Predator (1987) (Ultimate Hunter Edition)

[MoviesandSGs]

This is my second post in this thread and I have read through a great deal of it. OK I bought a couple of days ago "The Good The Bad and the Ugly". Thank GOD they didn't give us a Blu like the hunter edition. I bring up this classic because it has quite a bit of film damage that was left in the release. When I saw the line down the right side for a bit of the film I thought to myself, thank you for leaving it there and giving this film the best definition that most probably could be had. This is a perfect example of how Blu Ray should be done with older or damaged film. Please people I fear you are right that companies COULD continue to rip us off by just cranking the DNR. If people set this trend then the technology is screwed. Now I am REALLY nervous about ALIENS. Can you imagine Aliens destroyed like this? I know it will be extremely difficult to make Aliens look good but Ultra Blur and Wax cannot be the new way. Definition and film integrity must prevail. Really people and that poll up there is important. I know the industry is watching this thread. A worried movie enthusiast here.

[csdot]

Originally Posted by MoviesandSGs

This is my second post in this thread and I have read through a great deal of it. OK I bought a couple of days ago "The Good The Bad and the Ugly". Thank GOD they didn't give us a Blu like the hunter edition. I bring up this classic because it has quite a bit of film damage that was left in the release. When I saw the line down the right side for a bit of the film I thought to myself, thank you for leaving it there and giving this film the best definition that most probably could be had. This is a perfect example of how Blu Ray should be done with older or damaged film. Please people I fear you are right that companies COULD continue to rip us off by just cranking the DNR. If people set this trend then the technology is screwed. Now I am REALLY nervous about ALIENS. Can you imagine Aliens destroyed like this? I know it will be extremely difficult to make Aliens look good but Ultra Blur and Wax cannot be the new way. Definition and film integrity must prevail. Really people and that poll up there is important. I know the industry is watching this thread. A worried movie enthusiast here.

TGTB&TU is a DNR victim too

[Q?]

Originally Posted by csdot

TGTB&TU is a DNR victim too

Yeah, it's a massacred release too... sadly.

[Spymaster]

Originally Posted by davidjjanderson1981

why else invest in blu-ray if you dont want it to look at its best with vibrant colours etc?

Are you for real???

I mean, using this logic, you wouldn't consider buying the forthcoming SE of Psycho on blu-ray because it wasn't shiny and colourful????

Funny!!!

[MoviesandSGs]

I am confused is to how some think TGTB&TU is butchered like this movie(Predator-Hunter version) I mean there is a line of damage for example that was left in the restoration for a few minutes. Ah now I am really confused LOL. I just reviewed TGTB&TU. Dont you think that when a Blu is made of an old movie with excessive grain, film damage, etc. that there should be care taken in its restoration? In other words. Literally scene by scene should be examined and options should be explored for each scene when applying noise reduction and DNR. It just shouldn't be crank the knob for the entire film like this Predator version. There is NO comparison between these two blu-ray movies come on.

[Q?]

Originally Posted by MoviesandSGs

I am confused is to how some think TGTB&TU is butchered like this movie(Predator-Hunter version) I mean there is a line of damage for example that was left in the restoration for a few minutes. Ah now I am really confused LOL. I just reviewed TGTB&TU. Dont you think that when a Blu is made of an old movie with excessive grain, film damage, etc. that there should be care taken in its restoration? In other words. Literally scene by scene should be examined and options should be explored for each scene when applying noise reduction and DNR. It just shouldn't be crank the knob for the entire film like this Predator version. There is NO comparison between these two blu-ray movies come on.

There's literally no detail in the movie, I remember one shot looking like a moving painting with paintstrokes and all!! Viewed on a 42 inch Panny too. They should've just left the grain intact as the italian Mondo release has, sadly that release isn't english friendly at all.

[Spymaster]

Originally Posted by davidjjanderson1981

ok i respect that you love the natural look to new and old movies but your saying just leave it as it is and bung it on a disc and hope for the best? I understand you want the film preserved but why not make it look sharper etc? why do tv companies put loads of options and menu's on our new lcds and why not just leave all these thrills and spills out?

Bung it on a disc and hope for the best? I think you need a lesson in film restoration young man. And soon!

And as for "loads of options and menus on our new LCDs" - if you look at ANY professional review of ANY of these sets you'll see that the experts suggest you keep all these bells and whistles turned OFF.

You're clearly falling for all the wrong hype!!

[42041]

Originally Posted by MoviesandSGs

I am confused is to how some think TGTB&TU is butchered like this movie(Predator-Hunter version) I mean there is a line of damage for example that was left in the restoration for a few minutes. Ah now I am really confused LOL. I just reviewed TGTB&TU. Dont you think that when a Blu is made of an old movie with excessive grain, film damage, etc. that there should be care taken in its restoration? In other words. Literally scene by scene should be examined and options should be explored for each scene when applying noise reduction and DNR. It just shouldn't be crank the knob for the entire film like this Predator version. There is NO comparison between these two blu-ray movies come on.

DNR isn't going to remove film damage. If you want to see what a good transfer of a Leone western looks like, check out the Italian release of A Fistful of Dollars... though unfortunately it's not readily available here, and the US release doesn't use the same transfer.

[Spike Killer]

Originally Posted by HD Goofnut

I was born in 1982 and feel that the 2008 version is definitely more natural looking than the 2010 version. What's even stranger is that I own a PS3.

It used to be don't trust anyone over 30. Now it's don't trust anyone under 30 who owns a PS3.

[ts0323]

I was born in 1994 and I think the new release looks like sh!t.

[Q?]

Originally Posted by ts0323

I was born in 1994 and I think the new release looks like sh!t.

Standing ovation from me! (no sarcasm but won't literally do it though)

[RipleyLV426]

Originally Posted by HD Goofnut

I was born in 1982 and feel that the 2008 version is definitely more natural looking than the 2010 version. What's even stranger is that I own a PS3.

I was born in 1983 and think the 2010 version should be put back in the vat of melted wax from the ACME factory it came from.

BTW, love your signature quote!! I'd love to get myself a pulse rifle replica but they're like $800 er something...

[ScuseMe]

Originally Posted by Q!

There's literally no detail in the movie, I remember one shot looking like a moving painting with paintstrokes and all!! Viewed on a 42 inch Panny too. They should've just left the grain intact as the italian Mondo release has, sadly that release isn't english friendly at all.

+1

I saw the screenshot comparisons, and ended up wishing I spoke Italian

[HD Goofnut]

Originally Posted by RipleyLV426

I was born in 1983 and think the 2010 version should be put back in the vat of melted wax from the ACME factory it came from.

BTW, love your signature quote!! I'd love to get myself a pulse rifle replica but they're like $800 er something...

I agree that the 2010 version looks awful.

Thanks. I'd like to have one as well, but yeah $800 is a bit much. It would also be nice to have a real motion tracker. I saw one a few months ago YouTube that someone had built from scratch and it actually fires live rounds.

[mars396]

Originally Posted by Blu-Moon

Since Blu-ray can use branching routines, why didn't Fox allow the end-users the choice to select the version they want to watch on this newest pressing? You want to see Predator as you remember it from the Cineplex? Click here. You want to see the new DNR'd-to-death version? Click there. I think the choice should be made available on every Blu-ray that Fox (or anybody else) releases from here on out.

Bravo !

the self-named "film buffs" can watch a grainy "film-like" presentation and savor the "warmth" and "flavor" or whatever else they seem to get from watching a movie through all that grain, and the rest of us can enjoy a nice, clear picture of the actual movie we just bought on Blu-ray. Everyone wins.

But I am sure either #1 it is cost-prohibitive to have a film encoded onto Blu-ray twice, and/or #2 the self-named "film buffs" will still me how wrong I am to want to actually be able to clearly see the movie I just bought on Blu-ray.

[tvine2000]

Originally Posted by retablo

And to comment on this... exactly! Predator isn't SUPPOSED to look like a "new" movie, per se... It should look like it did when it was made. It isn't supposed to look like a video game, so why do people expect it to, or think it should?

Because your dealing with a certain age group, most likely younger then us. Thats all they have seen at home ,''the video game look. Whats strange to me is that age group viewed video games [ps2,ist gen xbox] with a crt tv and compsite video cables [the yellow one]. Most of those games viewed that way looked real shitty. so i don't get ''THE VIDEO GAME LOOK''. AND I REMEMBER, they didn't care about the look,all they cared about was the game! Is it possible [as some one here pointed out] that all this nice shiney ,poished,dnr'r to death look is just some studio agenda that theres this group of jp6 that loves this look is just made up by the studio, because some exec. that knows noting about films wants it that way. NO i'm not talking about some x-file just a thought.Some one also said that the point of blu-ray is ''the look and sound of perfect'' ,in this case [studio] beyond hi-def. Well what happen here? Why a studio thats been so good with catalog titles would do this, and do it now? I don't know, does anybody really know? FOX does, but you know we won't hear from them. I know i'm on a rant,i'll stop

[tvine2000]

Originally Posted by mars396

Bravo !

the self-named "film buffs" can watch a grainy "film-like" presentation and savor the "warmth" and "flavor" or whatever else they seem to get from watching a movie through all that grain, and the rest of us can enjoy a nice, clear picture of the actual movie we just bought on Blu-ray. Everyone wins.

But I am sure either #1 it is cost-prohibitive to have a film encoded onto Blu-ray twice, and/or #2 the self-named "film buffs" will still me how wrong I am to want to actually be able to clearly see the movie I just bought on Blu-ray.

Mars no disrespect but theres noting clear with this new edtion. catalog titles are a different animal. I loved the look of avatar and startrek 2009 and other modern movies on blu-ray. But i don't want a 1980's ''film'' to look like avatar. I just want it to look like ''as'' a film -presentation. To me if every movie looked like a modern ,digital shot movie it would be BORING!

IF you prefer the look your talking about ,thats fine enjoy. BUT its fair in my mind that other people want the movie [whatever catalog title] to look like the film it was shot on ,on blu-ray. SONY'S doing it right and others ,but theres a few studio need to up the anti. Quite frankly i thought by FOXES track record they were beyond this kind crap, wrong again!

[mars396]

Originally Posted by retablo

Predator was supposed to look grimy and gritty, that's the look chosen by the director and cinematographer. Unfortunately, all that mood has been washed away by DNR.

I am really sick of reading this "supposed to look that way" and the "chosen by the director "crap. Have you personally spoken to John McTiernan?
Or do you have a link to any website that specifically states this ?



Grain is an inherent flaw in filmstock. I will be called ignorant for that sentence. Ask yourself this before you call me ignorant: What would you do if you got back the pictures of you and your kids on vacation, and those photos were all dark and grainy ? Would you say "yum, that looks so 'photograph-y': I love that look" or claim "yup! that's how I shot it - THAT'S the look I wanted" Or would you say "what a shit camera!" or "that jerk in Walgreeens RUINED my vacation photos!"

Predator is a victim of inferior filmstock that due to the budget and the way the cloaked effects had to be shot (requiring several generations of photography) had to be presented in such a grainy state.

Like my vacation photo example above, photos and film are supposed to be pictures as close to real life as possible. As filmstock and technology improved, the grain decreased. Yes, there are some Directors that think grain makes their work look "film-like". I say they are holding on to what film used to have to look like, but no longer has to. They are not evolving with their industry.

There is no way I will ever believe that John McTiernan wouldn't have liked to have been able to present all his hard work in way that we can see it better.

Should Predator be preserved in its original state ? Yes, absolutely. In an archive film vault, preferably digital, or in some other state that will not degrade.

Blu-ray is a product, kids. It is packaged and consumed. It is not some sort of permanent archive of film, anymore than VHS and DVD were. There is no reason why we cannot have the best possible presentation of our favorite movies that Blu-ray is capable of. Blu-ray is NOT film. If any of you think that Blu-ray is the final version of films-at-home that will ever exist, then I will use a word that has been seriously overused in this thread and say that you are ignorant.

[Abacab]

Originally Posted by HD Goofnut

I agree that the 2010 version looks awful.

Thanks. I'd like to have one as well, but yeah $800 is a bit much. It would also be nice to have a real motion tracker. I saw one a few months ago YouTube that someone had built from scratch and it actually fires live rounds.

That's likely the LAGE conversion kit for an SWD M-11/9. It uses an AOW shotgun as the "grenade launcher" and has an LED ammo counter. Still in prototype, the kit runs around $3200 last I heard. Of course, you still need the $3500 machine gun.

The Pulse Rifle in the film was built on a Thompson .45 SMG platform.

[Member-38928]

08' Predator dropped to $9.99 at Amazon



Poll results as of now:

08' version 177
10' version 114
neither 70