Gladiator (2000)

[Jeff Kleist]

As people seem to have missed it:

Universal did all of the mastering and prep on the Gladiatro disc. Importing will be a waste of your money. Paramount DID do Braveheart

[Freekman]

Originally Posted by benricci

Well said. I swear, it seems like some of you don't even enjoy movies half the time, because you're too busy with your score cards grading picture quality and noting the time code where a speck of dust appeared in the print.

+1
Sad, but true.

[OARmaster]

Originally Posted by Jeff Kleist

As people seem to have missed it:

Universal did all of the mastering and prep on the Gladiatro disc. Importing will be a waste of your money. Paramount DID do Braveheart

I wish someone (who isn't banned ) would mention this in the AVS thread. They are rambling on about Paramount without having a clue...

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Jeff Kleist

Universal did all of the mastering and prep on the Gladiator disc.

Hey, there IS a silver lining in all this for moi.

I do hate to see a good man go down but, if by chance, Gladiator is not treated kindly by reviewers, I can’t imagine why we would not move up a slot on Esox50’s list in his sig……….

https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread...or#post2039511

[kpkelley]

People seem to be forgetting that by all indications the audio on the Gladiator Blu is excellent. I have not seen a single post which has anything but glowing praise for the audio portion of this disc. IMO, a stellar audio presentation is as important as it's video counterpart.

[Blu-Benny]

b/c i don't want to sort through all of this mess about PQ....is there a $10 mail in rebate for people that already own the dvd??

does anyone know if braveheart has 1 too??

[aggienader08]

Originally Posted by benricci

Well said. I swear, it seems like some of you don't even enjoy movies half the time, because you're too busy with your score cards grading picture quality and noting the time code where a speck of dust appeared in the print.

Get over yourselves. If you truly love Gladiator as much as you say you do, you'd buy the damn blu-ray and quit worrying over whether a freaking tiny arrow is less defined than it could be.

Aww... the arrow... what happened to the arrow!?

[Grubert]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

lol
In cases like this, there are other more pragmatic options that have geometrically greater changes of success.
Get into another hobby where you will not feel so unfulfilled all the time with the products not meeting your expectations or get a smaller display and sit further back from it!

I see you still refuse to take my posts or opinions seriously. Someone else would feel offended. Not me (I went through much worse fighting HD DVD FUD in 2006-2007 at AVS). However, it would be nice for once if you supported the enthusiasts instead of mocking them.

But really, telling me that the solution is to lower my standards is a non-starter. You might as well tell me to support HD DVD.

And yeah, I probably wouldn't object to DNR and EE if I watched on my 26" LCD. Then again, with that setup I might as well be watching DVD.

And actually there's another third solution, more pragmatic IMO: Buy only releases that have been given the proper care. It's not like there isn't good product around. Looking back, I must have bought upwards of eighty BD titles this year alone. So it's not like I have a huge gap in my collection/viewing schedule that somehow needs to be filled with Gladiator.

In this case, like I said before, I had Gladiator on preorder from the first day. Not anymore. Life's too short for that.

It amazes me how much time and effort some nerds put into trying to negatively influence others in regards to what they ‘consider’ to be for the ‘greater good’.

Guilty of the first charge - I'm a nerd through and through. But like I said, I don't think these debates persuade anybody of anything, whether the PQ on a release or whether Kirk would beat Picard in a fight.

Translation – I want Gladiator to look as great as Braveheart, not just better than the DVD, and if it doesn’t for whatever reason, I’m going to do my damdest to try to convince every fence sitter on the internet that was contemplating a purchase, not to buy the product………and every purchaser of the movie, not to thoroughly enjoy their home viewing by planting the physiological seeds of doubt, missed opportunity, etc.

Not at all. And you know it.

I want Gladiator to go through the remastering it didn't have (as proved by the much better PQ in the extended-cut shots). I want Gladiator not to be submitted to filtering and sharpening, and automatic unsupervised scratch reduction.

That's pretty simple.

Did all the whining from the *screenshot* nay-sayers about Patton or Gangs of New York prevent Paramount from releasing the Star Trek stuff, as is?

Actually, after all the *screenshot* naysaying, the films in motion actually looked bad, so what does it tells us? (Personally, I haven't seen those, but I have seen Dark City, and it was a disgrace, just as bad as the screenshot naysayers wrote.)

Honest to God, I think there is more pragmatism shown amongst grade-schoolers at my niece’s school than there is among some people that post on some internet forums.

I understand why this is a nuisance to the industry. But seeing how the industry time and again fails to give all releases the proper TLC, I guess the benefits outweigh the short-lived outcry.

[CRMA]

Here are the pics:





Review to follow. I could always put it on Ebay

[Al Bundy]

Enjoy it bro.

[Philnerd]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

Get into another hobby where you will not feel so unfulfilled all the time with the products not meeting your expectations or get a smaller display and sit further back from it!

Originally Posted by benricci

Well said. I swear, it seems like some of you don't even enjoy movies half the time, because you're too busy with your score cards grading picture quality

With all due respect, why then even endorse Blu-Ray? We could get even smaller TVs and sit even further back and DVDs would be fantastic. Hulu looks pretty good 2 or 3 feet away from my computer monitor. We could also switch to 100% digital and just watch movies on iPods. We'll save a lot of coin as well. What's wrong with participating in this hobby, being a film fan, and desiring top notch Blu-Rays that studios are trying to sell us; often the same film for the second or third time at a premium price to boot. Where is the harm in pointing out problematic releases? Worst case is that absolutely nothing happens. Best case is that some studio people maybe rethink some of their strategies. In any event, just accepting whatever studios throw at us and bleeting back to our small TVs with distant seating to enjoy $27 movies isn't going to bring about any positive changes. If no one had ever said a word, we'd still be watching a scratchy MPEG2 Fifth Element Blu-Ray. Was that first release OK too? Not worth complaining about? Just sit further away?

Originally Posted by benricci

and noting the time code where a speck of dust appeared in the print.

Well I can only speak for myself, but I'd have my pre-order in for Gladiator if they'd released a dusty, scratchy untouched transfer

[ack_bak]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

lol
In cases like this, there are other more pragmatic options that have geometrically greater changes of success.
Get into another hobby where you will not feel so unfulfilled all the time with the products not meeting your expectations or get a smaller display and sit further back from it!
It amazes me how much time and effort some nerds put into trying to negatively influence others in regards to what they ‘consider’ to be for the ‘greater good’.

Translation – I want Gladiator to look as great as Braveheart, not just better than the DVD, and if it doesn’t for whatever reason, I’m going to do my damdest to try to convince every fence sitter on the internet that was contemplating a purchase, not to buy the product………and every purchaser of the movie, not to thoroughly enjoy their home viewing by planting the physiological seeds of doubt, missed opportunity, etc.

Did all the whining from the *screenshot* nay-sayers about Patton or Gangs of New York prevent Paramount from releasing the Star Trek stuff, as is?
Grow up!

Honest to God, I think there is more pragmatism shown amongst grade-schoolers at my niece’s school than there is among some people that post on some internet forums.

So you would say the same to people like Robert Harris and Bill Hunt? I just don't see what is so wrong about raising awareness. I do agree with you on one thing though. Nobody should impose their will and force their opinion on others. Everyone should take the time to watch the movie on their own equipment in their own environment. I never tell people not to buy anything outright, but I do recommend renting a movie first if they are on the fence or there is doubt.

Honest question. Were you happy with the way Patton turned out? Do you not think it could have been better had Fox simply toned down the usage of DNR? Please do not tell me that lighting, and makeup were the reasons why the movie looked the way it did, or that motion will make the DNR go away. I have watched this movie twice on Blu-Ray and the DNR is extremely noticeable from start to finish. In motion. And I did buy it on release week. Should have been a rental...

[CRMA]

thanks man

[CRMA]

they didnt get Braveheart, i asked

[Mr. Cinema]

I agree with Grubert. What's wrong with expecting more from BD regarding picture quality? Do you think Ridley Scott is happy that some of those arrows have been filtered out of his picture? Does the theatrical cut of this BD represent what Scott intended us to see?

I don't understand why those who want the very best from BD are being scrutinized for it. What if every BD release used old masters and were filled with DNR and edge enhancement? Would everyone settle for that?

If the overprocessing like what's apparently been done to Gladiator were done to something like Meet the Spartans, I wouldn't care at all since that's a film I'll never watch or want to own. But Gladiator is an epic film that is very popular. This has "Sapphire Series" on the cover. That tells me "this is our top of the line product". Is that what we're getting with the theatrical cut? "Top of the line"? If you're going to slap a $39.99 list price on your product, you better damn well present your best effort. Otherwise, I won't be buying. I hope others feel the same way.

[ack_bak]

Originally Posted by Philnerd

With all due respect, why then even endorse Blu-Ray? We could get even smaller TVs and sit even further back and DVDs would be fantastic. Hulu looks pretty good 2 or 3 feet away from my computer monitor. We could also switch to 100% digital and just watch movies on iPods. We'll save a lot of coin as well. What's wrong with participating in this hobby, being a film fan, and desiring top notch Blu-Rays that studios are trying to sell us; often the same film for the second or third time at a premium price to boot. Where is the harm in pointing out problematic releases? Worst case is that absolutely nothing happens. Best case is that some studio people maybe rethink some of their strategies. In any event, just accepting whatever studios throw at us and bleeting back to our small TVs with distant seating to enjoy $27 movies isn't going to bring about any positive changes. If no one had ever said a word, we'd still be watching a scratchy MPEG2 Fifth Element Blu-Ray. Was that first release OK too? Not worth complaining about? Just sit further away?


Well I can only speak for myself, but I'd have my pre-order in for Gladiator if they'd released a dusty, scratchy untouched transfer

And I nominate this for post of the year. Well said Philnerd.

[OARmaster]

I'm quietly watching and laughing as the screenshot scientists over at AVS slowly figure out that they have been attacking the wrong studio.

[Bullseye]

I am surprised at the number of people who rely on reviews when deciding whether or not to buy a movie on BD or not. Much like a review of a movie in the cinema I like to make up my own mind and not rely on someone else’s opinion. I would suggest more people do the same. These screen shot grabs are a waste of time IMO and should form any scientific basis for making a decision either as they can be manipulated to serve someone’s biased opinion.

For sure read reviews but at the end of the day do not live by them.

[Philnerd]

Originally Posted by OARmaster

I'm quietly watching and laughing as the screenshot scientists over at AVS slowly figure out that they have been attacking the wrong studio.

Well if one is unhappy with Gladiator then one's disspleasure would still be with Paramount. Its a Parmount release, its got their logo and they're trying to get the money. The fact that Paramount essentially hired Universal instead of <insert BD authoring facility here> to master their Blu-Ray doesn't really change the fact that they are 100% responsible for the domestic release of the film.

[bt12483]

Originally Posted by Mr. Cinema

I agree with Grubert.

As do I.

In all of my travels on various forums, he is the all-time most accurate, FUD fighter, data collector, etc. in all of this format war and post format war madness.

I trust his opinion in these matters more than most anyone else.

Seriously - I don't want to sound like I am hanging from the dude's nuts, but since late 2007 when I got into all this he has always been about nothing but the truth. Most of the time that entailed slamming down guys like Lee Stewart, etc. In this case it is slamming what appears to be a real shitty job done on Gladiator.

I saddens me to see Penton-Man try to disregard him. Lay off Grubert man. He speaks the truth and he is rightfully disappointed in Gladiator.

I mean, there are actual physical objects missing from the picture. Assuming those screenshots are accurate (which they probably are), where in the hell did the arrows and flame ball go??????

Inexcusable. I can live with a little smeared facial pores, etc., but if the movie is really missing actual physical items like arrows due to overzealous digital manipulation, then I would say the outcry is deserved.

I don't like half of the AVS nuts either. But they do seem to have a good eye, and obviously care about the quality of releases. Yes, some of them are still bitter over HD DVD and may still have an agenda, but until I see conclusive proof of doctored images coming from them, I will read those threads and view the screenshots for potential indicators to good/bad PQ.

Originally Posted by Mr. Cinema

What's wrong with expecting more from BD regarding picture quality? Do you think Ridley Scott is happy that some of those arrows have been filtered out of his picture? Does the theatrical cut of this BD represent what Scott intended us to see?

I don't understand why those who want the very best from BD are being scrutinized for it. What if every BD release used old masters and were filled with DNR and edge enhancement? Would everyone settle for that?

If the overprocessing like what's apparently been done to Gladiator were done to something like Meet the Spartans, I wouldn't care at all since that's a film I'll never watch or want to own. But Gladiator is an epic film that is very popular. This has "Sapphire Series" on the cover. That tells me "this is our top of the line product". Is that what we're getting with the theatrical cut? "Top of the line"? If you're going to slap a $39.99 list price on your product, you better damn well present your best effort. Otherwise, I won't be buying. I hope others feel the same way.

Agreed. If they are going to charge new release prices for catalog titles, they better do a good job.

Recycling an old transfer and then applying so much image manipulation that actual physical objects are missing is no way to go about things.

The fact is they (i.e. whatever studio(s) is really responsible) thought they could save some money and reuse an old transfer, and gunked it up for one reason or another with all of their manipulation tools.

Which explains why the extended scenes and the movie proper look different in regards to detail.

Blame Universal for doing a crappy transfer if they did it. But also blame Paramount for deciding to then release it. Did they think no one would notice?? Or do they just not care and figure that most will be watching it on ~40" sets.

Too bad those arrows and flame ball will be missing on a 40", 50" 60", etc. TV. The screen size doesn't matter much when actual physical objects have been "disappeared".