PQs so bad I half expected a replacement disc program....

[Oblivion138]

Originally Posted by Ben_UK

Yep. I'm guessing the Connery Bond's got more love because they needed it. I *think* everything up to the Moore Bonds got a 4K master (that's what I read anyway). However upon looking at some of the Moore ones, certainly Moonraker onwards, im not so sure. Moonraker looks like the same master as the old DVD, just at a higher resolution. The same goes for A View To A Kill. So im guessing that the Brosnan Bonds use the same master as the DVD from maybe 5-8 years ago or whenever the more recent bond DVDs were done.

By the way, the Goldeneye picture looks like a disaster.

Most of the Bond BD's reused the most recent DVD masters (worked on by Lowry)...they have their problems (particularly frozen grain, which was a big problem with Lowry's system at the time), but they look mostly fine. A few were newly remastered for BD. GoldenEye, meanwhile, got an even older master than the other, earlier Bonds. Because the Lowry master was cropped, and many fans had complained about this on the DVD, MGM opted to go back to a previous DVD master (one which was heavily processed with DNR and EE) and use that, rather than striking an all-new master. Sadly, the result is that I can't bring myself to buy the BD for one of the only Brosnan Bond movie I really enjoy.

[Crom1]

Night of the Living Dead '90 tops the list for me. Messed up blue color on the transfer, PQ is terrible as a result.

[dbduece]

Originally Posted by Oblivion138

If you're not seeing a difference between the DVD and BD releases of Malcolm X, there's something wrong with your vision or your TV.

If I'm understanding your criticism, it's that a movie that was deliberately shot with diffusion looks soft? haha Well, blow me down!

Uhh..no. My point is solely the BD versus its DVD counterpart. Soft lighting will remain soft lighting, regardless of the format. Don't go off the rails on me, O. This thread has had enough of that already. Yours is the most salient argument yet...so much so that I will revisit Malcolm X since it seems to be only title I mentioned that appears to generate push back from yourself and others...

[double_l4488]

Originally Posted by blu-ray_girl_fan

Read the reviews here at BD.com before buying?

Well one reviewer you can flat out ignore, but caps-a-holic, is good for just comparing to the dvd.

Originally Posted by blu-ray_girl_fan

[Show spoiler]Goodfellas definitely needs a new transfer, if only to get rid of the vertical scratch.



All the early Fox, Paramount, and Sony MPEG-2 encodes should be redone as well.

Kingdom of Heaven, mpeg-2, looks better than just about anything out now. That is rare though, b/c many did not look that much better than a high quality dvd.

[dbduece]

Originally Posted by double_l4488

Well one reviewer you can flat out ignore, but caps-a-holic, is good for just comparing to the dvd.

Information I can actually use....thanks.

[Nostromo]

Originally Posted by bsweetness

If you come onto an enthusiast website and make comments like this:



...you're going to get an earful (or an eyeful if you prefer). It shows a disregard for the integrity of the art of film. That opinion is certainly your prerogative, but very few people around here are going to agree with you. That's particularly the case when you decry the lack of visual "pop" in a couple films (Goodfellas, Malcolm X) that were never intended to visually "pop." If you want more people to agree with your opinion, it's a good idea to use examples that are actually relevant to your argument.

How did you know these films weren't intended to "pop"? If you worked on the film and have first hand knowledge, then ignore my response. If not, then the only people who really have inside knowledge of how a film was intended to be presented, are the people who actually made the films.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by Ben_UK

Yep. I'm guessing the Connery Bond's got more love because they needed it. I *think* everything up to the Moore Bonds got a 4K master (that's what I read anyway). However upon looking at some of the Moore ones, certainly Moonraker onwards, im not so sure. Moonraker looks like the same master as the old DVD, just at a higher resolution. The same goes for A View To A Kill. So im guessing that the Brosnan Bonds use the same master as the DVD from maybe 5-8 years ago or whenever the more recent bond DVDs were done.

By the way, the Goldeneye picture looks like a disaster.

Dr.No, FRWL, Goldfinger, Thunderball, YOLT, OHMSS, Diamonds, LALD and Moonraker were mastered at 4K, 9 in total. The rest used extant 2K/HD masters.

[bsweetness]

Originally Posted by Nostromo

How did you know these films weren't intended to "pop"? If you worked on the film and have first hand knowledge, then ignore my response. If not, then the only people who really have inside knowledge of how a film was intended to be presented, are the people who actually made the films.

Because I've read information from and watched interviews/behind the scenes with the film makers. It's not tough to figure out what was intended with the look of a film these days. Most film makers are more than happy to talk about it.

[Marsupial Werewolf]

Paramount's Tomb Raider disc is appallingly bad.

And Image's Hellraiser II is another.

I think those are the two discs in my collection that I flat-out can't stand.

Obviously there's a few others (like GoldenEye) that I can deal with, but wish they were a lot better.

[dbduece]

Originally Posted by mdonovan

The special edition of the Master and Commander DVD was superb. The Blu is not really an upgrade here.

You know, to be honest with you. If I knew then what I know now regarding that BD, I think I would've stood pat with the DVD special edition. I'm right there with you...I got hoodwinked with the digibook.

[dbduece]

Originally Posted by The Narrator

How about The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford? A movie of that considerable beauty deserves more than a single-layer disc, lossy audio, and edge-enhancement which causes the grain to appear stationary.

Have to agree but for the very reasons you mentioned, I stood pat with the R2 special edition DVD. Great total package. Same with the R2 Shawshank DVD.

[movie]

Originally Posted by Blu-Velvet

I'd say a few of the worst Blu-ray transfers (mainly soft and/or smeary picture) include

MONSTER'S BALL
NEAR DARK
THE LAST STARFIGHTER
ZULU
IMMORTAL
THE WILD BUNCH
THE GREATEST STORY EVER TOLD
among others.

Zulu is by far my best PQ for a BD. I thinking on some equipment though that it looks smeary for some reason as I've heard this before. I have an LG Plasma and there is nothing that compares to Zulu in quality. There isn't a person that isn't blown away when they come to my house every time I pop it in, but I tell them straight that most BD's don't come close to looking that good.

[thrillmygorilla]

I thought my Master and Commander blu was good.

[SirMontyPython]

What about James and the Giant Peach? The DVD quality in color and contrast seems much better than the blu-ray treatment it got...?

[ultlife2013]

The OP makes it so hard to take this thread serious, also the search function could have easily found older threads that have posted these problems so many times.

[klauswhereareyou]

Phantom menace..!!!!

[zbinks]

I'm surprised The Deadly Spawn, it's two botched Blu-Ray releases, and the exchange program that never materialized hasn't been mentioned yet in this thread. This is one of those rare examples where a film's DVD truly is better than it's corresponding Blu-Ray.

[chris_sc77]

For every 1 catalog blu ray that has really impressed me with the picture quality there is another 10 that has disappointed me.
Maybe I have high standards or something.

Still that one that is impressive makes it all worth it.. i think

[texascoral]

About the audio on Master and Commander DVD vs. Blu-ray . The Blu-ray has a filter on the LFE channel. The DVD sounds much more realistic during the opening battle than the Blu-ray does by far.

I kept the DVD for a Demo disc. Probably some of the best audio in that scene you will ever hear, given a decent sound system. The Blu-ray sucks in comparison.

That is all.

[MTRodaba2468]

I'm going to have to agree with everyone else and say that Malcolm X's PQ is great, and in no way warrants a replacement disc program.