Dante's Peak (1997)

[MichaelR]

On reflection, it strikes me that we're essentially talking about the same issue from opposite ends (insufficient detail vs. artificial sharpening attempting to compensate for the missing detail). That being the case, I've added a paragraph to the video section of the review noting the issue, with specific reference to haloing and "edge enhancement", while also noting that I didn't see it myself. Readers have 20 screencaps available to them, at 1080p if they're registered. That should be sufficient information to make an informed decision.

Thanks for reading!

[kemcha]

Originally Posted by HD Goofnut

This is why I always post my equipment in my reviews so people have a reference as to what I am dealing with.

Another vital factor is how far the viewer is seated from the display. Remember, to fully resolve 1080 lines with 20/20 vision on a 46" display you must be seated 6.5' away or closer.

Exactly. Instead, we have idiots who criticize anyone who makes this point known. Not everybody has a 46" or 100" HDTV. The average HDTV size that consumers have is going to be around 32", on average.

It should be a requirement for reviewers to post the equipment they are reviewing the Blu-ray release on so that consumers have a reference point on what to expect. Watching a Blu-ray on a 32" is going to have a better quality than a Blu-ray watched on a 100" screen. It's just common sense and not all HDTV's or Blu-ray players were created with the same quality.

This is why I've started writing reviews on BR.com that directly reference this important fact.

[Aardvark_DK]

Originally Posted by kemcha

Exactly. Instead, we have idiots who criticize anyone who makes this point known. Not everybody has a 46" or 100" HDTV. The average HDTV size that consumers have is going to be around 32", on average.

And, once again, at that size there is hardly any point to watching blu-rays in the first place; DVDs will do just fine.

[Bishop_99]

I disagree on that somewhat. I think the sitting distance is more of a determining factor when it comes to the size of the HDTV. In one of my rooms I have a 21 inch HD monitor in which I watch Blu-ray movies in. Now I only sit two feet away from this monitor and I'm clearly able to see the difference when I switch the output from 1080p to 720p or even upconverted DVD's to Blu-ray. In the living room, I sit 6 feet away from my 65 inch tv. But if you are sitting in the right distance, you should see the same results in the tv regardless of the size. On the other hand, when I go to my relatives house and I see a movie in their 47 inch HDTV, it's much harder for me to notice a lot of things because they sit about 9 feet away from the tv.

[Maggot]

I would agree with those here who say the reviewer is off his rocker. The Blu-ray PQ is a HUGE step up from the DVD. A bonafied 4.0 for sure.

[MichaelR]

Originally Posted by Filmmaker

On the flip side, totally unnecessarily, there is an unfortunate application of edge enhancement on display . . .

. . . look at the uniformed legs of the marching band. If you don't see thick white haloes framing each of them, then you and I are at a frustrating impasse, sir.

Originally Posted by Maggot

A bonafied 4.0 for sure.

Talk amongst yourselves.

[Aardvark_DK]

Originally Posted by Bishop_99

I disagree on that somewhat. I think the sitting distance is more of a determining factor when it comes to the size of the HDTV.

Ok, fair enough. If you sit close enough to a 32" TV then you should be able to see the defects in this transfer. In my experience, though, most people sit way too far from their TVs to get the full benefit of BDs. Like, my dad insists on sitting more than 10 feet from his 42" and I can barely tell the difference between HD and SD from there.

Originally Posted by Maggot

The Blu-ray PQ is a HUGE step up from the DVD.

Do you think that should be a criteria when judging BDs? Does it also follow that the worse the DVD looks, the more slack we should cut the BD transfer?

[Filmmaker]

Originally Posted by MichaelR

Talk amongst yourselves.

Nothing to debate. As you'll recall, I said a couple of pages back "at worst, [the video review] deserves a half-star increase", which would put it at a 3.5, at worst. Actually, I would have given it a 4.0, with the one-point deduction being for the unnecessary edge enhancement; otherwise, I think the title looks superb.

[MichaelR]

Originally Posted by Filmmaker

Actually, I would have given it a 4.0, with the one-point deduction being for the unnecessary edge enhancement; otherwise, I think the title looks superb.

That's an interesting illustration of the limitations of ratings. They're quick to read, and they confer an illusion of objective measurement, but they're really less precise than a written description, because there's no way to tell what each person means by a particular rating. For example, I can't imagine giving a 4.0 for video quality to a disc after describing it as featuring "some egregious application of edge enhancement" (your words; my emphasis). I don't know whether Mr. Maggot's 4.0 allows that or not, but no one can tell unless he confirms, e.g., that he sees the same "thick white haloes" that you do.

[Chaotic]

I like that the rating includes Gore. Thats pretty funny for a pg-13 movie

[Khronikos]

Originally Posted by Ford

Another example of a "movie that seemed good at the time". Twister has the same problem. I liked them when they came out, but after seeing them again recently they're both just incredibly awful.

I know this was written a long time ago, but Twister is a much better film than Dante's Peak I think. It has some decent performances at least from non-leads.

How did I get here now....

[RodChester]

[hockeynut]

Dante's Peak/Daylight double feature new low price $6.79.

I own neither. Time for me to buy!

[critterdvd]

Originally Posted by hockeynut

Dante's Peak/Daylight double feature new low price $6.79.

I own neither. Time for me to buy!

Thanks for the heads up! I highly doubt a remaster of this will be coming out anytime soon, so I just picked myself up a copy as well...

[50strat54]

I picked this up when it was cheap at Fry's recently. Better than I remembered it. I liked Volcano better but Linda Hamilton mmmmmmm

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by 50strat54

I picked this up when it was cheap at Fry's recently. Better than I remembered it. I liked Volcano better but Linda Hamilton mmmmmmm

Seconded, mmmmmmm indeed. I bought this double pack for a few quid a year or two back, the UK versions of each movie are barebones and are only available separately, but this has both movies, each with extras, in one pack. Bargain-licious is what it is.

[1924]

I haven't seen Daylight but that double pack is a bargain


while Dante's Peak has some annoying characters, the eruption scenes are genuinely terrifying

[levcore]

Dante's Peak is awesome and the fx hold up really well.

[1924]

wow, the transfer is not really that good. Looks more like an upscaled DVD


still looks overall better than the DVD though and the DTS HD upgrade is good enough

[evoll]

Watched this last night and I agree, it looks a little bit better than the DVD but would be nice to see a good remaster.