True Grit (1969)

[Jimbo976]

Originally Posted by 42041

Every blu-ray has smudged, plasticy faces? I think not.

So when you watched the Blu-ray of True Grit did you notice "smudged, plasticy faces" throughout the whole disc or just in some scenes?

I have Easy Rider and yes it looks great.

[Jimbo976]

Originally Posted by Arkadin

EVERY single time a studio uses an old dvd based master you are going to have DNR on the blu-ray because it has already been applied.
numerous "experts" have discussed this issue.
end of story.
the extent of the dnr is what matters

Well said..

Studios are not going to spend the cash for a new master of every older title even if we all really want them to.

[PowellPressburger]

Just had my copy from amazon delivered and it is that awful looking cover art after all. The one that is on this sites information page.

No Slipcover etc.

Oh well, still afraid to open it. Hoping for some Robert Harris feedback on the title over at Home Theater Forum before I open it.

[Deviation]

Originally Posted by aggienader08

ok... typical bite the hand that feeds comment. So I guess Paramount just does a horrible job with all their catalog releases?

With most of them? Yes. They're worse than Universal when it comes to catalog. About the only acceptable true catalog titles they've released are Psycho and The African Queen. The African Queen, btw, really does look spectacular.

Paramount's new releases look fantastic, but there's not much good to say about their back catalog.

Originally Posted by Jimbo976

I believe every single Blu-ray release has DNR applied to it. So when you watched the Blu-ray did you think there were only some scene that looked like there was too much DNR or was it the whole thing?

While it may or may not be true that most BD titles have been filtered for home release, there's quite a lot of difference between whatever minor high frequency filtering there is on titles where no one notices or complains about it to the very noticeable and smeary noise reduction done that people get quite vocal about.

This film looks like a soap opera mastered on video.

[toddly6666]

I was looking at the screenshots of this blu-ray over at DVDbeaver.com and I think Robert Duvall is some kind of alien. How is that he has looked the same (a 50-60 year old) for the past 40 years? Was he ever a kid?

[Pigskincoach]

Originally Posted by adamhopelies

christ, those guys are unbelievable. I dread to think what they're saying about the town.

+1

[Jimbo976]

Originally Posted by Deviation

This film looks like a soap opera mastered on video.

So when you watched the Blu-ray was the whole thing "like a soap opera mastered on video" or just some parts?

[Deviation]

Originally Posted by adamhopelies

Christ, those guys are unbelievable. I dread to think what they're saying about The Town.

The Town isn't DNRed at all. The low bit rate leads to a bit of artifacting in the darker areas of the picture and some occasionally mushy film grain (the Warner "smoothie" effect) but it's hard for most people to notice in motion. I've got no problem blasting the BD release for True Grit but The Town is a solid presentation.

Would it have been better if they'd used seamless branching or two separate discs? Sure. But at worst, that brings it down from a 5/5 to a 4. I'm probably a bit too generous to really review discs though because I'd give it a 4.5.

[The Duke]

Originally Posted by toddly6666

I was looking at the screenshots of this blu-ray over at DVDbeaver.com and I think Robert Duvall is some kind of alien. How is that he has looked the same (a 50-60 year old) for the past 40 years? Was he ever a kid?

Those cosmetic surgeons in Tinseltown don't make the big bucks for nothing.

[chaingunsofdoom]

Bought this today @ BB as a Christmas gift. Had to ask for it since it wasn't on the shelf, so not sure how many copies they had to put-out. C$17.99.

[DetroitSportsFan]

Originally Posted by jawsfan1975

I just picked this up at Walmart for $15.

Same here. I was surprised to see it there.

[aggienader08]

Originally Posted by Deviation

With most of them? Yes. They're worse than Universal when it comes to catalog. About the only acceptable true catalog titles they've released are Psycho and The African Queen. The African Queen, btw, really does look spectacular.

Paramount's new releases look fantastic, but there's not much good to say about their back catalog.

how convenient that in your argument you exclude:

The Godfather
Saving Private Ryan
Minority Report
War of the Worlds
Braveheart
Forrest Gump
Gladiator - remastered
Collateral
Road to Perdition
Star Trek TOS

Worse than Universal? Heh! Hardly! Also, you may want to reconsider the strength of your argument.

[Deviation]

Originally Posted by aggienader08

how convenient that in your argument you exclude:

The Godfather
Saving Private Ryan
Minority Report
War of the Worlds
Braveheart
Forrest Gump
Gladiator - remastered
Collateral
Star Trek TOS

Worse than Universal? Heh! Hardly!

Okay, I've definitely been called out with the Sapphire stuff. Missing the Sapphire line was a mistake.

My bad.



***

I can equivocate though. Spielberg has been a big Blu-ray advocate and Spielberg's influence is all over a good number of those. Three of those are his films and three more (The Godfather films) only got restored because he bullied the studio - at least, that's my understanding.

Braveheart was mastered by Icon, not Paramount. Collateral was overseen by the director, Michael Mann. Star Trek TOS was a CBS production, not Paramount. Gladiator... well, it's hard to know where the blame and the credit belong there between Paramount and Universal. Either way, both masters were from Universal, not Paramount, and it's Paramount that decided to add the DNR and automatic cleanup software on the original disc.

The only movie left on your list then is Forrest Gump.

That said... I may have gone too far by saying they were worse than Universal. Amusingly enough, I own every single disc you listed.

[aggienader08]

Originally Posted by Deviation

Okay, I've definitely been called out with the Sapphire stuff. Missing the Sapphire line was a mistake.

My bad.



***

I can equivocate though. Spielberg has been a big Blu-ray advocate and Spielberg's influence is all over a good number of those. Three of those are his films and three more (The Godfather films) only got restored because he bullied the studio - at least, that's my understanding.

Braveheart was mastered by Icon, not Paramount. Collateral was overseen by the director, Michael Mann. Star Trek TOS was a CBS production, not Paramount. Gladiator... well, it's hard to know where the blame and the credit belong there between Paramount and Universal. Either way, both masters were from Universal, not Paramount, and it's Paramount that decided to add the DNR and automatic cleanup software on the original disc.

The only movie left on your list then is Forrest Gump.

That said... I may have gone too far by saying they were worse than Universal. Amusingly enough, I own every single disc you listed.

It doesn't matter who has overseen the transfers of each film, they are Paramount releases. At least they are willing to let a director step in which is contrary to the way other studios have conducted business. Why hasn't any of Spielberg's Universal catalog even been hinted at? All it takes is looking at the facts. I think Universal is my least favorite studio not for their transfers (which there are plenty of atrocious ones to consider) but for how they treat the consumer. I don't want to spend 10 minutes staring at junk whenever I spin a movie, and I want all extras to be on a disc rather than some server that only lets you access it for a limited time. I also don't want to buy some experimental packaging with my films that looks tacky and breaks in the mail. I could go on and on.

Are there questionable transfer in Paramount's catalog? You bet! Plenty of them, but the same goes for every studio.

BTW, good call on the Gladiator business. My bad! And CBS is owned by Paramount.

[Robert Harris]

Originally Posted by aggienader08

And CBS is owned by Paramount.

Actually, CBS and Paramount are owned by Viacom.

RAH

[AKORIS]

Originally Posted by Dickieduvet

Looks good to me, I'll be buying.

me too--

awesome avatar btw!

[Rizor]

Originally Posted by kpkelley

I disagree, the screenshots look fine. The image isn't as sharp as other releases, but that could be due to a number of factors including the now dated scan(reported as being from 2007).

I don't think they look bad, but take a look at Mattie's jacket and her nose in the shot I indicated. It's not that it's soft, it just the fine detail has been scrubbed away and the edges look smudged. Still, judging from the caps alone, it's a pretty good transfer.

[jawsfan1975]

I watched this last night and enjoyed it, it had been a few years since I had viewed it. I had to turn it up a little louder than newer releases to enjoy the full effect of the soundtrack. The picture looked good, not like new releases but worth the $15. The docs were short but interesting, I'd of liked to hear more from Campbell. I'll probably watch it again tonight to listen to the commentary track.

[Jimbo976]

My copy showed up today and I watched a few minutes from a few chapters. Overall it is pretty good in the PQ department. If you watch at 1.5x viewing distance you can see that the detail is not as great as similar period movies that have had remastered specifically for BD. There is grain yes but it's not as fine as it could be. I would give it about a 7/10 for PQ. It certainly isn't no DNR-fest but there is some that will be likely be noticable at 1.5x viewing distance.

It would be nice if the studios did a new master for every BD release but that isn't going to happen due to the costs. It's worth the $18 to me

[adamhopelies]

Originally Posted by Jimbo976

My copy showed up today and I watched a few minutes from a few chapters. Overall it is pretty good in the PQ department. If you watch at 1.5x viewing distance you can see that the detail is not as great as similar period movies that have had remastered specifically for BD. There is grain yes but it's not as fine as it could be. I would give it about a 7/10 for PQ. It certainly isn't no DNR-fest but there is some that will be likely be noticable at 1.5x viewing distance.

It would be nice if the studios did a new master for every BD release but that isn't going to happen due to the costs. It's worth the $18 to me

I'd echo these comments too. It's a solid little release.