Gladiator (2000)

[Petri Teittinen]

Originally Posted by Jimbo976

I wonder what this says about What Hi-fi?

The same pretty much all knowledgeable home theater enthusiasts around Europe have been saying for years: What Hi-Fi? is a joke. It's mandate is to avoid difficult words and technical jargon, and to get the review done in a minimum of time in a minimum of space. Extremely shallow reviews, riddled with superlatives and designed to make the sale. I'm sure manufacturers and distributors love What Hi-Fi?.

[CJWilkie]

It will be interesting to see what the people-in-charge of the release say about the film. There are so many reviews on both amazon UK and US with just 1 star that I'm sure more than just forum browsers will refuse to buy the film.

[Blu-Malibu2009]

Review is up. He gave it 3/5 for video and 4.5/5 for audio.

Gladiator Blu-ray.com Review

[banned user105]

Originally Posted by TTUBatfan2008

Review is up. He gave it 3/5 for video and 4.5/5 for audio.

https://www.blu-ray.com/movies/movie...35&show=review

3 is still too high imo, but I respect his opinion.

[Jimbo976]

Originally Posted by TTUBatfan2008

Review is up. He gave it 3/5 for video and 4.5/5 for audio.

https://www.blu-ray.com/movies/movie...35&show=review

Sounds like a reasonable review based on all i`ve read (but yet to see in person).

[Blu-Malibu2009]

Originally Posted by doctorthodt

3 is still too high imo, but I respect his opinion.

3 is what I gave it. I tend to be pretty generous though and dole out 4.5 and 5 pretty easily. This one wasn't even close to that level. It's not as bad as Gangs of New York but it's nowhere near as good as quite a few high profile releases lately.

Meanwhile, I'm watching it right now. I think I figured out that the processing isn't just the EE and DNR, they also overprocessed the colors. I cranked my settings down significantly this time around and it looks much better. Faces aren't anywhere near as orange, etc. Mind you, the same settings that it looked bad with, Braveheart looked stellar with yesterday. So I do think it's the transfer and not my settings. I've had the same settings for around a year.

[Deadset]

Originally Posted by Jimbo976

Sounds like a reasonable review based on all i`ve read (but yet to see in person).

I'm watching it tonight. Good review.

[Petri Teittinen]

Originally Posted by doctorthodt

3 is still too high imo, but I respect his opinion.

If 2.5 stars means average for Blu-ray, I'd give it 2 stars.

[HAVOKK]

3 is good.. Because there have been worse, and while there are alot of graphical flaws, there were moments that made me think it wasnt bad at all.. but still, those moments didnt last very long

[Godbluffer]

Ok, I may be cherry-picking here, but... oh my.

[Jimbo976]

Originally Posted by Petri Teittinen

If 2.5 stars means average for Blu-ray, I'd give it 2 stars.

I don`t think 2.5 stars really means average though with the reviews here. How many are there under 3?

[Swearengen]

Originally Posted by TTUBatfan2008

...they also overprocessed the colors.

Agree. To much red in skintones.

I had hoped the review would discuss the differences between the theatrical and the extended version, regarding the picture quality.

[Jimbo976]

Originally Posted by Godbluffer

Ok, I may be cherry-picking here, but... oh my.

I`m beginning to think you`re Xylon or his twin brother?

[HAVOKK]

Originally Posted by Godbluffer

Ok, I may be cherry-picking here, but... oh my.

yea.. every scene that looked like that (and there were quite a few) made me cringe..

edit: when I look at that, it makes my eyes feel as though I am staring into the sun.

[Godbluffer]

Originally Posted by Swearengen

Agree. To much red in skintones.

I had hoped the review would discuss the differences between the theatrical and the extended version, regarding the picture quality.

+1000 on both counts!

[Jimbo976]

Originally Posted by Swearengen

Agree. To much red in skintones.

I had hoped the review would discuss the differences between the theatrical and the extended version, regarding the picture quality.

It`s not 1 version or the other - it`s just the extra scenes look better. Wasn`t sure if you knew that based on what you wrote.

[sonyfanboy]

Regarding the European release from highdefdigest...

Just because two transfers from the same master both have EE and DNR, doesn't mean they have them to the same degree. I'll go back to Face/Off. You can see evidence of EE (not as much for DNR) on both the UK and US versions. However, EE on the UK version is much less noticeable and you can't hardly tell there is any DNR at all (even though I'm sure there is some).

Also, the missing flame and arrow tips is caused by the scratch removal methods, which again, could be applied to both, with very different effects. And just because you notice EE or DNR on both doesn't mean it is as bad.

Just because they notice a difference betweem the regular and extended edition footage doesn't mean anything. The extended edition footage was taken from cut material (not fully processed footage) from the first time around, and fully mastered years later. It will always appear different unless a complete remaster is done of all the footage.

Some may say it looks better and some may say it looks worse. Some people also say Crank looks better than other HD releases just because it has no film grain. Others say movie with grain looks better. You don't know the reviewers frame of reference.

I also know that I have found UK reviews on sites like Amazon UK that state the same things (arrow tips missing, excessive DNR, etc.). Many times I find people all over the globe parroting what the read at AVS or some other site. They think every release will be the same, so they read something bad about the US release and try to pass it off as if the problem is with their release too (and it may or may not be).

A good example of this was the first three reviews I read of the Canada Blade Trinity release all said the aspect ratio was a cropped 1.78:1 and to avoid the disc beacuse it was not OAR. Guess what, the release was 2.35:1 and OAR. How could all three reviewers got it wrong if they had even watched 5 minutes of it. The answer, they didn't watch any of it. They were just parroting something they had read somewhere else, or getting it confused with Blade. They had never watched a minute of the disc, but they were writing a review like they had, based off other stuff they read elsewhere.

Whether there is a difference or not, no one will believe it one way or another until Xylon puts screen caps side-by-side of the US/UK versions.

http://forums.highdefdigest.com/blu-...eviews-23.html

[Petri Teittinen]

Originally Posted by Jimbo976

I don`t think 2.5 stars really means average though with the reviews here.

It doesn't? It should.

[Godbluffer]

Originally Posted by Jimbo976

I`m beginning to think you`re Xylon or his twin brother?

Actually, my real name starts with an X too , but that's where the comparison stops. I found the whole Baraka thing "over there" an utter embarrassment.

[Deadset]

Originally Posted by Godbluffer

Ok, I may be cherry-picking here, but... oh my.

Have you watched the movie yet?