Predator (1987) (Ultimate Hunter Edition)

[davidjjanderson1981]

Originally Posted by eco10530

you don't know what you are talking about. 90% of this film is DNR'd
It's annoying to watch. And that shot of Arnold falling through the air and into the waterfall looks like 240x120 video size file.

But that scene has always been really really bad ever since my original vhs to dvd to bluray they can only do so much and blu-ray makes sub par footage look even worse!

[mars396]

Originally Posted by wormraper

so now we've gone from arguing that we like the DNR to "well ANYTHING besides a big theatrical presentation on projector with film spools is a compromise so Anything they pull is ok because home cinema is just one big compromise"

yes: exactly !
everything is adapted for the medium it is presented on.

Enjoy it ! Embrace the evolution of technology !
Stop trying to see film grain on a digital LCD/Plasma screen, and enjoy the new presentation of our beloved classics.

If you are that desparate to see a 1987 film exactly as it was presented in 1987, then perhaps all this advanced technology isn't for you.

[wormraper]

Originally Posted by mars396

yes: exactly !
everything is adapted for the medium it is presented on.

Enjoy it ! Embrace the evolution of technology !
Stop trying to see film grain on a digital LCD/Plasma screen, and enjoy the new presentation of our beloved classics.

If you are that desperate to see a 1987 film exactly as it was presented in 1987, then perhaps all this advanced technology isn't for you.

oh wow, that's truly embarrassing and completely disheartening as a movie buff. It's become obvious that some members on this forum aren't film fans at all just tech geeks . That statement you just made is one of the most horrifying statements I've heard in a while (not to mention ignorant)

[davidjjanderson1981]

Originally Posted by mars396

yes: Exactly !
Everything is adapted for the medium it is presented on.

Enjoy it ! Embrace the evolution of technology !
Stop trying to see film grain on a digital lcd/plasma screen, and enjoy the new presentation of our beloved classics.

If you are that desparate to see a 1987 film exactly as it was presented in 1987, then perhaps all this advanced technology isn't for you.

well said i totally agree, this is what new tech is all about! And if you don't like it maybe it isnt for some people then. I think these kind of discuusions tend to be with older movies aswell. But lets just embrace that we do have a choice between the 2010 version and the 2008 barebones. Either way the film is awesome.

[davidjjanderson1981]

Originally Posted by wormraper

oh wow, that's truly embarrassing and completely disheartening as a movie buff. It's become obvious that some members on this forum aren't film fans at all just tech geeks . That statement you just made is one of the most horrifying statements I've heard in a while (not to mention ignorant)

i DISAGREE WITH THAT, IM NOT A TECH PERSON AND I DONT MIND GRAIN IN FILMS BUT THE 2008 EDITION WAS JUST TOO BAD AND OVER INTRUSIVE. NEW EDITION IS SPARKLING CLEAN AND I LOVE IT. YEEEEEE HAAAAA

i THINK WE,RE ALL MOVIE BUFFS

[mars396]

Originally Posted by wormraper

oh wow, that's truly embarrassing and completely disheartening as a movie buff. It's become obvious that some members on this forum aren't film fans at all just tech geeks . That statement you just made is one of the most horrifying statements I've heard in a while (not to mention ignorant)

I am huge film fan, and am thrilled to own digital versions of my favorite movies.

I am not at all ignorant of the evolution of home theatre technology, in fact, I embrace it!


All I am saying is that if you are THAT much of a "film buff" that you cannot evolve with the media that film is presented on, than perhaps you need to get a projector and film and watch your movies that way. I certainly admire and respect your position; why can't you do the reverse ?

[xander]

Originally Posted by davidjjanderson1981

i DISAGREE WITH THAT, IM NOT A TECH PERSON AND I DONT MIND GRAIN IN FILMS BUT THE 2008 EDITION WAS JUST TOO BAD AND OVER INTRUSIVE. NEW EDITION IS SPARKLING CLEAN AND I LOVE IT. YEEEEEE HAAAAA

i THINK WE,RE ALL MOVIE BUFFS

Well, since you made you made your point in giant capital letters, I guess we can all agree. Or not. I'm amused at the number of members that have never really posted much before that have sprung out of the woodwork to champion this new transfer.

[wormraper]

Originally Posted by mars396

I am huge film fan, and am thrilled to own digital versions of my favorite movies.

I am not at all ignorant of the evolution of home theatre technology, in fact, I embrace it!


All I am saying is that if you are THAT much of a "film buff" that you cannot evolve with the media that film is presented on, than perhaps you need to get a projector and film and watch your movies that way. I certainly admire and respect your position; why can't you do the reverse ?

Actually I do watch movies on both a Plasma and a projector. HOWEVER, I think many people just get carried away with the Tech part of it. the Displays are nothing but picture frames. the media is the picture. Our tech is supposed to be as uninstrusive as possible and do nothing but display as accurately as possible the media being played. Anything else is un acceptable. The purpose of tech is NOT to make movies as "shiny and Avatar like" as possible. that is a butchery of film. I can respect your desire to watch movies that way. That's what the DNR and sharpness controls on your display are for. it's when people condone messing with the source that I take offense at.

[YodasFootPowder]

Originally Posted by toddly6666

Predator will be released on bluray again. People will double dip and triple dip again.

The people against this new bluray arent heroes. You are not making any statement by boycotting. It doesnt matter that this bluray was messed up because Predator is the type of catalog title that gets released over and over again (such as Terminator 2, Alien, or Die Hard) whether we like it or not.

Who is the naive person in here that believes that if you buy one bluray, that is going to be the one you can keep the rest of your life with no need to double dip? These companies want to make money. If you are upset with the DNR version, dont worry, another one will be made, you just need patience.

Maybe it will be released again. And even so, it will probably be another 2-3 years before we see another version.

[toddly6666]

Originally Posted by eco10530

you're not a hero either buddy.

I know, but we arent the ones complaining about this release because we are not blind to the way home video companies do their thing. If this bluray was remastered perfectly, it would still get another version in the future to sucker us. So if this version is not for u, then just watch the old versions and just wait till the triple dip version comes out. Just be patient.

People were complaining about the Star Wars dvds too. People had to wait so long that no one cares that they got changed. People bought them anyway. Dont be surprised if the Star Wars blurays are going to be changed again for the worse.

What if the director of Predator says thay he prefers the waxy nongrain look? What if he gives the same excuse as Lucas, that he didnt have the right cameras then so that he is happy with today's technology to change stuff around he did in the past? Will people respect the director's desicion? The same goes for Ridley Scott's Blade Runner getting so many versions.

Lucas changed his Star Wars movies on home video in the wrong way.
Scott changed his Blade Runner on home video in the right way.

[davidjjanderson1981]

Originally Posted by wormraper

Actually I do watch movies on both a Plasma and a projector. HOWEVER, I think many people just get carried away with the Tech part of it. the Displays are nothing but picture frames. the media is the picture. Our tech is supposed to be as uninstrusive as possible and do nothing but display as accurately as possible the media being played. Anything else is un acceptable. The purpose of tech is NOT to make movies as "shiny and Avatar like" as possible. that is a butchery of film. I can respect your desire to watch movies that way. That's what the DNR and sharpness controls on your display are for. it's when people condone messing with the source that I take offense at.

i do see your point of view but we do have 2 versions to choose from on blu-ray. and we all know that the 2008 edition is maybe closer to that so the choice is ours at the end of the day, but whats wrong with updating a classic like Predator.

[SpotOn]

Originally Posted by mars396

I am huge film fan, and am thrilled to own digital versions of my favorite movies.

I am not at all ignorant of the evolution of home theatre technology, in fact, I embrace it!


All I am saying is that if you are THAT much of a "film buff" that you cannot evolve with the media that film is presented on, than perhaps you need to get a projector and film and watch your movies that way. I certainly admire and respect your position; why can't you do the reverse ?

Film's evolution (faster stocks, color, etc) is separate from presentation media's evolution (DNR, edge enhancement, etc.). When watching a film on BD, the media is there to replicate the creative team's vision, not to use the movie as a canvas to show off "cool" or "neat looking" technology.

Most of us who fear an Ultimate Hunter DNR trend understand this and have respect for all artists visions (weather or not people view one movie or another as art is irrelevant, ALL movie are works of art). Thusly we won't "do the reverse" and contribute to the mutilation of things made by others, especially when it is by no means necessary. That is true respect.

[persuazion]

Originally Posted by toddly6666

I know, but we arent the ones complaining about this release because we are not blind to the way home video companies do their thing. If this bluray was remastered perfectly, it would still get another version in the future to sucker us. So if this version is not for u, then just watch the old versions and just wait till the triple dip version comes out. Just be patient.

People were complaining about the Star Wars dvds too. People had to wait so long that no one cares that they got changed. People bought them anyway. Dont be surprised if the Star Wars blurays are going to be changed again for the worse.

What if the director of Predator says thay he prefers the waxy nongrain look? What if he gives the same excuse as Lucas, that he didnt have the right cameras then so that he is happy with today's technology to change stuff around he did in the past? Will people respect the director's desicion? The same goes for Ridley Scott's Blade Runner getting so many versions.

Lucas changed his Star Wars movies on home video in the wrong way.
Scott changed his Blade Runner on home video in the right way.

I would like to see what would happen on here if the director came out and said he loved what they did with the transfer.

[Spymaster]

Originally Posted by mars396

yes: exactly !
everything is adapted for the medium it is presented on.

Enjoy it ! Embrace the evolution of technology !
Stop trying to see film grain on a digital LCD/Plasma screen, and enjoy the new presentation of our beloved classics.

If you are that desparate to see a 1987 film exactly as it was presented in 1987, then perhaps all this advanced technology isn't for you.

OMG that has to be the most ignorant and ill-informed comment I've ever seen on this forum - ever!

The whole point of "advanced technology" (in terms of home video) is to present something as close to the original source material as possible. It isn't to adapt it to look pretty on a television screen!

If that's what you're after I suggest you limit your purchases to movies made in the digital domain - or movies made after January 2010 - or better yet just stick with video games!

[jukejoint]

Originally Posted by persuazion

I would like to see what would happen on here if the director came out and said he loved what they did with the transfer.

It must be nice living in fantasyland.

[pro-bassoonist]

Originally Posted by mars396

The average size movie screen is 30-foot by 70-foot

Unless you are watching a FILM on this size screen, being PROJECTED, then the integrity of the content has been compromised.

The Director carefully planned each shot for a movie theatre screen, NOT an HDTV.

The Director artfully planned out the pacing of the film; if there was meant to be Pottie Breaks, there would be intermissions.

The very nature of home presentation is a compromise of the original intent of the Director. Everyone here arguing about not messing with the work of the Director while watching it on Blu-ray is condradicting themself.

Good morning

Unfortunately, everything you have written contradicts the point you wish to argue:

1. Blu-ray is a content carrier, and how one chooses to view this content has nothing to do with its integrity.

2. Precisely because the content was not created for HDTV use, its integrity should remain untouched.

3. You operate under the assumption that everyone views content on HDTV. It should be obvious, I believe, that this isn't the case.

4. Finally, all of your posts reveal that you equate viewing preference to director's intent/integrity of content. One has nothing to do with the other, hence all of your references (screen size(s), pacing, etc.) are irrelevant.



Pro-B

[persuazion]

Originally Posted by Spymaster

OMG that has to be the most ignorant and ill-informed comment I've ever seen on this forum - ever!

The whole point of "advanced technology" (in terms of home video) is to present something as close to the original source material as possible. It isn't to adapt it to look pretty on a television screen!

If that's what you're after I suggest you limit your purchases to movies made in the digital domain - or movies made after January 2010 - or better yet just stick with video games!

So if the source material is crappy for whatever reason....and they have ways to make it look better for home video then they did in the cinema.....its totally uncalled for to want to see it that way right?

[YodasFootPowder]

Originally Posted by persuazion

I highly doubt this release will "kill bluray" and that you may be overreacting just a tad.

It's obviously not going to kill Blu-ray. But, if this new edition sells a million copies more than the previews release, FOX is going to be like, "Wow, people really like it when we smear and blur our movies to death, let's do another one". And then we'll all be sitting here having this same conversation when the Aliens set is released.

I'm not here to argue one version over another, but I do think they went a little overboard with this new release and I'd really hate to see this start a trend in the way old releases are handled.

Originally Posted by persuazion

So if the source material is crappy for whatever reason....and they have ways to make it look better for home video then they did in the cinema.....its totally uncalled for to want to see it that way right?

This debate is not about touching something up a little bit to make it shine, which would be fine if the source of a movie sucked. We're talking about them going completely overboard like they did with Predator and just cranking the dial all the way to ten.

[persuazion]

Originally Posted by jukejoint

It must be nice living in fantasyland.

Mass suicides?

[wormraper]

Originally Posted by persuazion

So if the source material is crappy for whatever reason....and they have ways to make it look better for home video then they did in the cinema.....its totally uncalled for to want to see it that way right?

DEPENDS... if it's things that are NOT on the film originally when it was created (aka dust, dirt, hairs on the film etc).. Then by all means, restore the film to original state. HOWEVER. I must say this in Big letters..... GRAIN IS NOT A FLAW.. IT IS A PART OF THE LITERAL PHYSICAL FILM. Any altering of that DOES NOT make it look better. DNR always resorts in loss of detail no matter how small the loss is. if the original film was grainy as hell, or for example, low rez like 28 days later intentionally was. THEN LEAVE IT ALONE