Why do people get excited when old movies are brought to Blu-ray?

[Pondosinatra]

I've posted this question on various threads and each time I get on...

My question is simple. Why do so many people get excited when older movies are released on Blu-ray?

My personal experience has been that any movie older than roughly 10 years does not look spectacular on Blu-ray. The only movie I've personally seen which was different was Blade Runner which I thought was amazing in terms of the picture quality.

The reviews on here also seem to back me up - most older movies are only rated as mediocre in picture quality. Sure there are exceptions, but that's the point - they are EXCEPTIONS.

Why would one double dip, triple dip etc. for something that's barely better in terms of quality than the DVD????

[42041]

Originally Posted by Pondosinatra

I've posted this question on various threads and each time I get sh*t on...

justifiably so.

[assydingo]

Because they love the movies and just because it doesn't look as good as a modern movie doesn't mean it doesn't look great?

[J.Cornelius]

The Third Man, North By Northwest, the Godfather I & II, just to name a few are night and day on Blu-ray when compared to their DVD counterpart. Not in the same ballpark. Your opinion might get sh@t on because you come across as saying that older movies are not worthy of a HD transfer and that could not be further from the truth.

[Rblu-Dblu]

Most of these older films are films that we love. They may only get a rating of 3 when compared to other blurays but they are usually leaps and bounds better than the dvd. Especially films that are over 10 years old, they usually look horrible on dvd on our plasmas and lcds.

[mywhitenoise]

A lot of my movies were made before 1999, and a lot of them look just as good, or better, than most recent movies.

[Beta Man]

I didn't want to deny myself the joy of seeing 2001, The Shining, The Searchers, Casablanca, or any of the other numerous "old" films I own in in breath-taking HD video and audio quality simply because they didn't fall into some arbitrary "age-group"

Are you not one of the masses waiting eagerly for the Original Star-Wars films to be released on Blu-ray?

[Pondosinatra]

Originally Posted by Beta Man

Are you not one of the masses waiting eagerly for the Original Star-Wars films to be released on Blu-ray?

Just Empire

[Post Prod]

No offense to the OP but it's posts like these that hurt my brain.

If you have a small display - any improvements on blu-ray will appear marginal. but despite your skewed perception it's actually the older titles that benefit the most from being put on blu-ray. you of course have to take each release on it's own, as some transfers are better than others. it's also highly dependent on how shoddy the proceeding SD DVD transfer was. But the biggest jumps in improvement when compared to their DVD counterparts have been, by my eyes, most great with older titles.

Newer DVD's are encoded much better and the differences are much less jaw dropping. It sounds like you are taking more of an issue with how older films look compared to newer films, not how they look on blu-ray vs DVD.

Be it Buster Keaton's The General or Forrest Gump, the upgrades I get most excited about are almost always older releases. If you are looking for movies to show off your fancy new tv, then yes older films might not wow some people that are looking for a more video game/animated movie look. But for film lovers who are keenly aware of the short comings of previous releases, it's the blu-ray versions of old favorites that leave the jaws dropping.

[Beta Man]

Originally Posted by Post Prod

But the biggest jumps in improvement when compared to their DVD counterparts have been, by my eyes, most great with older titles.
.

I agree...... I get more "wow" factor from the huge improvement of the catalogue titles I have that look terrible on a big screen, than I do from pixar etc. that look fantastic on Blu-ray, but they didn't look terrible on DVD to begin with.

[DrasticPlastic]

Originally Posted by Rblu-Dblu

Most of these older films are films that we love. They may only get a rating of 3 when compared to other blurays but they are usually leaps and bounds better than the dvd. Especially films that are over 10 years old, they usually look horrible on dvd on our plasmas and lcds.

I just watched Saw, as you know... the blu doesn't really look much better than the DVD, not to mention the blu doesn't even have a lossless track... Oh well, at least it was on sale we bought it. Maybe your copy looks better on your tv than it does on mine though...

The Wizard of Oz though, that looks much better on blu. People also get excited because they want to be on the blu ray bandwagon, and brag about how many blus they have. I get excited because I have a high end audio system and I love to show off how good it sounds, which is easier to do when the blu has a lossless audio track. Plus some people never bought the older moives on DVD, so when it comes out on blu ray they are happy to get it since it's one of their favorites, and it can be had in better quality than could previously be had.

[neo_reloaded]

The reviews use Blu-ray's capabilities as a scale. So while 3-stars is "mediocre" for a Blu-ray, it is far above what a DVD can offer. And even 3-stars is a bit confusing - 5-stars is what a brand-new film, shot with the latest cameras, with no deteriorating effects of time, can look like. Older films will never look the same because the film stock and shooting conditions just weren't the same back then. But a Blu-ray of an older film CAN look just like said older film looked like when it was first shown in theaters, and that again is MUCH better than what a DVD can offer.

Go rent How The West Was Won on both Blu-ray Disc and on DVD, and tell me the two look anything alike.

[AKORIS]

well it's true that some older movies may not look super-- but there already are quite a few great examples of films out right now that look better than ever--

Wizard Of Oz, Gone With The Wind, Dr, No, Goldfinger, How The West Was Won, Bonnie and Clyde, North By Northwest, The Wild Bunch, Blazing Saddles, etc etc

The reason people get excited is because they've seen these movies numerous times in other formats and the upgrade in PQ quality on blu-ray
is usually quite stunning

[domtheone]

Couldn't disagree more with the OP

Blockbusters today are expected to look spectacular.

For those of us that didn't see (were too young/not around etc etc) the older movies back when they were originally released, seeing them on BR (or HD DVD) can be a spectacular experience.

Many of those older films i'll have only seen on the TV or mediocre DVD's.

Dirty Harry
Close Encounters
Highlander
Numerous Bond films
Grand Prix
Backdraft
The Thing
Casablanca
The Searchers


Just a few films off the top of my head that i'd never seen before in decent quality. When I watched them on BR/HD DVD I was blown away.

I find it more rewarding seeing something like Casablanca look stunning (as it's often a pleasant surprise) when I just know that Transformers will look great.

[vegeta88]

If done right, older films can look spectacular on Blu-ray. Even if they look "mediocre" in comparison to newer films, they can look much better than the DVDs.

[kpkelley]

Originally Posted by Pondosinatra

Why would one double dip, triple dip etc. for something that's barely better in terms of quality than the DVD????

In your opinion.

IMO, many of these old classics look much better than they ever did on DVD and some even have newly remastered audio tracks as well. Well worth the upgrade....IMO.

[Fighter]

Originally Posted by kpkelley

in your opinion.

Imo, many of these old classics look much better than they ever did on dvd and some even have newly remastered audio tracks as well. Well worth the upgrade....imo.

+100

[sasquatch]

Originally Posted by Pondosinatra

I've posted this question on various threads and each time I get sh*t on...

My question is simple. Why do so many people get excited when older movies are released on Blu-ray?

My personal experience has been that any movie older than roughly 10 years does not look spectacular on Blu-ray. The only movie I've personally seen which was different was Blade Runner which I thought was amazing in terms of the picture quality.

The reviews on here also seem to back me up - most older movies are only rated as mediocre in picture quality. Sure there are exceptions, but that's the point - they are EXCEPTIONS.

Why would one double dip, triple dip etc. for something that's barely better in terms of quality than the DVD????

Why ask why? Why does anyone do anything?

Maybe because people no longer have DVD or VHS players and want their old movies on blu-ray so they can watch it on their HDTV or their blu-ray player despite any lack of improved PQ.

It's all a matter of personal preference my friend.

[Chiyo_chichi]

Cherished, beloved classics looking clearer, sharper, not to mention sounding better then ever before.

Indeed? Who cares?!

[42041]

and for what it's worth, the last film shot entirely on 65mm negative (5-perf, anyway) came out in 1996. So you tell me if filmmakers' commitment to the highest quality picture has increased or decreased over the years