Fifth Element (Best Version?)

[blu-ray_girl_fan]

Originally Posted by deepbreathsanddeath

I've got an australian release, can anyone tell me which transfer it's based on?
There are these two in Australia:
https://www.blu-ray.com/movies/The-F...Blu-ray/12653/
https://www.blu-ray.com/movies/The-F...Blu-ray/13585/

Mine is the second one.

Those pages that you linked tell you all you need to know.

The first release is based on the Sony remaster. The second release is based on the French (Gaumont) encode.

[JimDiGriz]

Originally Posted by Blu-21

The Gaumont transfer looks so soft, has overblown contrast and is washed out to death with so much aggressive DNR that it just kills the detail completely. The U.S remaster does have a harsh digital look, but its far stronger then the Gaumont.

Have you watched it though or just going by screen caps? The Gaumont looked very good to me and the look really suited the film in my opinion. The screen caps I saw werent representative of the film in practice for me.

[Kryptonic]

Originally Posted by JimDiGriz

Have you watched it though or just going by screen caps? The Gaumont looked very good to me and the look really suited the film in my opinion. The screen caps I saw werent representative of the film in practice for me.

Agreed. It looks the way I remember it looking in theaters, bright, vivid, and colorful. Not soft at all. The U.S. transfer is too overly sharpened and digital looking, lacking that filmlike warmth and color that a film like this is designed for.

[JimDiGriz]

Originally Posted by Kryptonic

Agreed. It looks the way I remember it looking in theaters, bright, vivid, and colorful. Not soft at all. The U.S. transfer is too overly sharpened and digital looking, lacking that filmlike warmth and color that a film like this is designed for.

+1. Im not sure about the "washed out" comment about the Gaumont above either. If anything, screencaps made the Sony one look "washed out" in comparison. The Gaumont is most definitely not washed out - just the opposite in fact! It suits this film though. I suspect that for a normal 'realistic' type film I would go with the Sony type PQ but for this film? Gaumont. Plus the UK one was cheap - think I paid £6.50? No brainer.

Theres a UK steelbook coming up too.

[Blu-21]

Originally Posted by JimDiGriz

Have you watched it though or just going by screen caps? The Gaumont looked very good to me and the look really suited the film in my opinion. The screen caps I saw werent representative of the film in practice for me.

Admittedly I have not seen the Gaumont transfer in motion, but those screenshots don't look good. I'm seeing so much DNR that is making the image look incredibly flat and soft whist also removing general detail. Case in point this screencap comparsen here - http://www.caps-a-holic.com/hd_vergl...ess=#vergleich

Notice the lack of stars in the background which have been wiped away with strong DNR?

I guess I could warm up to the new more vivid contrast and colours over time, but not at the expense of detail and sharpness, and it does not look like film to me, more like smothered video.

[Tony208]

This is one of my favorite movies ever, I have the Gaumont, US, and ultimate edition

The Gaumont isn't that expensive if you're considering it

[blu-ray_girl_fan]

Originally Posted by Tony208

This is one of my favorite movies ever, I have the Gaumont, US, and Criterion

The Gaumont isn't that expensive if you're considering it

Hm, must be rarer than my IMAX version of Skyfall.

[Tony208]

Originally Posted by blu-ray_girl_fan

Hm, must be rarer than my IMAX version of Skyfall.

i've seen that photo around here somewhere

[Prof. Utonium]

The Gaumont transfer looks like a digitally color graded, teal and orange-fest, DNRed, constrast boosted, etc. Movies didn't look like that in 1997.

[blu-ray_girl_fan]

Originally Posted by Tony208

i've seen that photo around here somewhere

[nagysaudio]

Originally Posted by Prof. Utonium

The Gaumont transfer looks like a digitally color graded, teal and orange-fest, DNRed, constrast boosted, etc. Movies didn't look like that in 1997.

This is really some crazy talk. Both transfers are crap, but the Gaumont is significantly better. No comparison to that EE, digital sharpened nonsense.

[reaperx187]

I got this for $4.99 down from $9.99 on the last U&S from Best Buy.

[HD Goofnut]

Originally Posted by nagysaudio

This is really some crazy talk. Both transfers are crap, but the Gaumont is significantly better. No comparison to that EE, digital sharpened nonsense.

[Blu-21]

Originally Posted by nagysaudio

This is really some crazy talk. Both transfers are crap, but the Gaumont is significantly better. No comparison to that EE, digital sharpened nonsense.

The U.S remastered version is flawed with EE and artificial sharpening, but I'd take a more detailed image like the U.S version over a flat soft conrast boosted DNR fest which destroys detail and texture.

[Prof. Utonium]

Originally Posted by nagysaudio

This is really some crazy talk. Both transfers are crap, but the Gaumont is significantly better. No comparison to that EE, digital sharpened nonsense.

I didn't say the Sony transfer is great, rather that the Gaumont transfer is most likely not representative of how the film originally looked. My opinion is that the Sony transfer is closer in that regard.

[Dubstar]

Originally Posted by Blu-21

The U.S remastered version is flawed with EE and artificial sharpening, but I'd take a more detailed image like the U.S version over a flat soft conrast boosted DNR fest which destroys detail and texture.

maybe the forthcoming '4K' re-scan' bluray release will eliminate the edge enhancement ...

[blu-ray_girl_fan]

Originally Posted by Dubstar

maybe the forthcoming '4K' re-scan' bluray release will eliminate the edge enhancement ...

[Dubstar]

Originally Posted by blu-ray_girl_fan

awwww

[okay... that's distracting]

[blu-ray_girl_fan]

Originally Posted by Dubstar

awwww

[okay... that's distracting]

Sony was probably the worst offender when it came to flogging consumers during DVD's heyday.

1) Bare-bones release

2) Special Edition

3) Extended/Unrated Cuts

4) SuperBit

Disney played copycat and started doing the same thing, releasing extended/unrated cuts of a whole bunch of movies.

It got to the point where I almost didn't want to buy movies on DVD anymore. Now they're doing it again.

[Dubstar]

Originally Posted by blu-ray_girl_fan

Sony was probably the worst offender when it came to flogging consumers during DVD's heyday.

1) Bare-bones release

2) Special Edition

3) Extended/Unrated Cuts

4) SuperBit

Disney played copycat and started doing the same thing, releasing extended/unrated cuts of a whole bunch of movies.

It got to the point where I almost didn't want to buy movies on DVD anymore. Now they're doing it again.

you're preaching to the choir here. but yes, I completely agree with you.