Gladiator (2000)

[RIPSeanTaylor21]

any word on a re-release?

[Jimbo976]

My guess is sometime in 2012.

[benricci]

Let's see, we are talking about Hollywood now. And this is a 10-year old film. So......by conventional wisdom that means we should see a remake hit theaters by 2011, with a re-release of the original on blu-ray to help promote it.

So yeah, my guess is summer 2011. It will also include movie cash.

[JRS03]

Originally Posted by RIPSeanTaylor21

any word on a re-release?

Can you say about 2013!!!! If you want it better get out and get it!

[JRS03]

Originally Posted by Jimbo976

Everyone wants every release to be perfect - don't we? There are problems with almost every single release though. Some people have pegged this release as "terrible", "the worst ever", "don't ever buy it", etc. It just does not fit into that category from seeing it myself. If someone thinks doing all kinds of complaining on the internet and to the studio and such will get something changed then I guess most of us live in free countries and all the power to them. I am personally fine with the $14 I spent on this Blu-ray and don't think that the studio will do anything except put some new "extra super special" edition out a few years from now. Maybe the new one will use a new master (the main thing that needs to be done to make this look much better) and maybe it will use the same one but we'll have to wait and see.

Well then EVERY film should be reference material right? All films no matter how old should look like Pixar releases!! Well we did that with Patton and you all cried! Make up your freakin minds.

[Grubert]

Originally Posted by Jimbo976

Everyone wants every release to be perfect - don't we?

The problem is that "perfection" is subjective:

- For some a BD is perfect if it looks like the theatrical presentation

- For others, a BD is perfect if it looks like ESPN HD

[bhampton]

Hi,

I got the Gladheateher DVD on it's release day way back when.

I'll rent this one and then likely pick it up used eventually. It's not my favorite film.

-Brian

[aramis109]

Originally Posted by JRS03

Well then EVERY film should be reference material right? All films no matter how old should look like Pixar releases!! Well we did that with Patton and you all cried! Make up your freakin minds.

I would go very far out of my way before calling Patton "perfect". I don't define blu-ray perfection as shiny, grain-free DNR'd movies. I simply want them to be true to their source. For some, that means grain. Others, doesn't have to be that way. Are we really going to need to go down that road again?

[Jimbo976]

Originally Posted by Grubert

The problem is that "perfection" is subjective:

- For some a BD is perfect if it looks like the theatrical presentation

- For others, a BD is perfect if it looks like ESPN HD

Yes that certainly makes it tough to please everyone.

[Uxi]

Originally Posted by aramis109

I would go very far out of my way before calling Patton "perfect". I don't define blu-ray perfection as shiny, grain-free DNR'd movies. I simply want them to be true to their source. For some, that means grain. Others, doesn't have to be that way. Are we really going to need to go down that road again?

I think your sacrasm meter is broked.

[aramis109]

Originally Posted by Uxi

I think your sacrasm meter is broked.

I more think that sarcasm needs to be made more clear. There are lots of people with this opinion.

[Monkey]

In a perfect world, no grain artifacts and no DNR (yes there are exceptions like 300 where grain artifacts are intentional).. but that doesn't happen most of the time. Could digital camera's be the answer?

[Buddy Christ]

Its the simple pleasures in life for me.

The company of a beautiful women.
A nice hoppy beer
A medium rare Filet
Popping in to the Gladiator thread for a good laugh

[Jimbo976]

Some people claim the whole idea of Blu-ray is that it has close enough to the amount of resolution that will almost give you the exact picture that can be seen on the original film elements and can very closely match what it looked like in the theatre. This is a neat idea and I think many people would be very happy if this is what always happened. The problem is I don't think any of the studios have ever said that is their intent with Blu-ray have they? Many people claim that any Blu-ray release that doesn't do this is a failure.

There are so many factors involved but I think the biggest one is the lack of top quality masters for many catalog movies that can take full advantage of what Blu-ray can do for. If every catalog had a 4k master then conceivably studios could try to meet the goal I mentioned above but in reality most catalog movies do not have these masters and they cost a lot of money to make. Without these good masters we're going to get lots of releases with DNR and EE to compensate.

Other factors like people who seem to think grain is a defect are also involved but I think the main thing is the lack of good masters.

[Swede]

Originally Posted by Jimbo976

I would rate Gladiator in the bottom third for PQ of all the 300-400 Blu-rays I own but certainly better than many I have.

Well I'm glad you have high expectations for your blu-ray's. With a comment like that I don't see how anyone could be happy with it, but I guess some people are a LOT easier to please than others...

You do realize you're comparing old low budget Star trek movies to a less than 10 year old $100 million budget (that was actually a lot back then) blockbuster, 5 oscar winner movie that also happens to have been released under the new so-called "premium" sapphire blu-ray series label, and yet you have no problem with it rating in the bottom third PQ in your collection.

Some of us actually got blu-ray because of the "HD 1080p clearly superior to DVD" part, not because of the "well, pq is sort of, I guess a bit better than the crappiest version you can possibly find on dvd, and sound is meh not really better than the dvd, so yeah go pick it up" part, but hey whatever floats your boat.

[Jimbo976]

You're perfectly within your rights to sit there on your high horse. I'll sit here on my chair.

[retablo]

Originally Posted by Jimbo976

Everyone wants every release to be perfect - don't we? There are problems with almost every single release though. Some people have pegged this release as "terrible", "the worst ever", "don't ever buy it", etc. It just does not fit into that category from seeing it myself. If someone thinks doing all kinds of complaining on the internet and to the studio and such will get something changed then I guess most of us live in free countries and all the power to them. I am personally fine with the $14 I spent on this Blu-ray and don't think that the studio will do anything except put some new "extra super special" edition out a few years from now. Maybe the new one will use a new master (the main thing that needs to be done to make this look much better) and maybe it will use the same one but we'll have to wait and see.

Well, complaining on the internet got a new transfer of Fifth Element, and it got the proper subtitles put on Let The Right One In. It got uncompressed audio added to Warner discs and releases like Inside Man fixed due to problems with the surround sound.

So I guess complaining helps in some cases. In this case, who knows? But its a huge issue that needs to be addresses ASAP, before more movies meet the same blurry fate.

[retablo]

Originally Posted by Monkey

In a perfect world, no grain artifacts and no DNR (yes there are exceptions like 300 where grain artifacts are intentional).. but that doesn't happen most of the time. Could digital camera's be the answer?

No, because digital camera exhibit thermal noise, which, unlike film grain, is white instead of black, and must more intrusive (IMO) than natural film grain.

Most CGI has noise added into it. It's called Perlin noise. Without it, CGI looks cartoonish and animated. So there will always be grain, or noise, or something to that effect. Unless something changes. Which it probably will.

[Monkey]

Originally Posted by retablo

No, because digital camera exhibit thermal noise, which, unlike film grain, is white instead of black, and must more intrusive (IMO) than natural film grain.

Well at least technology is constantly evolving.

Most CGI has noise added into it. It's called Perlin noise. Without it, CGI looks cartoonish and animated. So there will always be grain, or noise, or something to that effect. Unless something changes. Which it probably will.

Yeah, well they have to blend the CGI to match the grain artifacts so the CGI doesn't look out of place. Kind of like Forest Gump scenes with the President, etc. where they have to degreed the quality to make it look like he was there.

[Swede]

Originally Posted by Jimbo976

You're perfectly within your rights to sit there on your high horse. I'll sit here on my chair.

Thanks, that's very kind of you. Although I think I prefer my couch. Have you ever sat on a horse? It's really not all that comfy, especially when watching movies

At least we can agree on one thing, The Sapphire label really is just marketing BS... Somehow I don't think that was their plan though.