The Truman Show (1998) - Blu-ray Forum

JAYSONE · 10-31-2009, 09:10 PM

I noticed that there are two different release dates for this movie...

Dec. 30, 2008 & July 21, 2009.

On Amazon, the '09 release is $2 cheaper than the '08 version...was the aspect ratio fixed in the newer release or is it the same as the old?

saginawjuggalo · 10-31-2009, 11:05 PM

I bought mine a couple months ago over at Best Buy and it had a new UPC sticker over the plastic wrap but underneath was the original UPC on the cover art... I wonder if the rebate form has anything to do with it? Mine didn't come with it, so I used the one from "Into the Wild". I believe my copy still has that stretched look, I know for sure that it has DNR and EE all over the place

steve_dave · 10-31-2009, 11:25 PM

If I remember correctly, this was one of the titles re-released with promotional movie cash for G.I. Joe: The Rise of Cobra. The July 21st date is for the release with the movie cash offer.

Clark Kent · 10-31-2009, 11:38 PM

That is correct. Paramount loves re-doing UPC codes for every minor addition to a release. The discs are the exact same.

bygberbrown · 11-01-2009, 09:18 AM

Avoid; stretched annoyingly from 1.66 to 1.78. I sold mine.

Damage Inc. · 12-24-2009, 01:51 PM

So, the newer release has issues or something?

Also, how do you really think this film looks on BD?
It got a high rating on this website's official review.
But looking at the screenshots, while I know they're just some shots, don't look that hot...
I mean, they're quite blurry and remind me of DVD-screenshots only in a higher resolution.
You can usually get an idea of what it looks like from the screenshots.
And, the ones from this BD just don't impress me compared to
I'm sure it would be probably more like a 3+ out of 5 for the video-quality, there's no way this is a 4.5.
It also seems to have DNR or Edge Enhancement, I'm not sure, it just looks quite bad for a (2008) BD.

Another thing, why do all Jim Carrey titles get shafted?!
There's not one I can find that has a great transfer.
Well yeah 'Yes Man', but that's a film that came out more recently and instantly got a good transfer.
"Number 23" is good apparently, but 'Bruce Almighty' looks terrible, while it's actually a beautiful-looking film.
'Dumb & Dumber', better, but could be better, 'Me,Myself & Irene', not great.
Even one of the more recent BD-releases, 'The Grinch', looks terrible.
What are they doing, is someone in the BDA working against his films out of hate for them or something? XD

Unacceptable.
I mean, I love Carrey's films and I hope I won't see the same results with 'Liar Liar',
'Cable Guy', 'Ace Ventura' and 'Man On The Moon' and such films.
Well, maybe the 'Ace Ventura'-ones aren't that great themselves, but you know, still get the best out of them.
It's clear enough if 'A Christmas Carol' will be shafted, and that's DIGITAL!
If that doesn't look perfect, I don't know anymore.

Clark Kent · 12-24-2009, 01:54 PM

It is an imperfect transfer. As noted above, there are stretching issues, where the geometry of the picture is actually distorted from the original film. The disc is only worth picking up if one can get it for cheap.

jbracciante · 01-27-2011, 03:55 AM

Is there a way to contact the blu-ray reviewer for this title? I think it's odd that the video section of the review ignores the fact that the title has been stretched.

Maybe they could post a friendly update to their review to let buyer's know that the title is flawed? I almost bought the title based on the site's high score, but realized the image was stretched and avoided it.

Bruce Morrison · 01-27-2011, 07:07 AM

The stretching was also present on the second Region 1 DVD release. The first Region 1 DVD was presented in the correct 1.66 ratio, but was non-anamorphic! This title seems to have been cursed on home video. I've often wondered whether Peter Weir is aware of how Paramount have butchered his film on DVD and Blu-ray - or whether he cares.

JuxTPosition · 03-09-2011, 12:54 AM

My local Blockbuster is closing down, and I found this disc last night for less than $10.

I calculated the PAR on the disc, and it turns out to be about 1.695:1. To add insult to injury, the trailers on the disc are in HD, are using correct picture geometry, and look much better than the feature!

I think i might start a petition or something...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bruce Morrison

I've often wondered whether Peter Weir is aware of how Paramount have butchered his film on DVD and Blu-ray - or whether he cares.

I've been wondering the same thing myself. Maybe someone could somehow contact him?

Wings80 · 03-09-2011, 12:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JuxTPosition

I've been wondering the same thing myself. Maybe someone could somehow contact him?

You don't think he checks out his films released on disc?

Oblivion138 · 11-23-2011, 01:44 AM

I'll never understand how this got a 4.5 PQ score.

It's one of the ugliest transfers I've ever seen.

Mandalorian · 11-23-2011, 01:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oblivion138

I'll never understand how this got a 4.5 PQ score.

It's one of the ugliest transfers I've ever seen.

Wasn't amazing, but I think that's an exaggeration. It's more than serviceable, in my opinion.

Oblivion138 · 11-23-2011, 03:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RJ Smoove

Wasn't amazing, but I think that's an exaggeration. It's more than serviceable, in my opinion.

Smothered in DNR, EE'ed to hell and back, and horizontally stretched to 1.78 qualifies as "more than serviceable?"

Well, if you really HATE the movie, I guess it is.

Mandalorian · 11-23-2011, 04:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oblivion138

Smothered in DNR, EE'ed to hell and back, and horizontally stretched to 1.78 qualifies as "more than serviceable?"

Well, if you really HATE the movie, I guess it is.

Opinions...

Oblivion138 · 11-23-2011, 04:23 AM

So true, regarding opinions.

But the presence of DNR, EE, and horizontal stretching isn't an opinion; it's a fact.

That said, if it's your opinion that waxy faces, constant edge halos, and everything in the frame being distorted by the stretching is A-OK, you're certainly welcome to it. It's still one of the ugliest transfers I've ever seen...and that's my opinion. Which is just as "irrefutable" as yours.

Mandalorian · 11-23-2011, 04:46 AM

Despite those flaws, I think the detail (overall, although faces do show obvious signs of scrubbing), color crispness, and other improvements make this transfer better. I'd give it somewhere in the ballpark of a 3.5/5 for the transfer. Like I said, it's not exceptional, but it doesn't look bad enough for me to sit there and nitpick the entire time I'm watching the movie. I've seen other Blus with DNR and EE so bad that it was too much of a distraction for me to enjoy the movie (Frailty comes to mind), but this isn't one of them. Granted, I have no clue what this looked like on DVD, but I'd bet everything in my bank accounts that the Blu-ray is much better. But anyway, I don't want to turn this into a debate. I just didn't like the snarky undercurrent I detected in your response. Agree to disagree.

Oblivion138 · 11-23-2011, 06:00 AM

Wasn't intended as snarky..."flabbergasted" would be more a more apt descriptor.

jbracciante · 12-10-2011, 09:55 PM

The version featured in this weeks Best Buy ad has an alternate cover.

(pictured here: http://cdn2-b.examiner.com/sites/def...8876fef40c.jpg)

Is this a rerelease with the stretching fixed? I can't find that cover anywhere else online.

jbracciante · 12-10-2011, 09:57 PM

By the way is the best non stretched version of this still the the 1999 laserdisc or is there a dvd with the picture not stretched?

http://www.lddb.com/laserdisc/24087/...The-%281998%29

10-31-2009, 09:10 PM	#1
JAYSONE Senior Member Member since:Dec 2008 Location:Los Angeles Home Theater Gallery:3 4K collection:9 Blu-ray collection:673 MA collection:22 Digital collection:480 iTunes collection:54 Prime collection:5 Blu-ray reviews:1 Trading Score:71	The Truman Show (1998) I noticed that there are two different release dates for this movie... Dec. 30, 2008 & July 21, 2009. On Amazon, the '09 release is $2 cheaper than the '08 version...was the aspect ratio fixed in the newer release or is it the same as the old? Last edited by Scottie; 05-22-2017 at 03:05 AM.

12-24-2009, 01:51 PM	#6
Damage Inc. Blu-ray Guru Top contributor Member since:Jan 2009 Location:The Netherlands 4K collection:3 Blu-ray collection:384 DVD collection:5	Jim Carrey's BDs look bad? So, the newer release has issues or something? Also, how do you really think this film looks on BD? It got a high rating on this website's official review. But looking at the screenshots, while I know they're just some shots, don't look that hot... I mean, they're quite blurry and remind me of DVD-screenshots only in a higher resolution. You can usually get an idea of what it looks like from the screenshots. And, the ones from this BD just don't impress me compared to I'm sure it would be probably more like a 3+ out of 5 for the video-quality, there's no way this is a 4.5. It also seems to have DNR or Edge Enhancement, I'm not sure, it just looks quite bad for a (2008) BD. Another thing, why do all Jim Carrey titles get shafted?! There's not one I can find that has a great transfer. Well yeah 'Yes Man', but that's a film that came out more recently and instantly got a good transfer. "Number 23" is good apparently, but 'Bruce Almighty' looks terrible, while it's actually a beautiful-looking film. 'Dumb & Dumber', better, but could be better, 'Me,Myself & Irene', not great. Even one of the more recent BD-releases, 'The Grinch', looks terrible. What are they doing, is someone in the BDA working against his films out of hate for them or something? XD Unacceptable. I mean, I love Carrey's films and I hope I won't see the same results with 'Liar Liar', 'Cable Guy', 'Ace Ventura' and 'Man On The Moon' and such films. Well, maybe the 'Ace Ventura'-ones aren't that great themselves, but you know, still get the best out of them. It's clear enough if 'A Christmas Carol' will be shafted, and that's DIGITAL! If that doesn't look perfect, I don't know anymore.

11-23-2011, 04:23 AM	#16
Oblivion138 Blu-ray Samurai Member since:Nov 2010 4K collection:85 Blu-ray collection:2219 Digital collection:11 Blu-ray reviews: 3 Trading Score:40	So true, regarding opinions. But the presence of DNR, EE, and horizontal stretching isn't an opinion; it's a fact. That said, if it's your opinion that waxy faces, constant edge halos, and everything in the frame being distorted by the stretching is A-OK, you're certainly welcome to it. It's still one of the ugliest transfers I've ever seen...and that's my opinion. Which is just as "irrefutable" as yours. Last edited by Oblivion138; 11-23-2011 at 04:27 AM.

11-23-2011, 04:46 AM	#17
Mandalorian Blu-ray Grand Duke Top contributor Member since:Sep 2010 4K collection:1138 Blu-ray collection:2791 Trading Score:252	Despite those flaws, I think the detail (overall, although faces do show obvious signs of scrubbing), color crispness, and other improvements make this transfer better. I'd give it somewhere in the ballpark of a 3.5/5 for the transfer. Like I said, it's not exceptional, but it doesn't look bad enough for me to sit there and nitpick the entire time I'm watching the movie. I've seen other Blus with DNR and EE so bad that it was too much of a distraction for me to enjoy the movie (Frailty comes to mind), but this isn't one of them. Granted, I have no clue what this looked like on DVD, but I'd bet everything in my bank accounts that the Blu-ray is much better. But anyway, I don't want to turn this into a debate. I just didn't like the snarky undercurrent I detected in your response. Agree to disagree. Last edited by Mandalorian; 11-23-2011 at 04:55 AM.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

10-31-2009, 11:05 PM	#2
saginawjuggalo Power Member Top contributor Member since:Nov 2007 Location:Saginaw, Michigan 4K collection:167 Blu-ray collection:2058 DVD collection:85 iTunes collection:1 Trading Score:2	I bought mine a couple months ago over at Best Buy and it had a new UPC sticker over the plastic wrap but underneath was the original UPC on the cover art... I wonder if the rebate form has anything to do with it? Mine didn't come with it, so I used the one from "Into the Wild". I believe my copy still has that stretched look, I know for sure that it has DNR and EE all over the place

10-31-2009, 11:25 PM	#3
steve_dave Blu-ray Duke Member since:Nov 2008 Trading Score:21	If I remember correctly, this was one of the titles re-released with promotional movie cash for G.I. Joe: The Rise of Cobra. The July 21st date is for the release with the movie cash offer.

10-31-2009, 11:38 PM	#4
Clark Kent Blu-ray Prince Top contributor Member since:Oct 2007 Location:Metropolis Blu-ray reviews:2 Trading Score:184	That is correct. Paramount loves re-doing UPC codes for every minor addition to a release. The discs are the exact same.

11-01-2009, 09:18 AM	#5
bygberbrown Active Member Member since:Aug 2009 Location:Sydney, Australia Home Theater Gallery:1 Blu-ray collection:356 DVD collection:107 Blu-ray reviews:19	Avoid; stretched annoyingly from 1.66 to 1.78. I sold mine.

12-24-2009, 01:54 PM	#7
Clark Kent Blu-ray Prince Top contributor Member since:Oct 2007 Location:Metropolis Blu-ray reviews:2 Trading Score:184	It is an imperfect transfer. As noted above, there are stretching issues, where the geometry of the picture is actually distorted from the original film. The disc is only worth picking up if one can get it for cheap.

01-27-2011, 03:55 AM	#8
jbracciante Member Member since:Jun 2009 Home Theater Gallery:16 Blu-ray collection:144 DVD collection:49 Blu-ray reviews:1	Is there a way to contact the blu-ray reviewer for this title? I think it's odd that the video section of the review ignores the fact that the title has been stretched. Maybe they could post a friendly update to their review to let buyer's know that the title is flawed? I almost bought the title based on the site's high score, but realized the image was stretched and avoided it.

01-27-2011, 07:07 AM	#9
Bruce Morrison Power Member Member since:Feb 2007 Location:United Kingdom 4K collection:342 Blu-ray collection:2247 DVD collection:581	The stretching was also present on the second Region 1 DVD release. The first Region 1 DVD was presented in the correct 1.66 ratio, but was non-anamorphic! This title seems to have been cursed on home video. I've often wondered whether Peter Weir is aware of how Paramount have butchered his film on DVD and Blu-ray - or whether he cares.

11-23-2011, 01:44 AM	#12
Oblivion138 Blu-ray Samurai Member since:Nov 2010 4K collection:85 Blu-ray collection:2219 Digital collection:11 Blu-ray reviews: 3 Trading Score:40	I'll never understand how this got a 4.5 PQ score. It's one of the ugliest transfers I've ever seen.

11-23-2011, 06:00 AM	#18
Oblivion138 Blu-ray Samurai Member since:Nov 2010 4K collection:85 Blu-ray collection:2219 Digital collection:11 Blu-ray reviews: 3 Trading Score:40	Wasn't intended as snarky..."flabbergasted" would be more a more apt descriptor.

12-10-2011, 09:55 PM	#19
jbracciante Member Member since:Jun 2009 Home Theater Gallery:16 Blu-ray collection:144 DVD collection:49 Blu-ray reviews:1	The version featured in this weeks Best Buy ad has an alternate cover. (pictured here: http://cdn2-b.examiner.com/sites/def...8876fef40c.jpg) Is this a rerelease with the stretching fixed? I can't find that cover anywhere else online.

12-10-2011, 09:57 PM	#20
jbracciante Member Member since:Jun 2009 Home Theater Gallery:16 Blu-ray collection:144 DVD collection:49 Blu-ray reviews:1	By the way is the best non stretched version of this still the the 1999 laserdisc or is there a dvd with the picture not stretched? http://www.lddb.com/laserdisc/24087/...The-%281998%29

Best Blu-ray Movie Deals