Predator (1987) (Ultimate Hunter Edition)

[Lincoln6Echo]

Originally Posted by mars396

How about the pacing of the film ? You are totally messing with scene as the director plotted it. You are taking HIS work and messing with it to suit YOUR needs ! It is not YOUR film to pause !!!!

[mars396]

Originally Posted by Q!

I guess you totally missed the point of the debate.

did I ?

the debate is about altering the original work of the Director.


I have been saying for pages now, that by digitizing a film, burning it onto a disc, and watching in one's home, you are altering that work.

There are no pause, fast forward, or reverse controls in a movie theatre.

Predator was not presented in 7.1 surround sound on an LCD nor Plasma HD screen.

Everything about Blu-ray is an alteration of the Director's work.

I think perhaps YOU are missing the point.

[Dotpattern]

Originally Posted by mars396

did I ?

the debate is about altering the original work of the Director.


I have been saying for pages now, that by digitizing a film, burning it onto a disc, and watching in one's home, you are altering that work.

There are no pause, fast forward, or reverse controls in a movie theatre.

Predator was not presented in 7.1 surround sound on an LCD nor Plasma HD screen.

Everything about Blu-ray is an alteration of the Director's work.

I think perhaps YOU are missing the point.

Blatant extremism aside, this guy doesn't agree with you...

Movies viewed in the HD format boast a film-grain quality [and] Blu-ray allows the film to be seen as closely as possible to how it was intended to be.

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/...93dc77297ac82b

[Monster Energy]

Great Edition

[victor1385]

As I was out re-purchasing the 2008 edition of Predator, I realized that something good did come out of this disastrous re-release. Typically when I would hear a favorite movie of mine was getting re-mastered I would go out and sell my existing copy in anticipation for the new one. Well not anymore. While it did hurt to have to re-purchase something I already had, the lesson I learned was perhaps worth more than the 15 bucks the movie cost. Thanks fox :P:P.

[42041]

Originally Posted by mars396

did I ?

the debate is about altering the original work of the Director.


I have been saying for pages now, that by digitizing a film, burning it onto a disc, and watching in one's home, you are altering that work.

There are no pause, fast forward, or reverse controls in a movie theatre.

Predator was not presented in 7.1 surround sound on an LCD nor Plasma HD screen.

Everything about Blu-ray is an alteration of the Director's work.

I think perhaps YOU are missing the point.

Don't be obtuse. Obviously I can't install a movie theater in my home, but a high quality blu-ray disc is quite capable of, for all reasonable intents and purposes, conveying a film as it is meant to look. Pausing is not modifying the movie, DNR is.

[pro-bassoonist]

Originally Posted by Lincoln6Echo

Yeah, because we all know that all movies , young and old, were originally theatrically presented with DTS HD Master Audio....

You should know that they have uncompressed audio, and DTS-HD Master Audio is one of a few codecs that allows you to experience it at home. So, technically, your rebuttal is indeed irrelevant.

Originally Posted by Lincoln6Echo

Ya see, these are the kin d of arguments that I have to roll my eyes on when it comes to the purists.

The ONLY way one could ever watch their favorite films as they were originallly intended would be to have the exact same set-up used in the theater at the time. Presuming that the equipment is top-of-the-line for the time period. But that can never be the case. We live in a digital age now...we don't have reel-to-reel projectors in our house, we don't have mono speaker boxes behind the screen. You can't compare the analog age to the digital age.

Precisely because we live in the so-called digital age we should be able to emulate these standards/originals. If we went with your logic, then we should never try to translate classic novels, poetry, etc., because a) the English language has dramatically evolved during the centuries (or God forbid we should have to read a novel that isn't in English -- which we cannot possibly "experience" as its creator intended it to be), b) we have no way of accessing many of the originals and c) technically we can "improve" all of these classic novels, poetry, etc.

With other words, the fact that you have the ability to "improve" on a film (or novel), thus irreversibly affecting its integrity, does not mean that you have the moral right to do so. In a slightly broader context, one could successfully argue that all these new "improvements" are in fact a very strange, and very disturbing, form of technical plagiarism - a technician selling his version of another man's work.

Originally Posted by Lincoln6Echo

Trust me, if I was a purist as such and wanted to watch films today in the way I remembered them in the theater back in the day, I'd shoot myself.

You don't have to be a purist. You have to be informed in order to understand why your opinion is criticized.

Pro-B

[pro-bassoonist]

Originally Posted by mars396

did I ?

the debate is about altering the original work of the Director.


I have been saying for pages now, that by digitizing a film, burning it onto a disc, and watching in one's home, you are altering that work.

There are no pause, fast forward, or reverse controls in a movie theatre.

Predator was not presented in 7.1 surround sound on an LCD nor Plasma HD screen.

Everything about Blu-ray is an alteration of the Director's work.

I think perhaps YOU are missing the point.

Unfortunately, your analogy is flawed. The debate at hand is about integrity of content, not content usage. You don't seem to differentiate the two.

Pro-B

[YodasFootPowder]

I'm thinking the mods should just delete the last 75 pages of this thread.

[TNT]

Originally Posted by YodasFootPowder

I'm thinking the mods should just delete the last 75 pages of this thread.

A thread that will live in infamy.

[Member-38928]

This thread is in my daily routine now, its a need more than a want.

[Rob_BluRay]

I saw the movie in theaters when it was originally released(I'm 38). When I bought the initial Blu-ray release, I was hugely disappointed with the picture quality. The film grain was ridiculous and I honestly don't remember it being that bad even those many years ago when I saw it in the theater. The colors seemed washed out, nothing stood out to me that it was "high def". It seemed more like a badly upscaled dvd. The grain was so much of a distraction that once I viewed the entire movie I promptly sold it to a local mom and pop video store.

Bought the Ultimate Hunter Edition at Walmart tonight for $15. Now this is a huge improvement imo of the picture quality. I can see beads of sweat, skin pores, details on leaves, individual whiskers, everything is crisp and crystal clear with deep colors and no more annoying film grain. The jungle scenes are detailed and crisp. Nothing seems "off" with the picture to my eyes(beyond 20/20 vision )

It all comes down to a matter of taste obviously. I'm happy with my purchase. Your mileage may vary.

Hey and I got a $10 movie money voucher good towards "Predators" as well.

My home theater setup- 40" Toshiba 1080p 60hz lcd, hdmi connected slim PS3 with latest updates, RCA 5.1 surround sound system(fiber optic)

[retablo]

Originally Posted by mars396

How about the pacing of the film ? You are totally messing with the scene as the director plotted it. You are taking HIS work and messing with it to suit YOUR needs ! It is not YOUR film to pause !!!! Why do you feel someone else's art should cater to you? It's made, and that's it. Either like how it's made or not.

How about the pacing? If I don't pause it, then where's your argument? Why not focus on the real problem (presentations like this one) and not nitpicky things that have no relevance?

And, exactly: "It's made, and that's it. Either like how it's made or not." So we shouldn't have bastardized presentations like this one because it was never meant to be pretty or look like a video game. You should take your own advice.

[retablo]

Originally Posted by Lincoln6Echo

Yeah, because we all know that all movies , young and old, were originally theatrically presented with DTS HD Master Audio....

NOT!!!

Ya see, these are the kin d of arguments that I have to roll my eyes on when it comes to the purists.

The ONLY way one could ever watch their favorite films as they were originallly intended would be to have the exact same set-up used in the theater at the time. Presuming that the equipment is top-of-the-line for the time period. But that can never be the case. We live in a digital age now...we don't have reel-to-reel projectors in our house, we don't have mono speaker boxes behind the screen. You can't compare the analog age to the digital age.

Trust me, if I was a purist as such and wanted to watch films today in the way I remembered them in the theater back in the day, I'd shoot myself. My local theater has always been out of date. I don't even think they have a full surround sound theater. I don't know, I haven't been in years. Movies used to be a big thing in our town...lines galor going in for the 7:00 showing during the summer weekends...not now...I haven't seen lines there in years.

Most people in our area now, drive to the next town over where they do have good theaters, and then over in the next town after that, a University town, they have an IMAX theater.

Wrong, and wrong. Sorry.

My analogy still stands. Would you remove brush strokes from the Mona Lisa just because you can? Nope.

Apparently you've never created anything artistic in your life, or you would understand about the preservation of someone else's WORK. Maybe I'll repost your above "rant" and change the words I don't like and re-write some sentences to cater to my needs, but still put your name on it. Let's see how happy you'd be then with your words misrepresented.

Same case here. The film is being mis-represented form its original, intended vision. That's what's at stake, and it's more important to not only this film but thousands of other films if tactics like this continue to happen. It has nothing to do with the digital age.

I'm sorry you don't respect the integrity of cinema, or the art that countless directors and cinematographers created for you to enjoy. That's precisely what's wrong with people nowadays.. no respect.

[Blu Myers]

Originally Posted by Rob_BluRay

I saw the movie in theaters when it was originally released(I'm 38). When I bought the initial Blu-ray release, I was hugely disappointed with the picture quality. The film grain was ridiculous and I honestly don't remember it being that bad even those many years ago when I saw it in the theater. The colors seemed washed out, nothing stood out to me that it was "high def". It seemed more like a badly upscaled dvd. The grain was so much of a distraction that once I viewed the entire movie I promptly sold it to a local mom and pop video store.

Bought the Ultimate Hunter Edition at Walmart tonight for $15. Now this is a huge improvement imo of the picture quality. I can see beads of sweat, skin pores, details on leaves, individual whiskers, everything is crisp and crystal clear with deep colors and no more annoying film grain. The jungle scenes are detailed and crisp. Nothing seems "off" with the picture to my eyes(beyond 20/20 vision )

It all comes down to a matter of taste obviously. I'm happy with my purchase. Your mileage may vary.

Hey and I got a $10 movie money voucher good towards "Predators" as well.

My home theater setup- 40" Toshiba 1080p 60hz lcd, hdmi connected slim PS3 with latest updates, RCA 5.1 surround sound system(fiber optic)

Nice review. I have to go through 3 pages of bs just to get to what I'm actually looking for, which is a review like this. I think people should keep the bashing and arguing to themselves and just post their own personal experience with the disc, like Rob_Bluray and others have done.

Now I'm not saying I'll prefer the UHE better than the original, which is what I own, but it's nice to hear the different perspectives.

[markbr]

Originally Posted by Rob_BluRay

I saw the movie in theaters when it was originally released(I'm 38). When I bought the initial Blu-ray release, I was hugely disappointed with the picture quality. The film grain was ridiculous and I honestly don't remember it being that bad even those many years ago when I saw it in the theater. The colors seemed washed out, nothing stood out to me that it was "high def". It seemed more like a badly upscaled dvd. The grain was so much of a distraction that once I viewed the entire movie I promptly sold it to a local mom and pop video store.

Bought the Ultimate Hunter Edition at Walmart tonight for $15. Now this is a huge improvement imo of the picture quality. I can see beads of sweat, skin pores, details on leaves, individual whiskers, everything is crisp and crystal clear with deep colors and no more annoying film grain. The jungle scenes are detailed and crisp. Nothing seems "off" with the picture to my eyes(beyond 20/20 vision )

It all comes down to a matter of taste obviously. I'm happy with my purchase. Your mileage may vary.

Hey and I got a $10 movie money voucher good towards "Predators" as well.

My home theater setup- 40" Toshiba 1080p 60hz lcd, hdmi connected slim PS3 with latest updates, RCA 5.1 surround sound system(fiber optic)

Well said that's my opinion, I have both versions. The 2008 version PQ is S••T !!! 2010 version clear, bright, more detail I'm very happy.

[persuazion]

Wow..... Just wow. Some people on here get very emotional when it comes to altering a movie, all of a sudden we want to destroy the Mona Lisa too. I feel like I'm in a lifetime movie. I need to go do some serious soul searching and find out why exactly I like the transfer and why I enjoy seeing works of art destroyed.What is wrong with me? Is it some sort of chemical imbalance?Why do I not start to get filled with rage and furious anger at the mere mention of dnr?This thread has made me realize one thing..... I must hate movies. Despite owning 600 blurays... 120 hd DVDs and countless DVDs.... Some how I hate movies.I need a new hobby.... I mean I like to read comics but if I get that marvel app for the iPad I will be Altering the way comics were meant to be seen and read.I don't want to find out that I hate comics too. I am lost.

[Douglas R]

Originally Posted by retablo

Wrong, and wrong. Sorry.

My analogy still stands. Would you remove brush strokes from the Mona Lisa just because you can? Nope.

Apparently you've never created anything artistic in your life, or you would understand about the preservation of someone else's WORK. Maybe I'll repost your above "rant" and change the words I don't like and re-write some sentences to cater to my needs, but still put your name on it. Let's see how happy you'd be then with your words misrepresented.

Same case here. The film is being mis-represented form its original, intended vision. That's what's at stake, and it's more important to not only this film but thousands of other films if tactics like this continue to happen. It has nothing to do with the digital age.

I'm sorry you don't respect the integrity of cinema, or the art that countless directors and cinematographers created for you to enjoy. That's precisely what's wrong with people nowadays.. no respect.

Wow! How many hundreds of posts have you made on this thread - no wonder it's so long. The phrase "Get a life" comes to mind. And there's that silly Mona Lisa analogy again. If you can't see the difference between Old Masters and Predator then I question your own artistic values.

[wormraper]

Originally Posted by Douglas R

Wow! How many hundreds of posts have you made on this thread - no wonder it's so long. The phrase "Get a life" comes to mind. And there's that silly Mona Lisa analogy again. If you can't see the difference between Old Masters and Predator then I question your artistic values.

just because you don't value McTienan's art as much as an Old Master doesn't make it any less important.

So basically because Picasso is an Old Master I need to preserve his work yet the upcoming artist at my local collage isn't nearly as important so it's ok If I re-color his painting with some extra reds and blue because I want to???

[42041]

Originally Posted by persuazion

I need to go do some serious soul searching and find out why exactly I like the transfer and why I enjoy seeing works of art destroyed.

Sarcasm doesn't make it untrue