Ghostbusters Reviews including mastered from 4K

[kdo]

Originally Posted by Croweyes1121

If I believed for one moment that the PQ only improved by 0.5, then I would not be recommending this release to anyone. I'm not trying to dispute Mr. Liebman's review. But it should be noted that other sites were not NEARLY as kind to the 2009 disc as this one (check out HDD's review for a second opinion on that release). Also, you're comparing a review *from 2009* to a review *from 2013*. Technology and transfers are *always* improving. Something that was 4.0 four years ago might be a 3.5 or even a 3.0 today when put into context with everything else being released. Now me personally? I would give the original release a 3.5 (mostly due to my being a grain purist and not being put off by the "noisy" nature of the image as some were). I'd knock that disc down to that score due to the posterization it had in darker areas, the jittery / unstable image, the boosted contrast, and the excessive digital noise caused by it. I'm being generous because I don't think it was an abject disaster, either. But I'd give this release a 5.0. It corrects each and every one of those issues and brings something new to the table (detail is unquestionably better, and colors are more vibrant). As a disc put next to Avatar, I'd give it a 4.0. For a catalog release full of composited special effects from 1984, it's a 5.0 if it's a 2.0. But again, I'm not going to convince you because A) I somehow have less credibility than another reviewer because my eyes are obviously not as good as his or B) you've made up your mind and are going to read information which supports what you already choose to see. That's human nature, though, and it's why I'm not going to try convincing you that what I'm seeing is what you will see. In fact, I'm rather convinced that it is not. I will say, though, that between the two of us, I think it's safe to say who's being more objective about this release. I have no vested interest in this looking amazing or like crap (other than wanting a good film transferred properly). You, however, seem to want to prove people wrong or offer up some definitive proof that they're gushing over a release that doesn't deserve it. That *makes* you less objective inherently. I have nothing to prove. I just find it sad that so many "film fans" so obviously have a greater interest in trashing even fine discs due to their annoyance with a marketing push (or worse, with forum members who think the disc looks good) than ENJOYING FREAKING FILM.

I couldn't care less about defending Sony. I've stated repeatedly that this marketing strategy is misguided at best and deceptive at worst. I challenge you to point me to a single post on this board that claims that Sony's marketing is great for these discs. No one is saying that. However, Sony's marketing has nothing whatsoever to do with the quality of this transfer. I'm defending *the disc*, not the way the disc is being brought to market. I don't care what studio is producing the product. I call quality as I see it, and lack of quality as I see it. Where I have an issue is people knocking with the quality of the blu-ray and using Sony's marketing as a crutch to bash what would otherwise be considered a quality release.

So...I guess you're not really "done here" yet .

Just for the record, I'm not trying to prove anyone wrong, I'm simply trying to prove that I don't believe this new M4K transfer is leaps and bounds better than the first. This isn't rocket science, it's either going to look like a big improvement to my eyes or it's not. Objectivity has nothing to do with it.

Originally Posted by Steve Lilley

Because that's how reviews work on these types of things. Technical reviews, I mean. Technology advances. Things contextualize. What was a 4 in 2009 might only be a 3 in 2013, because the bar for what "the best of the best" is keeps getting raised every so often as we see leaps in technology.

That doesn't just go for the original GHOSTBUSTERS release, mind you. That's for everything.

Do you kind of see what I'm saying?

There is some truth to this. However, I doubt I would rate the transfer of the 2009 disc any lower, even today. When I initially viewed it, my opinion was somewhere in between a 3.5 and 4.0, so I ended up giving it the benefit of the doubt. And I still stand by my score of that release, it's still a fine transfer, with a few issues (like almost every other Blu-ray release out there)...

Originally Posted by tilallr1

Originally Posted by tilallr1
Screen grabs are the worst. Rarely indicative of the final result.

[jamesdevil]

Originally Posted by kdo

Just for the record, I'm not trying to prove anyone wrong, I'm simply trying to prove that I don't believe this new M4K transfer is leaps and bounds better than the first. This isn't rocket science, it's either going to look like a big improvement to my eyes or it's not. Objectivity has nothing to do with it.

Why not wait until, I dunno, you've actually seen the disc then? If anything it seems like you've already made up your mind.

[kdo]

Originally Posted by jamesdevil

Why not wait until, I dunno, you've actually seen the disc then? If anything it seems like you've already made up your mind.

I am , that's why I said what I did...and I haven't made up my mind, I just have a pretty good idea of what to expect...

[MifuneFan]

Originally Posted by kdo

I am , that's why I just said what I did...

[jamesdevil]

Originally Posted by kdo

I am , that's why I said what I did...and I haven't made up my mind, I just have a pretty good idea of what to expect...

Yet you keep replying to people who have seen the disc or have made their opinion known while also replying you doubt the disc will actually be good.

I'd bet a copy of the disc you won't like it based on the mountain of posts you've made on the subject essentially stating that.

[kdo]

Originally Posted by MifuneFan

Ok, I will wait until I've watched it before posting anymore comments...fair enough ?

Originally Posted by jamesdevil

I'd bet a copy of the disc you won't like it based on the mountain of posts you've made on the subject essentially stating that.

I'll take you up on that bet...that way I don't have to pay for my copy ...because I can tell you right now that I will like it in terms of being satisfied with the presentation...the only thing there's a chance of me disliking, is if it turns out to not look all that much better (yet still better nonetheless) than the 2009 disc, which is what I am expecting...

Again, my whole argument has nothing to do with the new M4K disc not looking good, I think it looks great from what I'm seeing in caps...it has more to do with Sony's choice to bother with this, when the first release was more than acceptable, and the fact that some of my favorite Sony catalog titles are sitting unreleased, while we're getting another "Ghostbusters" release ...

OK, I'm taking a hiatus from this thread until I've watched the disc...looking forward to it...

[jamesdevil]

Originally Posted by kdo

Ok, I will wait until I've watched it before posting anymore comments...fair enough ?

Makes a ton of sense to me. Then if you disagree with me I'll agree to disagree, tip my virtual hat and be on my way because your opinion is then valid and (hopefully) will have come from watching the actual disc.

[klauswhereareyou]

I'll probably get the mastered in 4k disc since all I own is the dvd from 1999. I'll hold onto the dvd for the extras.

[jamesdevil]

Originally Posted by kdo

Again, my whole argument has nothing to do with the new M4K disc not looking good, I think it looks great from what I'm seeing in caps...it has more to do with Sony's choice to bother with this, when the first release was more than acceptable, and the fact that some of my favorite Sony catalog titles are sitting unreleased, while we're getting another "Ghostbusters" release ...

Fair enough and I was probably being too harsh. Personally, I never felt the original release was anything special and Ghostbusters has never been a film I thought looked very good...until now. That is why I'm effusive over it and happy it exists.

[tylergfoster]

I got the disc and it looks excellent. At first I was concerned, but my friend's TV was on "Dynamic." When we switched it to "movie" it looked perfect. A later glance at the old Blu revealed it looking even more blown-out than I remember.

The main thing I don't think necessarily comes through on the screencaps is improvement in the color and depth of the image. The backdrops during the finale are a huge highlight too.

[MrHT]

I looked at the screenshots on the 4K version and the grain looks much finer, which is good, but it looks like the contrast has been tweaked a bit...

[Spicoli]

Originally Posted by jamesdevil

Fair enough and I was probably being too harsh. Personally, I never felt the original release was anything special and Ghostbusters has never been a film I thought looked very good...until now. That is why I'm effusive over it and happy it exists.

You never blind buy?

Every movie you own you have seen before?

Every movie you saw in a theater was a blind buy BTW

[WetCardboard]

Originally Posted by mrpink134

2 words. Total recall!! They never bothered to fix the audio issue. The new 4k master is fixed but why not fix the other?

Speaking of Total Recall, what am I supposed to do, just throw the thing away?

**** Sony.

[GP Legend]

Wow, the hyperbole some of you are spewing over the transfers of both discs is getting pretty damn pathetic.

[blu-ray_girl_fan]

Originally Posted by WetCardboard

Speaking of Total Recall, what am I supposed to do, just throw the thing away?

**** Sony.

Hide it somewhere and pretend you never bought it. Life is too short to worry about it.

Originally Posted by GP Legend

Wow, the hyperbole some of you are spewing over the transfers of both discs is getting pretty damn pathetic.

[figrin_dan]

Does anyone have any idea what's holding up the Canadian release?

[MifuneFan]

Originally Posted by figrin_dan

Does anyone have any idea what's holding up the Canadian release?

Egon forbids crossing streams.

[Sky_Captain]

Originally Posted by GP Legend

Wow, the hyperbole some of you are spewing over the transfers of both discs is getting pretty damn pathetic.

Not as pathetic as your apparent outrage, at something you have no interest in. The lack of self-awareness is daunting.

[saprano]

This thread is getting so dumb. People can't appreciate quality. And it seems they can't understand what a 4K master is.

Ugh.

[Croweyes1121]

Originally Posted by kdo

So...I guess you're not really "done here" yet .

Just for the record, I'm not trying to prove anyone wrong, I'm simply trying to prove that I don't believe this new M4K transfer is leaps and bounds better than the first. This isn't rocket science, it's either going to look like a big improvement to my eyes or it's not. Objectivity has nothing to do with it.

I'm done trying to convince people like you of something they're not ever going to see, obvious evidence to the contrary be damned. As I said, this disc is going to look "to your eyes" how it will. And if you bring a negative predisposition to the process, then you'll see precisely what you want to see and what you've determined in advance that you will see. You don't go into looking at a disc's quality trying to "prove" ANYTHING if you want your conclusions to mean anything. Which brings me to...

Objectivity has *everything* to do with assessing a disc properly. Picture quality has nothing to do with which studio is releasing the disc, what their marketing strategy was in doing so, or how dubious you find the whole prospect of this movie or that movie being released again. It's a technical issue that's verifiable, both visually and quantitatively. That you do not or cannot understand that given your attitude towards the other members of this board who have in good faith reported positive things regarding this particular release is hardly surprising.