The Cooler (101 Films) Black Label 006 - 2003 - William H. Macy, Maria Bello

[lemonski]

Originally Posted by johnpaul2

Because unfortunately, many customers don't have the same exigences than us when it comes to AV performances. Many are happy with anything that seems HD and will be happy to get a new documentary with the older extras included too.

That doesn't make much sense to me. If you love The Cooler enough as a film to be attracted to a 1 hour+ documentary on it and a 15 pound price tag for a "black label" disc, surely you're also concerned about the look of the film? I don't believe the consumer audience you're using to rationalise the problem away is anywhere near as big as you think it is. This is not a big-budget superhero film.

Originally Posted by johnpaul2

The other issue lies with the restoration market itself. Wayne's answer clearly pinpoints why the current HD master is dated, but if no new restoration gets done, there won't be any other alternative to release the movie on video with the biggest technical flaws alleviated.

Then perhaps 101 Films should have asked themselves whether they should be doing it at all.

It seems to me like a case of the tail wagging the dog, where the documentary was the main focus of this project and the quality of the transfer was an afterthought.

[johnpaul2]

Originally Posted by lemonski

I don't believe the consumer audience you're using to rationalise the problem away is anywhere near as big as you think it is. This is not a big-budget superhero film.

It's some kind of opposite issue to me : it's not the audience that needs to be big enough to be unaware, it's the people like us who aren't that numerous.
Heck, even some enthusiasts aren't very technically-savvy.
I mean, even Robert Harris sometimes doesn't know what he's talking about when reviewing a BD.

We often overestimate the awareness of enthusiasts. Sadly, even enthusiasts can be lax at times.

Originally Posted by lemonski

Then perhaps 101 Films should have asked themselves whether they should be doing it at all.

This, to me, is the more important question : why some labels keep agreeing on releasing BDs with subpar or very dated material ? I understand "ah, but it gives the movie a new visibility" and "a DVD release wouldn't give the same new visibility", but wasn't the whole point of BD to be a premium format giving premium AV performances ?

[nmac320]

Just watched this. The picture is terrible in bits and decent in others. The sound in some scenes however is next level bad. Any scene with a car is so tinny and distorted it completely ruins the scenes. Pretty bad when one of the major scenes involves a car. I’ve sent them a tweet to ask if there is a fault with the disc. The picture I can except may be the master (although director says different) but the quality of the sound is ridiculous.

[lemonski]

Originally Posted by johnpaul2

This, to me, is the more important question : why some labels keep agreeing on releasing BDs with subpar or very dated material ?

If your label were only in it for a quick buck I can understand why you might release any film with any kind of profile you can get your hands on. If you see yourself as more than a "pump and dump" operation, and you love the film as 101 obviously do, why do your brand reputation and the filmmakers the disservice of accepting and using a subpar master? Presumably as a licensor you get to look at the master before you purchase the video rights...if it is an older master, it seems strange to me to try to use that as the springboard for a "black label" premium product. Sometimes the best answer is "no".

[Porco Azzurro]

I watched this recently and agree the video quality is pretty bad.

When I watched the audio sounded unbelievably bad too - until I switched it to the second audio track (DTS-HD MA) which is much better.

I liked the film itself a lot, it’s a shame the presentation isn’t as good as it deserves.

[nmac320]

101 hit back to me and said they were aware of an issue and were looking into it. Hopefully there is a fix planned.

[johnpaul2]

Originally Posted by lemonski

If your label were only in it for a quick buck I can understand why you might release any film with any kind of profile you can get your hands on. If you see yourself as more than a "pump and dump" operation, and you love the film as 101 obviously do, why do your brand reputation and the filmmakers the disservice of accepting and using a subpar master? Presumably as a licensor you get to look at the master before you purchase the video rights...if it is an older master, it seems strange to me to try to use that as the springboard for a "black label" premium product. Sometimes the best answer is "no".

I know that in some cases, unfortunately, the rightholder doesn't allow to see the master before closing the deal (and presumably paying the money for it). In other cases, all you get is a sample, but who knows if it's representative of the whole master or if it was cherry picked on purpose.
I assume many cases came from this issue in the material flow, and it might have been that 101 only got their hands on the HD master late in the workflow.

However, if regular people like me can check if a recent master exists or if it's extremely likely to be stuck with an old dated master, I suppose professionals can guess that too and make their choices based on this.

So you're absolutely right : it doesn't serve lots of people to do that, especially when you're launching a new vaguely "premium" collection. So far, the Black Label collection from 101 has been plagued by older dated masters (not very well encoded on top of that) and it makes one wonder what 101 is hoping to do with this.


We also need to keep in mind that some labels have very good commercial, marketing or movie persons in their teams but nobody technically-minded. This certainly doesn't help detecting technical issues. For instance, even I would probably be unable to detect that The Cooler has been improperly converted to 24fps and actually is still somehow running at 25.


In any case, it's unfortunate for The Cooler, which I like quite much.

[lemonski]

Originally Posted by johnpaul2

We also need to keep in mind that some labels have very good commercial, marketing or movie persons in their teams but nobody technically-minded. This certainly doesn't help detecting technical issues.

Since he was participating in the documentary, they could have simply asked Mr. Kramer to review the transfer...or at least send him a check disc! From the stills he posted on his Facebook page, it seems they didn’t even bother to check their results against a reference print.

Originally Posted by johnpaul2

For instance, even I would probably be unable to detect that The Cooler has been improperly converted to 24fps and actually is still somehow running at 25.

Making sure the feature runtime is correct is elementary QC. Mistakenly encoding it at 1080i/25 is a reflection of the lack of care they’ve taken.

Originally Posted by johnpaul2

In any case, it's unfortunate for The Cooler, which I like quite much.

Yep. I’d love the disc to look like the stills posted on Mr. Kramer’s Facebook page. Hopefully something can yet be worked out.

[johnpaul2]

The lack of anything rather is when a 25fps master is left as such as a 1080i50 rather than bothering converting it to 1080p24 but without changing the speed of the movie (which is something I actually never heard of before).
But in any case you're right, runtime is a basic QC step.

[pino]

Just got it today. It's true that the transfer is 1080i50 and the image quality is not perfect by any stretch of the imagination, but the DVDbeaver screenshots don't do it justice at all. They look bleak by comparison.

Like mentioned earlier, the sound quality is much worse. Very flat and compressed to hell. I can only imagine if you listen to this movie with a headset on...

Edit: In addition, the score playing in the main menu sounds much better than in the movie itself...

[Porco Azzurro]

Originally Posted by pino

Like mentioned earlier, the sound quality is much worse. Very flat and compressed to hell. I can only imagine if you listen to this movie with a headset on...

Edit: In addition, the score playing in the main menu sounds much better than in the movie itself...

Again, just to check, have you switched the audio track from the first one (stereo LPCM) to the second one (5.1 DTS-MA)?

If you find the second one bad too then fair enough, but it's much better, to my ears.

[pino]

Originally Posted by Porco Azzurro

Again, just to check, have you switched the audio track from the first one (stereo LPCM) to the second one (5.1 DTS-MA)?

If you find the second one bad too then fair enough, but it's much better, to my ears.

That made all the difference in the world. Thanks!
I simply overlooked the 5.1 track, because there was no menu option for it.

[Porco Azzurro]

Originally Posted by pino

That made all the difference in the world. Thanks!
I simply overlooked the 5.1 track, because there was no menu option for it.

You're welcome. I only tried pressing the audio button on my remote myself because like everyone complaining about the audio, the default audio track seemed so bad from the start.

[Indiana Jonezzz...]

Originally Posted by Porco Azzurro

Again, just to check, have you switched the audio track from the first one (stereo LPCM) to the second one (5.1 DTS-MA)?

If you find the second one bad too then fair enough, but it's much better, to my ears.

That’s good to hear then, so there’s at least one decent audio track on the disc, and a good documentary. It’s just the video quality that’s disappointing, but it’s still the best looking version out there AFAIK.

[danny24]

Got the BD and watched it. Overall the video is an upgrade over the DVD but it's just had an average Kino Lorber disc kind of feel to it. Still better than anything out there at the moment. The extras are really good.

The disc should be recalled though not for the video (it isn't that bad nor is it that great either) but having to switch the audio track. The main audio track sounded awful, the second English audio track (5.1 DTS) was great.

Packaging was excellent, booklet included and slipbox. Remember if you watch it to switch audio track to 5.1 DTS for best sound.

Yes, a 4k remaster would be ideal but this is still an upgrade over the DVD.

[scott1598]

is this the uncut version of the film or the 'R' rated version? i know only minute difference, but i saw the uncut and want it. thanks for reply.

[robw285]

It is the uncut version which is the only positive thing that you can say about this disc.

[buck135]

Originally Posted by robw285

It is the uncut version which is the only positive thing that you can say about this disc.

The documentary is amazing.

[OldBoy15]

Originally Posted by buck135

The documentary is amazing.

I was gonna say. The pic quality isn’t bad, it’s uncut, an incredibly underrated movie and has that docu. This and In Bruges are now my favorite other region releases.

[robw285]

Originally Posted by buck135

The documentary is amazing.

To be fair that's true and better presented than the film itself.