The Good, the Bad and the Ugly (1966) (50th Anniversary Edition)

[mar3o]

Originally Posted by Rory

Of course, that's what I want everything to look like. That's not what this is about. All I'm saying is that from my memory of what Italian westerns looked like decades ago -- which in my opinion was ugly -- what the Ritrovata "restoration" image looks like is spot on. That's how it was, and I don't know when it ever was that there were mostly immaculately timed prints in theatres. Not back in the '70s that's for sure.

If they released films the way I used to watch them on SD TVs, then the blu-rays would include commercials, and they would be cropped pan & scan, along with being edited for content and time-compressed, with a splash of antenna noise for added effect.

But that's not the way we want to see these films on blu-ray. We did that already with VHS. We want to see them at their best, not their worst.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by balthazar_bee

Normally I wouldn't post this, but with all of the shit that has been thrown about of late, what's the harm?

I know Stinging Velvet suggested using the "Cool" setting with the 2014 MGM release as a way of mitigating the furious yellow, and that does help some.

But watching the Kino "theatrical" version I found that the "Cool" setting also results in a very pleasing appearance during exterior scenes. It made the film look more like Sony's 4K mastering of The Man from Laramie; I'm biased, since I think that transfer is one of the most beautiful ever rendered, but it was great to see actual blue skies (something that, to my eyes, the Kino transfer doesn't quite achieve) and the setting also pretty much dispels the green/orange look in general.

Is it accurate? Almost certainly not. It's also counter intuitive, interiors are predictably hit-and-miss, and the faces skew a bit pink -- but not too much.

Anyway, I'm a card-carrying anti-revisionist, but I also love watching TGTBTU, and in this imperfect world, I'll probably be doing it this way from now on, even though it comes with about seventeen asterisks.

Aye. I'm only looking at the caps of the Kino and while the skin tones are much more pinky I noticed that the skies do still look more cyan than blue. Personally I'm happy with Cool on the 2014 MGM, I get much more natural skin tones AND proper blue skies without the shitty encoding and even brighter look of the Kino.

[Leterface]

Originally Posted by Baron Blood

Are you serious???

You want the version that represents a cheap crappy print that you watched on a crappy old TV and not what the Artist intended?
I suppose you also prefer the crappy old Night Of The Living Dead that was extremely soft with zero contrast that TV channels would always broadcast.
Did you have a Zenith?
Ahhh...the good ol days!

I wish I could say I've now heard it all!

Hmm maby the real restoration people and even the second to the asisisting camera man remember the good ol' prints

[Johnysurfin]

Fascinating

[StingingVelvet]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

To which I refer my right honourable friend to my previous comment which then got shot down by your good self. It's all well and good taking your middle ground (damn you and your well-reasoned arguments!) but there will always be something that people like for which the oft-repeated issues with x distributor will then become a problem. So why shouldn't it be pointed out with whatever shlock release as well as whatever classic so that these outfits might just become aware of it? Prevention is better than cure etc etc.

Sure, sure. My experience is just that the labels are so sensitive to criticism you have to pick your battles. No Retreat, No Surrender had horrible compression artifacts on the left side of frame in every dark scene, and I made sure to mention that. Man on Fire (original film) had a more serious levels issue where it looked grey and flat the whole movie, and I called that out. I guess on the day-to-day stuff I just gave them a Mill Creek-like pass as a smaller label doing super niche stuff.

If they're gonna play with the big boys though, they need to bring a bigger stick.

[DVDave]

Has anybody contacted Kino directly about the stuttering issues on the extras? If nothing else they really need to fix those and issue replacement discs. Totally unacceptible as-is. I contacted Mill Creek about the audio issues on Miami Vice and got them to issue replacements and they seem like a smaller company than Kino.

[iaragorn1]

Originally Posted by DVDave

Has anybody contacted Kino directly about the stuttering issues on the extras? If nothing else they really need to fix those and issue replacement discs. Totally unacceptible as-is. I contacted Mill Creek about the audio issues on Miami Vice and got them to issue replacements and they seem like a smaller company than Kino.

Mr. Lime reads the forum, or at least used to; in any case I'm sure that they knew and approved the release in the version it is now.

[DVDave]

Originally Posted by iaragorn1

Mr. Lime reads the forum, or at least used to; in any case I'm sure that they knew and approved the release in the version it is now.

Approved?!?! Somebody really FUBAR'd the QC. Totally not acceptable. I'm going to return my copy to Amazon as defective then.

[Dr. Humbert]

Originally Posted by DVDave

Approved?!?! Somebody really FUBAR'd the QC. Totally not acceptable. I'm going to return my copy to Amazon as defective then.

Here's the quote from the man himself:

Originally Posted by MisterLime

These old SD extras don't really look great, the BD50 disc only has so much space and we wanted use as much of the bitrate for the actual 179 minute feature and the separate audio options. We could've made it a 3-disc set like the DVD to improve it a a tiny bit, but decided against it. We had no choice on with the DVD, since it feature and extras did not fit on one DVD9 disc.

[Geoff D]

I still don't see how bitrate directly affects them ****ing up the frame rate.

[babybreese]

It doesn't.
This release is pretty much a ( bad ) joke ( if they trying to separate me from my money ).

As this is the single most released film to home video in the history of all home video mediums.....
we'll see someone else take a crack at this soon.

As far as doing it properly, someone should get it right in say, 2024.

[blugremlin]

Umm...someone correct me if I'm wrong-I've been dropping into this thread since this blu ray was announced, and even pre-ordered from Amazon when it was posted-wasn't this supposed to come with a slipcover? The inept shipping folks just got this to me today, but had no slipcover...not necessarily a fanboy of them, but gee...

[Davidian]

No, no slipcover. The listing just has the reverse art in the slipcover slot.

[Leterface]

Has anyone from Europe allready got their shipped from wowhd? Can't wait to see this in motion!

[Cactus]

Can anyone provide something like a sequence of caps from the extras to show the problems?

[Geoff D]

I don't think that seeing it in still form will shed any light on it. If anyone has Shout's edition of Mad Max then watch the legacy extras on that, that should give you some idea of the problem here.

[StingingVelvet]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

I still don't see how bitrate directly affects them ****ing up the frame rate.

"It's screwed up because we wanted to give you the best quality" is a nice dodge move. Then it ends up more poorly compressed than the MGM edition anyway.

Shout Factory has improved their compression over the last few years, one assumes as a response to complaints. I hope Kino take this brightly shining criticism from such a major film release as a call to do better with future "big movies," rather than get bitter and defensive about it. Then we all win.

[blugremlin]

I'm watching this after receiving in the mail today...I'm no quality control critic, nor am I knowledgeable enuff with all the terminology to address any flaws some folks find with it...all I can say is I'm pretty damn pleased with it.

[Johnysurfin]

Originally Posted by blugremlin

I'm watching this after receiving in the mail today...I'm no quality control critic, nor am I knowledgeable enuff with all the terminology to address any flaws some folks find with it...all I can say is I'm pretty damn pleased with it.

I thought it was good myself.
The extras,I watch them once and that's it.
Glad I bought it.

[bokes]

I grew up watching this in the basement- local broadcast pan and scan- on a 20 inch Standard Zenith television equipped with rabbit ears and three knobs- Color, tint, brightness.
Under those conditions, Good, Bad and Ugly still became my favorite film.

I even audio taped it to play in my VW Bug while I drove around town.
I became a huge Clint Eastwood fan (Named my only son Eastwood)

Based on the size of this thread I feel I am not alone.
Folks love this movie with a passion and simply want the best presentation.
I get it.
And
Yes- i want it to look the best it can as well, but honestly-
I'll take it anyway they give it.
Right now I have it in HD on a 60inch Oled- blemishes and all.
I'll continue to look forward to any new release.