Predator (1987) (Ultimate Hunter Edition)

[raygendreau]

Originally Posted by BillieCassin

1) Many people have admitted, "Hey I just looked at the screenshots, and I think..."

2) If as many people I've seen yelling about this across all kinds of sites actually bought this disc, it would have been the bestselling Blu-ray title of all time.

Sales are just fine without the discontents:

http://www.amazon.com/gp/bestsellers/dvd/16295751

[Rob71]

Originally Posted by mars396

your profile says that you are 28 !



I am 43, and have had films on the following films-at-home formats:

CED
VHS
DVD
Blu-ray

>>>I've seen quite a few presentations of films at home

some before you were even born

And you prefer the Gumby Predator?!?

[Abacab]

Originally Posted by mars396

your profile says that you are 28 !



I am 43, and have had films on the following films-at-home formats:

CED
VHS
DVD
Blu-ray

>>>I've seen quite a few presentations of films at home

some before you were even born

Wow, CED? I thought you had to be like 70 to have had one of those.

[raygendreau]

Originally Posted by tama_drummer91

I'm still on the fence about which version I prefer. I have read most of this thread, and I have both versions on hand to compare. I have watched both fully. I bought the UHE and watched it first, then the 08 version. I had the special edition 2 disc DVD, but haven't seen the film in quite some time. I must admit when I watched the UHE it felt like the first time I had seen the film. I understand the use of DNR and that the 08 version is closest to what those saw in the theaters. That does mean a lot, but UHE still looks so fresh and crisp. I know that doesn't make it better, but it makes it easier to look at.
I lean slightly towards liking the 08 version better, but only due to keeping it close to the original source. I don't mind the grain at all on the 08 version, but the colors and overall effect of the UHE are more effective. I wish they hadn't overused the DNR on some of the scenes, such as the beginning that everyone has overused to compare how the UHE looks. I don't quite understand how we can use just one screen cap to compare how a whole film will look. Even after watching both versions fully, studying a 200 page thread, and reading all kinds of reviews on other sites I am still not fully sure.

A fair, well informed assessment. Have you watched UHE with the director's commentary on? Listen to his comments about the shot of the General and Dutch at the beginning if you haven't. Knowledge changes perception in my view.

I take it you haven't voted on the poll yet?

[tama_drummer91]

Originally Posted by raygendreau

A fair, well informed assessment. Have you watched UHE with the director's commentary on? Listen to his comments about the shot of the General and Dutch at the beginning if you haven't. Knowledge changes perception in my view.

I take it you haven't voted on the poll yet?

I did actually. I lean towards the 08 now, but I had voted for the UHE before watching the 08 version. That was a fault on my part. After further study, I'm just not sure. I will go listen to that. I am curious though, does this mean that Mctiernan supported the new UHE? That would basically settle the argument for me.

[SpotOn]

Originally Posted by persuazion

How is this a new argument? Its the same thing we have been talking about since page 1.....same subject....its not my fault that so many people voted that they liked the disc and its gotten you into a violent grain loving uproar. Why dont you leave the people alone that actually have watched the disc and like the picture instead of trying to convince them how little they know about film making and how evil they are for buying it in the first place? If you hate the disc so much why do you continue to hang out in a thread dedicated to it? Let me guess ....its to enlighten and educate right?

Are you trying to project your "violent grain hating uproar" tendencies on me? Your posting history shows way more posts in this thread and waaayyyy more of an uproar attitude. Once again, you seem to forget that posting history is easy to look up.

Secondly, since you brought up the poll, when 50% of the posters vote for the barebones release from THREE options, your camp is definitely the minority. Sorry, numbers is numbers, y'all...

Oh, and the way you want to take ownership of this thread is just adorable. This thread is not dedicated to loving the UHE. It is about the debate (hence the poll that your side is losing in a major way here)

Why do you keep hanging out in this thread? Oh yeah, you have been on a long term DNR crusade on this and other threads (that darn posting history again...).

[HeavyHitter]

Originally Posted by supercutz

Yes it is because I have a lot of PS3 owning friends too and none share your friends opinions/complaints.

Your friends =/= majority

It's not just my friends.

The people who hate film grain the most also play games - even on this forum.

The video gamers are the ones creating this anti-film grain problem that studios like Fox clearly catered too even making some aspects of the new release look like CGI!

[Hatter]

Still a stalemate after 211 pages and no end in sight. Maybe it's time to call a truce adn end this. All the analysis one needs has already been posted. There's no need for repeat the same thing till the end of time.

[ScuseMe]

Originally Posted by Offender_Mullet

Alien and The Exorcist are the only older movies I wish I was alive for to see in theaters when they were originally was released. I've heard so many stories about people's experiences with them, but nowadays they are very tame compared to most other films of the same genres.

Sorry to interrupt the DNR arguments, but.....

My soon-to-be wife and I had the privilege of watching Alien in the theater during its first run. In the scene where

[Show spoiler]Dallas is using the flame thrower to drive the Alien through the air ducts - he turns around - and the Alien appears,

my soon-to-be-wife threw up her hands and screamed at the top of her lungs! She wasn't the only one either (I will never say if I did the same thing). The tension in the theater was so thick you could cut it with a knife. Sounds cliche today, but it's very true.

We had no idea what to expect from the Alien movie except that we knew from the ads that it was sci-fi/horror and we both liked those genres. Alien was shocking, to say the least, especially considering it was 1979. We had never seen anything like it before; it was an unforgettable experience that we will always remember.

[raygendreau]

Originally Posted by tama_drummer91

I did actually. I lean towards the 08 now, but I had voted for the UHE before watching the 08 version. That was a fault on my part. After further study, I'm just not sure. I will go listen to that. I am curious though, does this mean that Mctiernan supported the new UHE? That would basically settle the argument for me.

I believe the commentary is the same as the one on the DVD. Perhaps you can check that since you have it. If that is the case it won't answer your question since it precedes the UHE release. It does point out why that scene with the General looks as bad as it does.

I just have a problem with the mpeg-2 (2008) version with a low bitrate looking better the AVC-4 (UHE) version with twice the bitrate. Higher bitrate=more detail. Overapplication of DNR just did not ruin the whole presentation.

[Rob71]

Originally Posted by Hatter

Still a stalemate after 211 pages and no end in sight. Maybe it's time to call a truce adn end this. All the analysis one needs has already been posted. There's no need for repeat the same thing till the end of time.

Look at the poll. Definitely not a stalemate.

[mars396]

Originally Posted by raygendreau

I just have a problem with the mpeg-2 (2008) version with a low bitrate looking better the AVC-4 (UHE) version with twice the bitrate. Higher bitrate=more detail. Overapplication of DNR just did not ruin the whole presentation.

agreed

Originally Posted by Hatter

Still a stalemate after 211 pages and no end in sight. Maybe it's time to call a truce adn end this. All the analysis one needs has already been posted. There's no need for repeat the same thing till the end of time.

I am looking forward to doing this all over again in the Aliens thread: Coming this Fall to Bluray.com !!!

[Rob71]

Originally Posted by raygendreau

I believe the commentary is the same as the one on the DVD. Perhaps you can check that since you have it. If that is the case it won't answer your question since it precedes the UHE release. It does point out why that scene with the General looks as bad as it does.

I just have a problem with the mpeg-2 (2008) version with a low bitrate looking better the AVC-4 (UHE) version with twice the bitrate. Higher bitrate=more detail. Overapplication of DNR just did not ruin the whole presentation.

Why go through the effort of a new release with a higher bitrate(more detail) if you are just going to erase that added detail?

Just doesn't make sense.

[SpotOn]

Originally Posted by raygendreau

I believe the commentary is the same as the one on the DVD. Perhaps you can check that since you have it. If that is the case it won't answer your question since it precedes the UHE release. It does point out why that scene with the General looks as bad as it does.

I just have a problem with the mpeg-2 (2008) version with a low bitrate looking better the AVC-4 (UHE) version with twice the bitrate. Higher bitrate=more detail. Overapplication of DNR just did not ruin the whole presentation.

Respectfully, that statement is incorrect. It has everything to do with the compression artist, not the bitrate. PS3 started this bitrate religion by letting you monitor it, but it has no grounding in reality.

The following article explains this in detail and should be required reading for all posters who think mpeg-2 is not any good:
http://www.highdefdigest.com/news/show/1096

[tama_drummer91]

Originally Posted by raygendreau

I believe the commentary is the same as the one on the DVD. Perhaps you can check that since you have it. If that is the case it won't answer your question since it precedes the UHE release. It does point out why that scene with the General looks as bad as it does.

I just have a problem with the mpeg-2 (2008) version with a low bitrate looking better the AVC-4 (UHE) version with twice the bitrate. Higher bitrate=more detail. Overapplication of DNR just did not ruin the whole presentation.

You raise some great points. I guess I'm just stuck here in the middle. I think both sides have fair and logical arguments to make. I do believe those who argue for the 08 version have the stronger point, but those who argue for the UHE, like yourself, still make a strong stance because the new version looks in ways so much better and crisp. I would really appreciate any input from the director or director of photography, but that's not likely going to happen.

[Hatter]

Originally Posted by Rob71

Look at the poll. Definitely not a stalemate.

Wasn't talking about the poll. If it was only about the poll, 211 pages wouldn't be needed. It's the constant points, counter points, rebuttalls etc that have made this thread just go in circles.

[raygendreau]

Originally Posted by tama_drummer91

You raise some great points. I guess I'm just stuck here in the middle. I think both sides have fair and logical arguments to make. I do believe those who argue for the 08 version have the stronger point, but those who argue for the UHE, like yourself, still make a strong stance because the new version looks in ways so much better and crisp. I would really appreciate any input from the director or director of photography, but that's not likely going to happen.

I agree, although Don McAlpine might be more accessible than McT because of his current legal problems.

[Cobra33]

just bought this last night, i think it looks fantastic! ive never seen this movie this clear before. that stupid annoying grain is gone and its completely cleaned up. sure there are some parts where peoples faces look a bit waxy but thats not all the time. its crisp and clear and thouroughly enjoyable. i dont get the complaints. maybe im just not a techno buff like many hear and cant see the issues, but this is certainly the best predator has ever looked. im very impressed. ill take this very clear cleaner polished version over the ultra grainy old looking version anyday.

[720pDude]

Originally Posted by mars396

I still think those screen caps were manipulated in some way - either with the settings on the TV or after they were taken. I've watched and re-watched my Predator UHE, and what I saw simply does not look like those screenshots. And, I am not sitting too far away - I specifically got off the couch and moved within inches during the most celebrated (by the anti-UHE crowd) scenes (General Waxy, Mr Potato Head Shirt, Melting Carl, etc).

I just don't see it.

If it is because I am watching on a 37" LCD, then that is what this Blu-ray was made for; it looks terrific !

Rest assured they've been manipulated by grain-boys. You may have a 37, but I'm watching on a 120 inch projector and the image on UHE is GREAT

[720pDude]

Originally Posted by HeavyHitter

It's not just my friends.

The people who hate film grain the most also play games - even on this forum.

The video gamers are the ones creating this anti-film grain problem that studios like Fox clearly catered too even making some aspects of the new release look like CGI!

Broad brush painter huh?

Guess what, I love the UEH and am NOT a gamer, dont own a PS3, etc...I actually dislike gaming. So um...