Predator (1987) (Ultimate Hunter Edition)

[Stu123]

He looks more like polished wood

[wesslan]

One can hope FOX listens to all reviews and make a new master like Fifth element and gladiator. Sometimes just sometimes someone listens. Kind of worried for all Alien movies....

Digital bits has a good piece worth reading. http://www.thedigitalbits.com/articl...oap062510.html And they know a lot of people in the business.

[opterasis]

Originally Posted by wesslan

One can hope FOX listens to all reviews and make a new master like Fifth element and gladiator. Sometimes just sometimes someone listens. Kind of worried for all Alien movies....

Digital bits has a good piece worth reading. http://www.thedigitalbits.com/articl...oap062510.html And they know a lot of people in the business.

Weird, that link gave me a malware warning.

[KarmaNL]

same here

[DetroitSportsFan]

Originally Posted by stubiedoo

He looks more like polished wood

[Show spoiler]

[DetroitSportsFan]

Originally Posted by CoMaToast

WHY do they make differet ( better ) versions for different regions? the film industry really confuses me

If you want a quality presentation of T2, order this one:

http://www.amazon.co.jp/%E3%82%BF%E3...7558928&sr=1-1

Or if you want a cheaper option and don't care about extras, this one is good too.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Terminator-2...7559006&sr=1-6

[Rusty100]

Originally Posted by DetroitSportsFan

If you want a quality presentation of T2, order this one:

http://www.amazon.co.jp/%E3%82%BF%E3...7558928&sr=1-1

Or if you want a cheaper option and don't care about extras, this one is good too.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Terminator-2...7559006&sr=1-6

I've been looking for the best Terminator 2 video quality, so you say this japanese version has the best?

[DetroitSportsFan]

Originally Posted by Rusty100

I've been looking for the best Terminator 2 video quality, so you say this japanese version has the best?

Yes, and has a nice amount of extras.

The UK release is a close second in picture quality, but it has no extras and is the extended cut only.

[TheOneWithThePrize]

Originally Posted by opterasis

Weird, that link gave me a malware warning.

They claim that there is no malware on their site yet why did my Windows Media Player open up automatically with a request to access a Chinese link? Something isn't right.

[TheOneWithThePrize]

Originally Posted by QuasidodoJr

Here's a close-up pic of Carl Weathers that Blu-News.com posted over at HDD:

http://twitpic.com/201f30/full

AND that's what a wax figure looks like, Ladies and Gentlemen.

I don't know whether to laugh or cry, I'll probably do a little of both.

[Home Th3atre]

I don't think this review has been posted yet. A bunch of comparison shots also. The reviewer states that the red shirt arnold is an isolated frame and is caused by the lighting or something.

http://www.avpgalaxy.net/website/art...ay-comparison/

[Maggot]

Originally Posted by ScuseMe

+1

I have both the 1998 and 2004 versions of Predator on DVD, and both pale in comparison to the BD version (the original, the only one I have).

We all have different tollerances, but I would strongly dissagree. The Blu-ray is marginally better for me. I sit about 6-7 feet away from my Panny v10 50 inch and I'm surprised how little improved the image is. But then again, I'm seeing that way too often. The Bill Hunt rant about studios not putting out the bucks on new transfers/restorations is exactly what I'm seeing and what I have ranted about all along. If I'm going to reinvest my entire catalog on a new tech that clearly can do the job, but you as the studios fail, fail epically way too many times, then it's clear, very clear......there's a problem. More and more, I finding that what friends and strangers have been saying all along. Blu-ray doesn't look much better than DVD. And when you pop in a DVD and upconvert, it becomes more and more apperent. I'm not saying Blu-ray isn't capable. Hardly, I have great Blu-ray transfers, but far too many movies are being put out in a sub-par state.

[Dotpattern]

Originally Posted by Home Th3atre

I don't think this review has been posted yet. A bunch of comparison shots also. The reviewer states that the red shirt arnold is an isolated frame and is caused by the lighting or something.

http://www.avpgalaxy.net/website/art...ay-comparison/

That reviewer is just some average, anonymous guy. He calls this new version a "restoration" - it's not a restoration. And the shot of the shirt may be isolated, but anyone who claims it's caused by the lighting simply doesn't know what they're talking about.

[DetroitSportsFan]

Originally Posted by Home Th3atre

I don't think this review has been posted yet.

That's because it's an Alien/Predator fanboy site, which means their reviews have little to no credibility.

[ScuseMe]

Originally Posted by QuasidodoJr

Here's a close-up pic of Carl Weathers that Blu-News.com posted over at HDD:

http://twitpic.com/201f30/full

AND that's what a wax figure looks like, Ladies and Gentlemen.

Madame Tussauds is drooling to get her hands on him

[bleauboy]

He calls this new version a "restoration"

Thats what Fox is calling it too. That is gonna deceive a lot of people.

[MikeH5856]

Review from Home Theater Forum is up at:

http://www.hometheaterforum.com/foru...hunter-edition

Doesn't sound good at all... Here's what reviewer Matt Hough says about the video:

"From the moment one’s eyes spy the Twentieth Century Fox logo in all its soft, buttery ooze, it’s obvious the film has been heavily scrubbed with massive amounts of DNR (there isn’t a speck of grain in sight), and while edge enhancement hasn’t been heavily applied, there’s enough there for it to be unmistakable on several occasions. The shots that have always been soft now take on an added mushiness that’s ugly and almost unwatchable, and naturally countenances appear waxy and unnatural after all of the digital processing. Color is nicely saturated, and black levels are good. It also appears that the picture has been brightened a bit from the darkness levels of the original Blu-ray release, but that isn’t much compensation for a picture that doesn’t look at all like film."

[DetroitSportsFan]

Originally Posted by MikeH5856

Review from Home Theater Forum is up at:

http://www.hometheaterforum.com/foru...hunter-edition

Doesn't sound good at all... Here's what reviewer Matt Hough says about the video:

"From the moment one’s eyes spy the Twentieth Century Fox logo in all its soft, buttery ooze, it’s obvious the film has been heavily scrubbed with massive amounts of DNR (there isn’t a speck of grain in sight), and while edge enhancement hasn’t been heavily applied, there’s enough there for it to be unmistakable on several occasions. The shots that have always been soft now take on an added mushiness that’s ugly and almost unwatchable, and naturally countenances appear waxy and unnatural after all of the digital processing. Color is nicely saturated, and black levels are good. It also appears that the picture has been brightened a bit from the darkness levels of the original Blu-ray release, but that isn’t much compensation for a picture that doesn’t look at all like film."

Yeah, I posted this yesterday. Don't forget the conclusion:

Predator seems to have gained in stature over the years as a much above average sci-fi/horror/action film. The movie still plays tensely and tautly even if this new Blu-ray edition is definitely a step back in terms of video quality from the original Blu-ray edition. Fans of the movie might want to get the set for the extras that are new to this release, but unless one has a smaller screen HDTV, I can’t imagine many people liking the looks of this remastered edition of the movie.

[sharkcohen]

Originally Posted by Maggot

We all have different tollerances, but I would strongly dissagree. The Blu-ray is marginally better for me. I sit about 6-7 feet away from my Panny v10 50 inch and I'm surprised how little improved the image is. But then again, I'm seeing that way too often. The Bill Hunt rant about studios not putting out the bucks on new transfers/restorations is exactly what I'm seeing and what I have ranted about all along. If I'm going to reinvest my entire catalog on a new tech that clearly can do the job, but you as the studios fail, fail epically way too many times, then it's clear, very clear......there's a problem. More and more, I finding that what friends and strangers have been saying all along. Blu-ray doesn't look much better than DVD. And when you pop in a DVD and upconvert, it becomes more and more apperent. I'm not saying Blu-ray isn't capable. Hardly, I have great Blu-ray transfers, but far too many movies are being put out in a sub-par state.

+1 The format is awesome, has tons of potential, and there are great examples of solid catalog releases on it, but more examples that are poor. Garbage in, garbage out.

[MikeH5856]

Originally Posted by DetroitSportsFan

Yeah, I posted this yesterday. Don't forget the conclusion:

Sorry, I missed your post. I didn't go back far enough to check if I was double-posting. This thread has been growing really fast now that reviews are cropping up.

Last copy of Predator I bought was the original DVD release. Despite all the bad news, I'll still check out this blu-ray release eventually, although my enthusiasm for it is now really low.