Predator (1987) (Ultimate Hunter Edition)

[xander]

Originally Posted by Beast

Sure. They may have gone a bit too far with the DNR. If they would have dialed it back a bit, it probably would have been a perfect in-between option. But some of us happen to think it looks pretty good. There is still grain evident in shots. And outside of the one numerously posted image of Arnie in the red shirt, where the lighting and color of the shirt likely contributed to the over-scrubbed nature of that particular shot. But one should never judge a movie based on a couple of shots. There's plenty of movies without DNR that have one really bad example that could be dragged out and pointed to as some sort of evidence. But it's not accurate in either case.

I totally agree with you. That said, the entire film was reviewed by Casey, who is a pretty darn fine resource and reviewer, and the verdict layed out of the transfer. I just don't understand why so many of you are ignoring THAT. Screenshot science is indeed a poor way to judge a film, no argument from me there.

[dannycj]

With this new release, will they discontinue the original one on blu?

[BouCoupDinkyDau]

Originally Posted by csdot

hahahahaha "why did they make that muppet out of leather?"

[Freekman]

I'm extremely disappointed that this release is not as I hoped it would be. Guess I'm gonna need to find a new avatar, as well as purchase the grainy 2008 version.

[Beast]

Originally Posted by xander

I totally agree with you. That said, the entire film was reviewed by Casey, who is a pretty darn fine resource and reviewer, and the verdict layed out of the transfer. I just don't understand why so many of you are ignoring THAT. Screenshot science is indeed a poor way to judge a film, no argument from me there.

Well, I don't put any reviewer's opinion on a pedestal. I'll judge it for myself.

After all, people liked The Dark Knight also. And that makes no damn sense.

[Jimmy Smith]

Originally Posted by 42041

I certainly hope you are the minority
What do movies have to do with the real world? Are cuts, zooms, etc, part of the real world? I've never been attacked by an extra-terrestrial monster in the real world, so let's just remove that whole part of the movie too while we're at it

While grain removal shouldn't come at the expense of detail but in general I prefer movies without grain. I find it distracting and annoying when excessive. Sometimes I see grain-free upconverted DVDs as better equitment demos then grain filled Blu-Rays. So the effort to reduce excessive grain isn't something comparible to pan scanning in my opinion but a way to make movies look better. From everything Ive seen from comparison shots this new version is definutely the best Predator has ever looked since I never bought the first Blu-Ray release Im definutely picking this up.

[Post Prod]

Originally Posted by Beast

Then.... don't buy it and stop harassing those who do want to?

But it's fine to harass people that don't want to buy it eh?

[retablo]

Originally Posted by Beast

Then.... don't buy it and stop harassing those who do want to?

It's a free forum, I'm sorry you disagree. But no, I'll post what I want, since it's my opinion. Thanks anyway though.

[retablo]

Originally Posted by Jimmy Smith

While grain removal shouldn't come at the expense of detail but in general I prefer movies without grain. I find it distracting and annoying when excessive. Sometimes I see grain-free upconverted DVDs as better equitment demos then grain filled Blu-Rays. So the effort to reduce excessive grain isn't something comparible to pan scanning in my opinion but a way to make movies look better. From everything Ive seen from comparison shots this new version is definutely the best Predator has ever looked since I never bought the first Blu-Ray release Im definutely picking this up.

But EVERY movie has grain. It's what makes up the film image. So I guess you like Avatar and nothing else then?

[SynGamer]

Originally Posted by retablo

But EVERY movie has grain. It's what makes up the film image. So I guess you like Avatar and nothing else then?

I believe Alice in Wonderland (2010) was all digital...just throwing it out there.

[Beast]

Originally Posted by Post Prod

But it's fine to harass people that don't want to buy it eh?

Let's see. The thread is about the upcoming release....

Something you're not interested in due to how it's presented.

Nobody is forcing you at gunpoint or making you buy it somehow. So your analogy doesn't work.

It's your choice whether or not to buy it. But ranting about it and berating people for liking it is silly.

[Beast]

Originally Posted by retablo

But EVERY movie has grain. It's what makes up the film image. So I guess you like Avatar and nothing else then?

Most don't look like they replaced the film stock with sandpaper though.

[Pounder]

Originally Posted by retablo

It's a free forum, I'm sorry you disagree. But no, I'll post what I want, since it's my opinion. Thanks anyway though.

well put sir, well put.

[Beast]

Originally Posted by retablo

It's a free forum, I'm sorry you disagree. But no, I'll post what I want, since it's my opinion. Thanks anyway though.

You're free to post your dislike of the transfer.

Harassing people cause they like it or because they're buying it is the problem.

[singhcr]

Originally Posted by QuasidodoJr

I guess I'll just stick to the first release. If I didn't already have the other disc and this was the only version of Predator available, I'd buy it. But I'm not keen on the overzealous digital processing. As much as I love the movie, it's still hard for me to watch the History of Violence blu-ray.

Thankfully, the UK version of History of Violence does not have the excessive DNR that the US version does.

[Beast]

Originally Posted by pgestradasp1

well put sir, well put.

Even if his entire point is flawed.

[csdot]

Originally Posted by Beast

You're free to post your dislike of the transfer.

Harassing people cause they like it or because they're buying it is the problem.

i dont think anyone has harassed anyone about liking it or wanting to buy it. its just the people who like it take it personally that there are those of us who dont like the changes theyve made. if im wrong then please show some examples of such harassment.

[Jimmy Smith]

Originally Posted by retablo

But EVERY movie has grain. It's what makes up the film image. So I guess you like Avatar and nothing else then?

Classic straw-man arguement. Yes I did like the way Avatar looked and would love it if all movies replacated that clean sharp look. But that doesn't mean I can't enjoy a movie if it isn't razor sharp. Frankly Id rather watch The Shawsank Redemption on an old scratched up VHS then clean sharp digital high definition 3D version of Transformers Revenge of the Fallen. All I said is I don't think grain removal is a travesty. Nothing more and nothing less.

[deadhatetheliving]

So............Should I get the old version or this new version???

[meehan]

Originally Posted by Jimmy Smith

All I said is I don't think grain removal is a travesty.

I still can't quite get my head around this attitude. How is destroying part of the image not a travesty?