American Gangster

[bmwone]

I just received this BD and the PQ was terrible. I seriously thought someone played with the settings on my Sharp Aquos. It was sooo dark. Dark images were so washed out, they were bairly visible. The contrast... were not bright white, they were a cream. Face colors were way out of wack. Even if I reset the settings for this movie, it still sucked. I have the Planet Earth and the colors are bright sharp. Deep blacks and bright sharp whites. Sorry for the rant. I wonder why a quality director such as Ridley Scot would release such a bad transfer. He also did Blade Runner which was mostly shot at night. That was not as dark as American Gangster. The sound was very good though.

[benricci]

Looked exactly like it did in theaters. The transfer was pretty true to the source, I thought.

Comparing Blade Runner to AG isn't fair, they were shot in completely different styles...

[TheForce8686]

Originally Posted by bmwone

I just received this BD and the PQ was terrible. I seriously thought someone played with the settings on my Sharp Aquos. It was sooo dark. Dark images were so washed out, they were bairly visible. The contrast... were not bright white, they were a cream. Face colors were way out of wack. Even if I reset the settings for this movie, it still sucked. I have the Planet Earth and the colors are bright sharp. Deep blacks and bright sharp whites. Sorry for the rant. I wonder why a quality director such as Ridley Scot would release such a bad transfer. He also did Blade Runner which was mostly shot at night. That was not as dark as American Gangster. The sound was very good though.

I agree. This is easily one of the worst looking Blu Rays I have ever seen.

[Sussudio]

Originally Posted by bmwone

I just received this BD and the PQ was terrible.\

hey, to each his/her own, but terrible is a fairly strong word and one i definitely wouldn't use to describe the PQ. it wasn't exceptional, but the washed out scenes aided the look of the film imo. and you're right, great sound

[sfmarine]

I've heard that the transfer was medicore at best. I'll stick with the dvd. It was the last one I bought.

[Rblu-Dblu]

I thought it looked fine. I thought it was given that tint to make it look like it was an older movie. Its not supposed to look like Iron Man or The Dark Knight.

[seigneur_rayden]

That is how it is supposed to look.

[Brad1963]

I thought it looked pretty good. It is intentionally shot to look kind of drab, the sets have a plain and somewhat washed out look, and the cinematography purposely under enhanced the environment. The look and feeling came off as a look of the late 60's early 70's melodramas. It looks exactly how it should look.

[Deadset]

Originally Posted by bmwone

I just received this BD and the PQ was terrible. I seriously thought someone played with the settings on my Sharp Aquos. It was sooo dark. Dark images were so washed out, they were bairly visible. The contrast... were not bright white, they were a cream. Face colors were way out of wack. Even if I reset the settings for this movie, it still sucked. I have the Planet Earth and the colors are bright sharp. Deep blacks and bright sharp whites. Sorry for the rant. I wonder why a quality director such as Ridley Scot would release such a bad transfer. He also did Blade Runner which was mostly shot at night. That was not as dark as American Gangster. The sound was very good though.

read the site review

https://www.blu-ray.com/movies/movie...30&show=review

[Moefiz]

American Gangster looks pretty good from how Scott wanted it to look..dated..if you are looking for HULK or Transformers PQ ,you are not going to find it here.

I personally loved the way it looked and prefer the extended edition.

[Brad1963]

From High Def Digest:

The Video: Sizing Up the Picture


'American Gangster' on Blu-ray boasts a number of improvements versus the HD DVD version of the film, the first being that Universal has included both the 156-minute theatrical version and the 176-minute extended version (the HD DVD combo included only the theatrical cut with the extended cut on the flip side). Both are encoded in 1080p/VC-1 video (1.78:1, opened up from the theatrical 1.85:1) and easily accessed via seamless branching. (You can also toggle between the two during live playback by simply calling up the main menu.)

Both versions are sourced from the same master, and the effect is seamless -- I could detect no obvious visual differences between the footage of each version. The results are also identical in any perceivable way to the previous HD DVD. Befitting a new release, the source is clean as a whistle. Ridley Scott eschewed the more glossy look of some of his '80s and '90s pictures for 'American Gangster,' but this is still a slick enough image that you won't mistake it for Steven Soderbergh's 'Traffic.' Colors are not overly saturated and are far from bright, but the muted brown-and-blue palette is clean and consistent. Scott also utilizes a softer look for the film, so while certainly sharp, there is a bit more flatness than some might expect on a high-def presentation.

My only real gripe, however, is that contrast is somewhat lacking. While blacks are rock solid, the mid-range seems lethargic, and shadow delineation suffers. The image teeters on being too dark, and fine details often get lost in the darker areas of the image or in night scenes. However, detail and depth hold up as well as is possible, and closer shots in particular can look quite textured and impressive. The re-encode is also perfectly smooth, so I had no problems with artifacts. Even if I wasn't completely blown away with this transfer, 'American Gangster' remains satisfactory.

[bmwone]

Nice to read other opinions, thanks

[Travis]

What about Denzel with the other Scott in Man on Fire. It is one of my favorite Blu-rays.

It isn't picture perfect like Planet Earth, but it looks awesome. It was put onto Blu-ray exactly the way it was supposed to be with grain and blur and all.

I'm not a fan of video noise, but when a director makes the camera shake, adds lines and specks, grain, blur , etc. I have no problem whatsoever.

[GGX]

I don't have any complaints with American Gangster's PQ.

[CMM]

Originally Posted by sfmarine

I've heard that the transfer was medicore at best. I'll stick with the dvd. It was the last one I bought.

Same!

[JamesG76]

Yea this movie looks bad compared to the best blu's, but it's still ok and perfectly watchable, and the movie is really about plot not visuals so it doesn't matter and I still enjoy the movie.

[Batman1980]

This movie was about the performances of the actors in it SELLING the story the writers came up with. If you let the grittiness of the way it looks turn you away, that's your loss. I loved this movie and look forward to watching it again.

[beerman]

Originally Posted by Brad1963

I thought it looked pretty good. It is intentionally shot to look kind of drab, the sets have a plain and somewhat washed out look, and the cinematography purposely under enhanced the environment. The look and feeling came off as a look of the late 60's early 70's melodramas. It looks exactly how it should look.

I'd agree with Brad here. I think the look was intended to portray the gritty, dirty feel of the city at the time. I thought it came across brilliantly, it was like watching some 80's cop show. Nothing was polished or cleaned. It had that real drab grey look about it, which i think really added to the tone of the movie.

[MaCruz]

I've watched AG for the first time ever a few weeks back, and I thought the PQ was great.

[OhDamaso]

PQ looked fine. AQ is a huge upgrade...I love those people who say they're going to "stick with the DVD" never consider the audio difference.

Seriously, what's the point of having blu-ray if you can't enjoy lossless audio. It's like 70% of the high-def. experience.