total recall

[adamkang]

i want to know if total recall is worth getting on blu ray?
i can get the 2 disc special edition DVD for £3.98
has anyone got both copies and can tell me its PQ and AQ are good?
thx

[sardaukar1977]

To be honest Total Recall is a pretty bad transfer on Blu, but I still think it looks better then the DVD. If you like the movie it is worth getting in my opinion. There isn't much in the way of extras, but hey why not support blu ray with another purchase.

[DetroitSportsFan]

It's an upgrade over the DVD, but don't expect cutting edge picture quality.

[Blu Titan]

I just ordered this movie from JR.com. I am aware that the PQ is not the greatest, but I don't even own the film on DVD. $7.99 is not a bad price.

[adamkang]

hmm ok im gunna buy it, try to find a cheap price on ebay. its a shame there is no commentry from arnie on it
anyone have a screenshot?

[DetroitSportsFan]

Originally Posted by BlueNeon

I just ordered this movie from JR.com. I am aware that the PQ is not the greatest, but I don't even own the film on DVD. $7.99 is not a bad price.

Looks like the sale is over. It's back up to $17.99.

[Bobby Henderson]

Total Recall needs a better transfer to HD (preferably by way of a scan of original film elements and processed with digital intermediate). The movie won a "Special Achievement" visual effects Oscar. I'm pretty sure Return of the Jedi is the only other movie to be given such a high technical honor. So it's a shame this movie isn't presented in a better manner.

An improved Blu-ray version of Total Recall should feature the original teaser trailer and movie trailer in 5.1 audio. I specifically remember seeing a 70mm 6-track Dolby mag format teaser trailer for Total Recall played in front of 70mm showings of Glory and Mountains of the Moon. The clip had some pretty good fly-by surround effects. That's completely lost when the teaser is shown in plain 2.0 stereo.

[Stiny-Ray2]

That movie should be recalled!

[nycomet]

Originally Posted by Stiny-Ray2

That movie should be recalled!

Totally.

[tron3]

Ditto to all the above. I tried comparing the DVD and blu-ray but I really couldn't make out any difference. Think I'll pop it in tonight to check the bit rates and see if the display reads back as 1080p.

[cathexist]

Just ordered this in the JR sale as well...have it on DVD...but I'm slowly getting everything on blu.

On a side note, I found it funny that the week that the the California Recall was going on I watched both Total Recall and Running Man.

[Knight-Errant]

Is this another case of cheap film stock in a Paul Verhoeven movie? I recall that being explained as the reason for Robocop's picture limitations. Apparently he chose to save money on film stock.

[adamkang]

hmmm well get back to me on the comparison plz, and hopefully they will re-release a remastered special edition. anyone think this is highly likely?

[tron3]

Well, I checked Total Recall last night. The problem is not in the resolution, it is in the bitrate. Typical bitrate averaged at 25 to 28 mbit. With a brief second or two in at 29 to 31 mbit. Sometimes a little more.

Any blu-ray worth its salt starts with bit rates in the 30+ mbit range. Cars starts in pitch blackness but the bit rate was over 20! That is a phenominal transfer.

"Now get your @$$ to Mars." - Quaid / Total Recall

[GreenMotion]

Don't forget; these movies are like 20+ years old. I think Paul Verhoeven did a phenomenal job back then without all the special effects and computing power we have nowadays! Same with the original starwars, dune, and ofcourse blade runner.

Originally Posted by Knight-Errant

Is this another case of cheap film stock in a Paul Verhoeven movie? I recall that being explained as the reason for Robocop's picture limitations. Apparently he chose to save money on film stock.

[Knight-Errant]

Originally Posted by GreenMotion

Don't forget; these movies are like 20+ years old. I think Paul Verhoeven did a phenomenal job back then without all the special effects and computing power we have nowadays! Same with the original starwars, dune, and ofcourse blade runner.

Oh don't get me wrong, I love the movie, I was just trying to point out something that was explained around the time Robocop came out, that Paul Verhoeven did save money on the film stock.

I'm not bashing old films at all. I'm more of an afficianado.

[bhampton]

Well,

I picked up the DVD for $5.50 at Walmart way back when,.. Just sold it to Newbury comics for $2 and bought the Blu Ray for $7.99 at J&R.

I'm sure it's a worthy upgrade... I've yet to see a Blu Ray that didn't represent the best possible version of a movie on Home Video. I think in this case... it's about as good as it's going to get.

(I would be happy to be wrong and when and if I am I guess I'll buy it again.)

-Brian

[WickyWoo]

Well, I checked Total Recall last night. The problem is not in the resolution, it is in the bitrate. Typical bitrate averaged at 25 to 28 mbit. With a brief second or two in at 29 to 31 mbit. Sometimes a little more.

Any blu-ray worth its salt starts with bit rates in the 30+ mbit range. Cars starts in pitch blackness but the bit rate was over 20! That is a phenominal transfer.

Kingdom of Heaven is reference at an average of 24

Bitrate in this case is not the issue if that's where the bitrate is sitting. It's that the film looks awful on the negative, and the master LG has isn't the best either

Is this another case of cheap film stock in a Paul Verhoeven movie? I recall that being explained as the reason for Robocop's picture limitations. Apparently he chose to save money on film stock.

No, it's that 80s film stocks are pretty much ass to begin with. In the 70s studios decided that since so few movies were ever re-released, they didn't need high quality film. It wasn't until probably the early 90s that the idea of preserving the catalog really took off, and things started improving. While TR was a high budget movie for 1990, that still doesn't mean that stocks, combined with stylistic choices are going to produce something that looks that great, especially with all the optical printer shots. Verhovan likes his films gritty, I even saw raw footage of Hollow Man (sans FX), and that one was gritty too

[Knight-Errant]

Originally Posted by WickyWoo

Kingdom of Heaven is reference at an average of 24

Bitrate in this case is not the issue if that's where the bitrate is sitting. It's that the film looks awful on the negative, and the master LG has isn't the best either



No, it's that 80s film stocks are pretty much ass to begin with. In the 70s studios decided that since so few movies were ever re-released, they didn't need high quality film. It wasn't until probably the early 90s that the idea of preserving the catalog really took off, and things started improving. While TR was a high budget movie for 1990, that still doesn't mean that stocks, combined with stylistic choices are going to produce something that looks that great, especially with all the optical printer shots. Verhovan likes his films gritty, I even saw raw footage of Hollow Man (sans FX), and that one was gritty too

Aha thanks for explaining. Didn't realize there was actually a deliberate move away from quality stocks.