What's your top 5 worst blu transfer picks?

[cstyle2000]

I'm still a newbie when it comes down to BDs and I've heard a lot about how some older movies have had some really crappy transfer jobs (either because the studio behind it was lazy and/or because they just want an easy buck). Well anyway, I was just curious as to what you all think about this and to list your top 5 worst transfer jobs on blu. Also, I think it'll help other newbies and veterans alike with their future blu purchases by warning them of what to avoid (even though this site does list bad blus that exist already...I just want to know what everyone's opinion is).

[Sabotage]

Originally Posted by cstyle2000

I'm still a newbie when it comes down to BDs and I've heard a lot about how some older movies have had some really crappy transfer jobs (either because the studio behind it was lazy and/or because they just want an easy buck). Well anyway, I was just curious as to what you all think about this and to list your top 5 worst transfer jobs on blu. Also, I think it'll help other newbies and veterans alike with their future blu purchases by warning them of what to avoid (even though this site does list bad blus that exist already...I just want to know what everyone's opinion is).

Dumb & Dumber wasn't a very good transfer. It looked like the DVD essentially. The same can be said about 28 Days later.

[dg5150]

40 year old virgin has some quick cuts that look bad, that's probably the worst I own other than BS Dracula (I know Dracula is supposed to look a certain way, it still doesn't look good imo).

[Clark Kent]

Most of the films in Tiers 4 and 5 of this list look bad:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1168342

That is a handy list of good and bad movies in terms of PQ on BD.

[Dotpattern]

The problem with "bad transfer" threads is that most people don't distinguish between a bad transfer and poor source material. 28 Days Later is often incorrectly cited as a bad transfer, but there is nothing wrong with the transfer. That's how the movie was shot and that's how it's always going to look.

[Sabotage]

Originally Posted by Dotpattern

The problem with "bad transfer" threads is that most people don't distinguish between a bad transfer and poor source material. 28 Days Later is often incorrectly cited as a bad transfer, but there is nothing wrong with the transfer. That's how the movie was shot and that's how it's always going to look.

My mistake then.

[CZAR]

Originally Posted by Dotpattern

The problem with "bad transfer" threads is that most people don't distinguish between a bad transfer and poor source material. 28 Days Later is often incorrectly cited as a bad transfer, but there is nothing wrong with the transfer. That's how the movie was shot and that's how it's always going to look.

I own over 100 blu's and they all look good to me. The only ones that I may have a prob with is 28 Days Later until the last 5 minutes but Obviously we know why the transfer is like that. And Miami Vice. I dont know if this falls under poor source or bad transfer. The daytime scenes are great but the night time scenes have a lot of fuzz. Anyone know why? Got Em!!

[Rblu-Dblu]

Originally Posted by CZAR

And Miami Vice. I dont know if this falls under poor source or bad transfer. The daytime scenes are great but the night time scenes have a lot of fuzz. Anyone know why? Got Em!!

I would assume its the cameras he uses to film his movies. They are all heavy on the grain and add a tint of color.

[Lt. Aldo Raine]

Originally Posted by CZAR

I own over 100 blu's and they all look good to me. The only ones that I may have a prob with is 28 Days Later until the last 5 minutes but Obviously we know why the transfer is like that. And Miami Vice. I dont know if this falls under poor source or bad transfer. The daytime scenes are great but the night time scenes have a lot of fuzz. Anyone know why? Got Em!!

i believe miami vice was shot with HD cameras, someone correct me if im wrong, thats why nite time scenes r very grainy and fuzzy, same problem with public enemies

[Duffy12]

Originally Posted by CZAR

And Miami Vice. I dont know if this falls under poor source or bad transfer. The daytime scenes are great but the night time scenes have a lot of fuzz. Anyone know why? Got Em!!

Maybe its because it is a movie dealing with the 'Police'. ( har har )


I LOVE when this thread pops up from time to time. I have a 'word doc' saved that I just keep adding titles to. Sadly way too many though.


.

[gvortex7]

Originally Posted by Dotpattern

The problem with "bad transfer" threads is that most people don't distinguish between a bad transfer and poor source material. 28 Days Later is often incorrectly cited as a bad transfer, but there is nothing wrong with the transfer. That's how the movie was shot and that's how it's always going to look.

Well said bud. People need to understand the difference between bad transfer and poor source material.

[starkent08]

i think highlander season one is by far the worst transfer ever as well as the audio im a big fan and it makes me cringe to watch it

[Chaotic]

1. Hostel 2
2. Dog Soldiers
3. The Omega Man
4. Ocean's 12
5. Reservoir Dogs

[Kevtronn]

It is so bad, I will mention again from previous posts, AVOID DOG SOLIDERS!

I like the film, hate the transfer.

[lDlisturb3d]

gladiator, gladiator, gladiator and gladiator, they ****ed that great movie, all up!!!

[720pDude]

Originally Posted by gvortex7

Well said bud. People need to understand the difference between bad transfer and poor source material.

If 28 Days Later was shot as director intended than that cannot even be considered poor source material. IMO, a BLU RAY reviewer should be someone more than one who just watches a bunch of movies.

Grain varies by film stock... to want a grainy shot film to have that "sheen" like Blu Rays do for non grainy movies shows a lack of understanding film..and I am by far NOT a scholar on this stuff but have read enough over the years to know at least basics from SDVDs and now from Blu Rays

Poor source material is akin to poorly stored negatives, damaged prints, etc.

These kind get restorations...a remaster isnt a restoration either...etc etc..

Theres nothing wrong with 28 Days Later...the source material used is fine..and I have to laugh at the so called "tiers"....First Blood, for its budget back then, shot on location, daylight scenes, etc and year made...for being on Blu Ray is quite damned good, imo.

[Caesu]

Robocop for me so far is my worst bluray transfer

i would say 28 days later, however, apparently thats how it should be, still for some reason the DVD version is easier to watch then the bluray

Sin City is my worst Audio bluray with the high frequency pitch it has (although some dont get it, others do)

[Canada]

Avoid "The Italian Job" still has the worst transfer I've seen by far.

I wish

Predator
The Terminator
and 28 Days later looked better but that all has to do with a budget issue and film stock

[dylan6126]

Gladiator

[RyRyMcNizzy13]

Rob Zombie's Halloween II. yeah it was suppose to look the way it did, but when the 1st one looks that good i think the sequel shoulda kept it that way. terrible quality and theres really no need for the blu since the dvd looks the exact same