batman. Although I disagree. I think the colors are very good on the BD. I'm not home to look at my disc, but I'd be willing to bet the colors on Joker's suit are vibrant, at least to an impressive degree, even if not as much as a 5 year old Spider-Man or Lost episode.

[MrHT]

Originally Posted by RJ Smoove

But those have nearly 20 years on Batman. Although I disagree. I think the colors are very good on the BD. I'm not home to look at my disc, but I'd be willing to bet the colors on Joker's suit are vibrant, at least to an impressive degree, even if not as much as a 5 year old Spider-Man or Lost episode.

Maybe I should set the Dynamic Contrast to High on my TV and see if that helps.

[RJ Smoove]

Originally Posted by MrHT

Maybe I should set the Dynamic Contrast to High on my TV and see if that helps.

Lol. Yeah, maybe you should. I'm sure it'll make all of your BDs look like they were filmed in the late 2000's, since that's how you judge PQ. Personally, I hate the feature...

[Rinzler]

The only DVD release of the anthology I have is B&R (oh my god I know, pretend I said one of the others if that stops you from having a heart attack) and I have always thought it looked really good, and holds up well (for a DVD) upconverted. However, the resolution alone is enough of a benefit to upgrading the anthology, all four look fantastic (the first one is really the weakest, and Forever has spots of weakness as well).

[MrHT]

Originally Posted by RJ Smoove

Lol. Yeah, maybe you should.... Personally, I hate the feature...

You tell me you hate the feature (which, I agree) and then you tell me to make the adjustment??? I'm not following you. Your two statements contradict each other.

[RJ Smoove]

Originally Posted by MrHT

You tell me you hate the feature (which, I agree) and then you tell me to make the adjustment??? I'm not following you. Your two statements contradict each other.

It's called sarcasm. I thought the "Lol"made it clear that I thought it was a joke for you to insinuate that I must be using High Contrast settings if I think Batman looks good.

[MrHT]

Originally Posted by RJ Smoove

It's called sarcasm. I thought the "Lol"made it clear that I thought it was a joke for you to insinuate that I must be using High Contrast settings if I think Batman looks good.

I didn't insinuate anything. You said the colors popped for you, but it doesn't for me. The only explanation could be that my contrast isn't high enough.

[RJ Smoove]

Originally Posted by MrHT

I didn't insinuate anything. You said the colors popped for you, but it doesn't for me. The only explanation could be that my contrast isn't high enough.

I apologize if I read between lines that weren't there. I didn't say the colors popped. I said they were vibrant to an impressive degree, even if not as much as the ones you compared it too. But I'm out of town, and cannot physically check my disc right now, so I'm going by memory.

[motorheadache95]

Originally Posted by MrHT

The thing is... yeah, "Batman" may possibly look better than the DVD. However, the transfer is dull and lifeless. The contrast and colors don't pop like your normal HD video does. Watch "Batman" and then watch "Spider-Man 3" or an episode on one of the "Lost" BDs and then tell me that BATMAN looks great. Watching Spider-Man 2 or 3 and "Lost" on BD is just, wow!! But then you pop in "Batman" and it's like meh. Heck, I even just bought "Deadwood" on BD and I was amazed at the clarity of the picture. It's so crystal clear and the picture pops! If "Batman" looks so great, I'm not sure why I don't get the same reaction.

It's the source-- the original Batman movie cannot ever look like Spider-Man 3 or a modern HD television show. It's just the way Burton shot the movie-- kind of dark and drab looking. I believe when it was shown theatrically, the picture was so dark and dim that some people complained it was too hard to see clearly in certain scenes. I believe all home video versions have been brightened up a bit, but the film will always have that kind of look to it.

And believe me, I've had the movie on VHS, original DVD, Special Edition DVD, and the Blu-Ray. And being very familiar with how the movie has always looked, I was pleasantly surprised with how the Blu-Ray came out. It certainly isn't demo material, but I can assure you there it is much clearer and more detailed than any of the DVD versions.

[MrHT]

Originally Posted by motorheadache95

It's the source-- the original Batman movie cannot ever look like Spider-Man 3 or a modern HD television show.

That's BS. Both were shot on film. Film has a higher resolution than 1080p. So, both should look equally great in HD. Don't give me that "it's the source" nonsense. That is false. It's the transfer!!!

[MifuneFan]

Originally Posted by MrHT

That's BS. Both were shot on film. Film has a higher resolution than 1080p. So, both should look equally great in HD. Don't give me that "it's the source" nonsense. That is false. It's the transfer!!!

Wow.....

[MrHT]

Originally Posted by MifuneFan

Wow.....

Amazed at my knowledge, eh? Didn't think I was that smart now, did ya?

[MykeHavoc]

While Batman and Batman Forever may not be reference quality, both have much better picture quality than their DVD counterparts. I have all four films on both DVD and BD and the only one that's really only a minor jump is Batman and Robin.

[RJ Smoove]

But I'm sure you know that technology can improve over a span of 17 years.

[motorheadache95]

Originally Posted by MrHT

That's BS. Both were shot on film. Film has a higher resolution than 1080p. So, both should look equally great in HD. Don't give me that "it's the source" nonsense. That is false. It's the transfer!!!

Have you seen Taxi Driver? Did you hate the transfer for that movie? How about the Evil Dead?

Film doesn't have a universal look-- hell, digital doesn't either. It looks the way the director and cinematographer want it to look. Plus there are different types of film stock-- films of the eighties were especially known to be shot on cheaper, faster stock that often made the image softer and grainier. So no, it's the source. I doubt you can get "Batman" to look much better than it does now.

[MifuneFan]

Originally Posted by motorheadache95

Film doesn't have a universal look-- hell, digital doesn't either. It looks the way the director and cinematographer want it to look. Plus there are different types of film stock-- films of the eighties were especially known to be shot on cheaper, faster stock that often made the image softer and grainier.

Exactly. The whole "Film is Film!" schtick is is hilarious

[MrHT]

Originally Posted by MifuneFan

The whole "Film is Film!" schtick is is hilarious

People use it to prove that classic films will look just as good as modern films in HD. So, I'd thought I'd use it to defend my argument. I mean, hey, it works for them so I figured I'd give it a shot.