Forrest Gump 4K UHD (1994)

[SpazeBlue]

Originally Posted by SleazyForWeasley

2.5 on the video score per this website, which I trust when it comes to technical aspects.

Your loss.

[meremortal]

Kind of confusing reading through comments on this thread for which version is the preferred pq. Don't think I've seen this since the vhs days. May have watched the dvd, though I can't recall. It was fun seeing this in the theater as a kid. Watched it several weeks after release and it was still a packed theater, possibly sold out. This movie was extremely popular and an instant classic. Need to revisit it again at some point.

[HD Goofnut]

Originally Posted by meremortal

Kind of confusing reading through comments on this thread for which version is the preferred pq. Don't think I've seen this since the vhs days. May have watched the dvd, though I can't recall. It was fun seeing this in the theater as a kid. Watched it several weeks after release and it was still a packed theater, possibly sold out. This movie was extremely popular and an instant classic. Need to revisit it again at some point.

The original BD is definitely better than the new BD. There's no contest there. IMHO the UHD is the way to go overall despite a few segments of moderate DNR.

[SleazyForWeasley]

I appreciate the feedback from everyone, and I'm willing to accept when I am ill-informed, or that the reviewer was wrong, but what I don't understand, and maybe someone can clarify: How is a 2.5 score for the 4K video more preferential to a 4.5 score for the BD video?

[dallywhitty]

Originally Posted by SleazyForWeasley

I appreciate the feedback from everyone, and I'm willing to accept when I am ill-informed, or that the reviewer was wrong, but what I don't understand, and maybe someone can clarify: How is a 2.5 score for the 4K video more preferential to a 4.5 score for the BD video?

Different formats, different times, different standards. That beaming review for the Blu-ray was published in 2009. I can't speak for Forrest Gump on home video (I think I've only ever seen it via TV broadcasts!), but there's plenty of decade-old Blu-rays which I remember as looking great at the time, then I'll revisit them and think, 'Eh, this doesn't look too hot.'

[infiniteCR]

Originally Posted by SleazyForWeasley

I appreciate the feedback from everyone, and I'm willing to accept when I am ill-informed, or that the reviewer was wrong, but what I don't understand, and maybe someone can clarify: How is a 2.5 score for the 4K video more preferential to a 4.5 score for the BD video?

Not exactly an answer, but thought I'd mention that the improved color in this alone makes it worth it.

[HeavyHitter]

Originally Posted by dallywhitty

Different formats, different times, different standards. That beaming review for the Blu-ray was published in 2009. I can't speak for Forrest Gump on home video (I think I've only ever seen it via TV broadcasts!), but there's plenty of decade-old Blu-rays which I remember as looking great at the time, then I'll revisit them and think, 'Eh, this doesn't look too hot.'

Yup. When the very first Toshiba HD DVD player hit Best Buy in 2006, I bought it along with The Last Samurai. I was stunned at the image I was getting with it on my Sony 57" CRT RPTV/1080i. I would have rated it 5/5 at that time.

[SleazyForWeasley]

Originally Posted by HeavyHitter

Yup. When the very first Toshiba HD DVD player hit Best Buy in 2006, I bought it along with The Last Samurai. I was stunned at the image I was getting with it on my Sony 57" CRT RPTV/1080i. I would have rated it 5/5 at that time.

True. Maybe the BD should have been reevaluated in the 4K review when the 4K disc review came out to account for then vs. now.

[Laservampire]

Originally Posted by SleazyForWeasley

True. Maybe the BD should have been reevaluated in the 4K review when the 4K disc review came out to account for then vs. now.

Have a look at caps-a-holic and see the differences yourself.


Reviews are pretty much worthless as a measurement of quality.

Criterion's old "Anatomy Of A Murder" blu-ray got 5 stars, but compared to the new 4K in the Columbia box it now looks like crap.

I'm sure the new 4K will get 5 stars but in no way does that make them equal.

[nick4Knight]

So I say again, and insufferably as it may be, I'm so disheartened when hyperbolic members testimony is overbiased by some here to not purchase a perfectly fine 4K UHD disc.

Looking through many of your collections who refused to buy this, there is often plenty that I would classify as middling transfers on this format. Those were purchased though simply because no one dogpiled bad impressions on the thread.

That's the kicker!

[SleazyForWeasley]

Originally Posted by Laservampire

Have a look at caps-a-holic and see the differences yourself.


Reviews are pretty much worthless as a measurement of quality.

Criterion's old "Anatomy Of A Murder" blu-ray got 5 stars, but compared to the new 4K in the Columbia box it now looks like crap.

I'm sure the new 4K will get 5 stars but in no way does that make them equal.

We can talk about "well yeah, 4Ks darks will be darker, and lights will be lighter," and I can definitely see an improvement in detail, but to me those 4K caps look like someone went and put a gray filter over the entire transfer.

Originally Posted by nick4Knight

So I say again, and insufferably as it may be, I'm so disheartened when hyperbolic members testimony is overbiased by some here to not purchase a perfectly fine 4K UHD disc.

Looking through many of your collections who refused to buy this, there is often plenty that I would classify as middling transfers on this format. Those were purchased though simply because no one dogpiled bad impressions on the thread.

That's the kicker!

Thank you for saying it again, as insufferable as it may be. I'm always willing to admit if/when I'm wrong. Maybe I'll check out the 4K, but I don't want to ditch my old BD just yet based on those screen caps.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by SleazyForWeasley

We can talk about "well yeah, 4Ks darks will be darker, and lights will be lighter," and I can definitely see an improvement in detail, but to me those 4K caps look like someone went and put a gray filter over the entire transfer.



Thank you for saying it again, as insufferable as it may be. I'm always willing to admit if/when I'm wrong. Maybe I'll check out the 4K, but I don't want to ditch my old BD just yet based on those screen caps.

SDR converted screen caps aren’t the best way of judging an HDR image, though that comment is aimed more at Laservampire than yourself. They can show certain things like spatial detail, black level without too much deviance but colour and range can be badly misrepresented as there’s no set ‘transform’ for doing so.

[Laservampire]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

SDR converted screen caps aren’t the best way of judging an HDR image, though that comment is aimed more at Laservampire than yourself. They can show certain things like spatial detail, black level without too much deviance but colour and range can be badly misrepresented as there’s no set ‘transform’ for doing so.

I'm aware there's not much point comparing the color between SDR and SDR-converted HDR caps.

My point was that reviews are usually completely subjective, and often don't use older versions as a point of reference. So one person's star rating is not a good basis for choosing which version to buy.

An objective comparison can at least be made with screencaps, as long as you're aware that it's not a true representation of what the colors will look like in HDR.

[lilboyblu]

I had the original 4K release, but returned it before ever watching due to the "bad press" it received. Instead, based on the suggestion of this site's review, I picked up the 25th Anniversary Blu-ray and gave that a spin. Much to my surprise, in what I presume is due to the missing HDR grade that would even things out, the SDR on the 25th Blu-ray really made the whole film look almost candy colored. Not sure how else to describe it, though from that discs review, this is probably why: "Primaries are generally very bold and offer very strong saturation..."

It's nice to see that the UHD has been reassessed. Think it's time that I give it another go.

[Geoff D]

Doesn't even need to be reassessed by some folks, they liked it well enough first time around e.g. https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread...w#post15567925

with follow up comments re: the new BD https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread...3#post16598323

[nick4Knight]

I was gonna say, there was no reassessing with this. It's just the ones against the UHD, often based on screencaps alone and having unrealistic expectation of the source, have stopped crusading their viewpoint as the vocal minority. So there is a more balanced optics on the impressions.

More nuance sucks for simple minds who want easy to palate purchase advice. But it's more fair to a maligned release.

[HD Goofnut]

As I have said before Forrest Gump is a mixed bag on UHD, but the pros outweigh the cons. For every moderate DNR scene there's three that are not tampered with.

[Abdrewes]

$9.99 at Best Buy

[Brian81]

I have the original UHD release but have been looking to get the remastered BD for cheap, wonder if that is the way to do it? Either that or get the BD only one. Then again, get a spare three disc case might be a win.

[Torgon]

Originally Posted by Abdrewes

$9.99 at Best Buy

But is it worth it?