Gladiator (2000)

[Jimbo976]

I'm sure there will be another release in a year or 2

[Monkey]

Originally Posted by jsub

I never knew people had a problem with Dark City until I read it in this thread. That movie looked GREAT to me.

Dark City looks good on my setup.. Not perfect, there are some scenes that look DNR'd and some that look fantastic (DNR wasn't used to remove Jennifer Connelly's mustache Check out the hand watch in the beginning, every finger print line and fine grain for all the grain lovers), some scenese were blurry just due to being shot that way. Transfer just isn't consistent Contrast is superb and the audio is great as well.

I can't get DVDBeaver's pictures to work.. Some look great, some not.

[meowCat]

Originally Posted by jwbbud

I only watched that version, I had seen the original some time back

Question guys, is the both Theatrical Cut and Extended Cut in a same disc or in two separate discs? Answer plz.

[JJ]

Originally Posted by meowCat

Question guys, is the both Theatrical Cut and Extended Cut in a same disc or in two separate discs? Answer plz.

Same disc. Seamless branching.

[aramis109]

Just keep in mind that nothing happens quickly in the industry, and it'll be awhile before we hear anything.

[Deadset]

Originally Posted by aramis109

Just keep in mind that nothing happens quickly in the industry, and it'll be awhile before we hear anything.

I was expecting an announcement this coming Tuesday.

I don't know how Gladiator compares with the original Fifth Element, but maybe someone here can answer that. There was no review on the site, but people gave it 2.5-3.5/5 for video.

The Fifth Element had a year in between the original release and the remastered version.

[Gremal]

Well, I finally sat down and watched it last night. Many of the opening fight screencaps that people are complaining about are from the battle sequence where there is a highly stylized blur effect that adversely and purposefully impacts the scene. Criticizing that is like criticizing Monet for not painting realistic landscapes.

Overall looking back on this thread, and referring to the many denizens who had the nerve to berate Paramount before they had even seen the BD, I am shocked at the level of malcontentedness, mean-spirited hypercriticism aimed at the studio, lack of appreciation over what is clearly the best version of this title, and general sense of entitlement that every single BD must have reference-quality video in every sequence for the duration of the film.

If I was a director of home video at Paramount and received a barrage of angry rants, I'd wonder why even bother releasing BDs. Downloads are very attractive to the studios. We ought to be very supportive of BD releases and stop whining like a bunch of little kids who didn't get the toy they wanted every time we see a frame that isn't reference quality.

[aramis109]

Originally Posted by Gremal

Well, I finally sat down and watched it last night. Many of the opening fight screencaps that people are complaining about are from the battle sequence where there is a highly stylized blur effect that adversely and purposefully impacts the scene. Criticizing that is like criticizing Monet for not painting realistic landscapes.

Overall looking back on this thread, and referring to the many denizens who had the nerve to berate Paramount before they had even seen the BD, I am shocked at the level of malcontentedness, mean-spirited hypercriticism aimed at the studio, lack of appreciation over what is clearly the best version of this title, and general sense of entitlement that every single BD must have reference-quality video in every sequence for the duration of the film.

If I was a director of home video at Paramount and received a barrage of angry rants, I'd wonder why even bother releasing BDs. Downloads are very attractive to the studios. We ought to be very supportive of BD releases and stop whining like a bunch of little kids who didn't get the toy they wanted every time we see a frame that isn't reference quality.

I agree and disagree with you. I think people overreacted, and I think this is the best version of this title currently available. I think that if you enjoyed the film then this is still a worthwhile purchase.

That said, I don't think we should just accept the medicine we got and pull an Oliver Twist. ("Please sir, may I have another?") I think we should support BD releases, but should be able to voice our discontent and ask for our money's worth. Voting with our wallets is always in our reach, but sometimes that can backfire- studios won't do more movies of the same type or re-release a title if they think there's no money in it. Take a look at the drying trickle of "classic" movies on blu-ray for that one.

[kpkelley]

Originally Posted by aramis109

That said, I don't think we should just accept the medicine we got and pull an Oliver Twist. ("Please sir, may I have another?")

Chip from Animal House would have been a better analogy.

Thank you, sir! May I have another?

[Jimbo976]

Originally Posted by Gremal

If I was a director of home video at Paramount and received a barrage of angry rants, I'd wonder why even bother releasing BDs. Downloads are very attractive to the studios. We ought to be very supportive of BD releases and stop whining like a bunch of little kids who didn't get the toy they wanted every time we see a frame that isn't reference quality.

Maybe some of these people are holding out hope that Blu-ray gets cancelled and some other HD format can be found that will be better?

[bandit29]

Originally Posted by Gremal

Well, I finally sat down and watched it last night. Many of the opening fight screencaps that people are complaining about are from the battle sequence where there is a highly stylized blur effect that adversely and purposefully impacts the scene. Criticizing that is like criticizing Monet for not painting realistic landscapes.

Hmm I didn't think the blur in the beginning was intentional.. I'll have to check my DVD to see if its the same (in terms of blur) as the Blu. I don't remember the HDTV broadcast looking that way.

At the end of the day, Gladiator is an ok Blu-ray..that's it. Some scenes look great, other scenes look awful. In terms of PQ, it shouldn't be in Paramount's Sapphire line as a high profile release.

[tvine2000]

Originally Posted by Jimbo976

Maybe some of these people are holding out hope that Blu-ray gets cancelled and some other HD format can be found that will be better?

i'm sure if that true titles that look like this one will help that happen.

[SquidPuppet]

Originally Posted by Gremal

Well, I finally sat down and watched it last night. Many of the opening fight screencaps that people are complaining about are from the battle sequence where there is a highly stylized blur effect that adversely and purposefully impacts the scene. Criticizing that is like criticizing Monet for not painting realistic landscapes.

Overall looking back on this thread, and referring to the many denizens who had the nerve to berate Paramount before they had even seen the BD, I am shocked at the level of malcontentedness, mean-spirited hypercriticism aimed at the studio, lack of appreciation over what is clearly the best version of this title, and general sense of entitlement that every single BD must have reference-quality video in every sequence for the duration of the film.

If I was a director of home video at Paramount and received a barrage of angry rants, I'd wonder why even bother releasing BDs. Downloads are very attractive to the studios. We ought to be very supportive of BD releases and stop whining like a bunch of little kids who didn't get the toy they wanted every time we see a frame that isn't reference quality.

So, overall, you believe it's a good Sapphire Series release?

[BluEggsandHam]

Originally Posted by Gremal

Well, I finally sat down and watched it last night. Many of the opening fight screencaps that people are complaining about are from the battle sequence where there is a highly stylized blur effect that adversely and purposefully impacts the scene. Criticizing that is like criticizing Monet for not painting realistic landscapes.

Overall looking back on this thread, and referring to the many denizens who had the nerve to berate Paramount before they had even seen the BD, I am shocked at the level of malcontentedness, mean-spirited hypercriticism aimed at the studio, lack of appreciation over what is clearly the best version of this title, and general sense of entitlement that every single BD must have reference-quality video in every sequence for the duration of the film.

If I was a director of home video at Paramount and received a barrage of angry rants, I'd wonder why even bother releasing BDs. Downloads are very attractive to the studios. We ought to be very supportive of BD releases and stop whining like a bunch of little kids who didn't get the toy they wanted every time we see a frame that isn't reference quality.

Many people overreacted on this forum, and I would begrudgingly agree that this bluray is currently the best version of the film available (on a physical format).

However... having seen a comparison of both the unfiltered extended scenes and the filtered theatrical scenes, I believe this film did not get the release it deserves. Advertised as the Sapphire Series, Gladiator's overall picture quality should be admirable and mirror that of the unfiltered extended scenes. It doesn't have to be reference quality, but this film looks better than what's presented on the bluray.

All in all, more effort could have gone into this release...

[Gremal]

Originally Posted by SquidPuppet

So, overall, you believe it's a good Sapphire Series release?

I'll turn the question around. You guys are upset because Paramount marketed it as "Sapphire Series" but would have been ok with it otherwise?

Seriously?

[P@t_Mtl]

Originally Posted by Gremal

I'll turn the question around. You guys are upset because Paramount marketed it as "Sapphire Series" but would have been ok with it otherwise?

Seriously?

Yes I agree with you on that.

[Jimbo976]

Originally Posted by BluEggsandHam

I believe this film did not get the release it deserves.

I have not seen it personally yet but based on everything i've read I think I will certainly agree with this. It should be better and they should have done a better job. Hopefully there will be another version sometime in the next few years that does it more justice.

A lot of stuff has been blown way out of proportion though as always.

[Petri Teittinen]

Originally Posted by bandit29

Hmm I didn't think the blur in the beginning was intentional.. I'll have to check my DVD to see if its the same (in terms of blur) as the Blu.

If the blurring is in the master, intentionally or not, and they used the same master for both... yes, the blur will be on the DVD as well.

[Jimbo976]

Originally Posted by SquidPuppet

So, overall, you believe it's a good Sapphire Series release?

Some folks get roped into the marketing BS too much. They could call it the Coal Series and it wouldn't make any difference.

[SquidPuppet]

Originally Posted by Gremal

I'll turn the question around. You guys are upset because Paramount marketed it as "Sapphire Series" but would have been ok with it otherwise?

Seriously?

Perhaps I formed my question poorly.

Do you think its a good Blu-ray presentation of the film in general?