**Official Blu-Ray & HD-DVD Thread Part II**

Collapse

Recommended Videos

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • GAMEC0CK2002
    Stayin Alive
    • Aug 2002
    • 10384

    #1501
    Re: **Official Blu-Ray & HD-DVD Thread Part II**

    Another review of Video and Audio (Hidefdigest)

    The Video: Sizing Up the Picture 4 out of 5 stars

    Brace yourselves, fanboys. You're about to read the most "biased" and "unprofessional" review in the history of forever! What's this? I'm not going to give 'Revenge of the Fallen' perfect 5-star scores for audio or video? How can that be? Clearly, I've let my dislike for the movie color my review of its technical specs. I mean, there couldn't possibly be any other explanation, could there? It's simply not conceivable that this disc could be anything less than total perfection in every regard.
    Well, be that as it may, I don't consider the Blu-ray's 1080p/AVC MPEG-4 transfer to be the pinnacle of home video quality. 'Revenge of the Fallen' looks almost exactly like the first 'Transformers', which is to say that the picture is superficially sharp, but (aside from those few scenes shot on IMAX film stock) doesn't exhibit a lot of textural detail. While the image doesn't look soft, skin pores or the fabric weave of clothing are almost never resolved in any particular clarity, as they are in the best high-def transfers. Contrasts have been pumped up, blacks are crushed, and colors are gaudily oversaturated such that all the actors have orange Oompa Loompa skin. That's Michael Bay's style, of course, so I can't fault the transfer for replicating what he wanted. Nonetheless, when searching for the best of the best-looking movies on Blu-ray, this probably isn't the first one I'd grab off the shelf.
    None of that is to say that the disc looks bad. It looks very good indeed, excellent even. But 5 stars? Not in my opinion.
    Riding the coattails of 'The Dark Knight', Michael Bay chose to film selected scenes for 'Revenge of the Fallen' on IMAX film stock, which has a much larger negative size and captures much more detail. (Because so much of the movie is CGI-intensive, Bay also had the VFX artists render their work at a higher resolution for these scenes.) The majority of the movie was shot on traditional 35mm film with Panavision lenses for an aspect ratio of 2.40:1. In IMAX theaters, the bulk of the movie was projected letterboxed on the giant 1.44:1 screen, while the special IMAX scenes expanded vertically to fill the screen. On the other hand, in standard 35mm theaters, the IMAX scenes were cropped on the top and bottom, and the entire movie was projected at 2.40:1.
    The general release Blu-ray is a replication of the 35mm theatrical prints. The whole movie is letterboxed to 2.40:1 throughout. A few scenes have English subtitles for alien dialogue. Those subtitles are contained within the movie image, and are safe for viewing on Constant Image Height projection screens.
    Like the Blu-ray edition of 'The Dark Knight', the IMAX scenes here do exhibit slightly better sharpness and detail than the rest of the movie around them. However, much less of this movie was shot on IMAX stock than 'Dark Knight'. Also, Bay's frenetic and confusing visual style largely negates the benefit of that added clarity.

    The Audio: Rating the Sound 4.5 out of 5 stars




    This is a Michael Bay movie. It's gonna get loud, folks. The DTS-HD Master Audio 5.1 soundtrack starts up with the thumping bass right from the Dreamworks and Paramount logos. Even Optimus Prime's gravelly voice sounds like it's trying to rattle your chair a little. The action scenes in the film, of which there are many, are pure audio porn. They feature slamming, thunderous waves of intense bass down to the lowest registers. No matter how large your subwoofer, this disc will push it to its limits. All the while, the surround channels constantly buzz with sound effects zinging all around the soundstage.
    The thing is, though, that dialogue levels are very low and flat in comparison to the really freakin' loud sound effects and music. Also, non-action scenes, of which there are several long stretches, are pretty much sonically dead. In either type of scene, this movie is all about loudness at the expense of anything else. Clarity of subtle audio details (I can't believe I just used the word "subtle" to describe something in a Michael Bay film) and musical fidelity are incidental, and not particularly noteworthy.
    So, again like with the video, the soundtrack is pretty great, but not what I personally classify as perfect.

    I can wait for the price drop b/c I didn't love the movie. I'd be more inclined to buy Wolverine or the last Terminator movie on blu ray before T2: RotF

    Comment

    • jmood88
      Sean Payton: Retribution
      • Jul 2003
      • 34639

      #1502
      Re: **Official Blu-Ray & HD-DVD Thread Part II**

      Originally posted by DTX3
      Transformers 2: Revenge of the Fallen IMAX Edition review


      Walmart.com has it listed at $18.86. I'll be picking it up after work, still haven't watched this movie.
      Damn if it's only $18 I'm getting it tonight.
      Originally posted by Blzer
      Let me assure you that I am a huge proponent of size, and it greatly matters. Don't ever let anyone tell you otherwise.

      If I went any bigger, it would not have properly fit with my equipment, so I had to optimize. I'm okay with it, but I also know what I'm missing with those five inches. :)

      Comment

      • GAMEC0CK2002
        Stayin Alive
        • Aug 2002
        • 10384

        #1503
        Re: **Official Blu-Ray & HD-DVD Thread Part II**

        After viewing Braveheart and Gladiator back to back, I can say that both are at worse, highly recommended. Both are must owns, IMO.

        Comment

        • Fresh Tendrils
          Strike Hard and Fade Away
          • Jul 2002
          • 36131

          #1504
          Re: **Official Blu-Ray & HD-DVD Thread Part II**

          I watched the original Batman movie last night (Adam West) and the video quality was surprisingly clean and very good considering the age. Colors were awesome looking.



          Comment

          • rockchisler
            All Star
            • Oct 2002
            • 8290

            #1505
            Re: **Official Blu-Ray & HD-DVD Thread Part II**

            Originally posted by jmood88
            Damn if it's only $18 I'm getting it tonight.
            Went to my Walmart and got the Blu Ray edition for $15.17, best deal I have ever seen for a new release.
            chuckcross.bandcamp.com

            Follow me on www.Twitter.com/Rockchisler

            Just type [ SPOILER ] and [ / SPOILER ], without any spaces.

            ROOKIE KILLER

            Comment

            • GAMEC0CK2002
              Stayin Alive
              • Aug 2002
              • 10384

              #1506
              Re: **Official Blu-Ray & HD-DVD Thread Part II**

              Ended up trading Snakes on a Plane for Transformers 2. And traded Flightplan for Gladiator.

              Now if I could just get Friday and Paycheck.

              By the way: Amazon has The Hangover for $17.99 as a pre-order Don't think you'll find it cheaper

              http://www.amazon.com/Hangover-Unrat...sr=8-1-catcorr
              Last edited by GAMEC0CK2002; 10-31-2009, 02:30 AM.

              Comment

              • Seymour Scagnetti
                Banned
                • Oct 2006
                • 2489

                #1507
                Re: **Official Blu-Ray & HD-DVD Thread Part II**

                Originally posted by Fresh Tendrils
                I watched the original Batman movie last night (Adam West) and the video quality was surprisingly clean and very good considering the age. Colors were awesome looking.
                The budget for Batman was quite big for a TV show and subsequent spin-off movie at that time and used technicolor which was innovative back then as well. Couple that with the use of bright colors on the show and no film grain to mute those colors and it will translate to hidef well if the source material is pristine which appears to be the case.

                If you're a fan of the movie then it's a great deal because sound and picture are way above average for a mid 1960's film. And if they release the show on Bluray it should be a steal of a deal as well.
                Last edited by Seymour Scagnetti; 10-31-2009, 10:25 AM.

                Comment

                • aholbert32
                  (aka Alberto)
                  • Jul 2002
                  • 33106

                  #1508
                  Re: **Official Blu-Ray & HD-DVD Thread Part II**

                  Originally posted by GAMEC0CK2002
                  Ended up trading Snakes on a Plane for Transformers 2. And traded Flightplan for Gladiator.

                  Now if I could just get Friday and Paycheck.

                  By the way: Amazon has The Hangover for $17.99 as a pre-order Don't think you'll find it cheaper

                  http://www.amazon.com/Hangover-Unrat...sr=8-1-catcorr

                  Im waiting for the black friday sales. I'm sure I can find some of the summer movies cheap.

                  Comment

                  • Seymour Scagnetti
                    Banned
                    • Oct 2006
                    • 2489

                    #1509
                    Re: **Official Blu-Ray & HD-DVD Thread Part II**

                    Originally posted by GAMEC0CK2002
                    After viewing Braveheart and Gladiator back to back, I can say that both are at worse, highly recommended. Both are must owns, IMO.
                    While I heard Braveheart was steller in sound and picture I've read that Galidiator, while great sound, suffers quite a bit in the video dept. You didn't notice any problems? I'd like to get it because my Gladiator DVD does not look good upconverted.

                    I just don't wanna buy the Bluray and then a year later we get another Gladiator released with a new and improved picture. Extras on double dip discs I don't care about and won't double dip for but when they release improved and picture and sound and it really is improved then that pisses me off with distributors. Like with No Country For Old Men. I knew the picture and sound on the original bluray wasn't gonna get any better, it was steller already at least to my eye, so when they double dipped with extras I knew the video\audio would be the same and it was.
                    Last edited by Seymour Scagnetti; 10-31-2009, 10:24 AM.

                    Comment

                    • GAMEC0CK2002
                      Stayin Alive
                      • Aug 2002
                      • 10384

                      #1510
                      Re: **Official Blu-Ray & HD-DVD Thread Part II**

                      Originally posted by Seymour Scagnetti
                      While I heard Braveheart was steller in sound and picture I've read that Galidiator, while great sound, suffers quite a bit in the video dept. You didn't notice any problems? I'd like to get it because my Gladiator DVD does not look good upconverted.

                      I just don't wanna buy the Bluray and then a year later we get another Gladiator released with a new and improved picture. Extras on double dip discs I don't care about and won't buy but when they release improved and picture and sound and it really is improved then that pisses me off with distributors.
                      Gladiator is in 1080i. I watched it on a 720p Panny plasma and it looked darn good to me. Is it possible that a double dip is coming with a better encode? Perhaps.

                      Comment

                      • GAMEC0CK2002
                        Stayin Alive
                        • Aug 2002
                        • 10384

                        #1511
                        Re: **Official Blu-Ray & HD-DVD Thread Part II**

                        Originally posted by aholbert32
                        Im waiting for the black friday sales. I'm sure I can find some of the summer movies cheap.
                        Last year, Amazon had some of the summer blockbusters for $14.99-15.99

                        I remember getting The Dark Knight and Iron Man on black friday.

                        Comment

                        • Seymour Scagnetti
                          Banned
                          • Oct 2006
                          • 2489

                          #1512
                          Re: **Official Blu-Ray & HD-DVD Thread Part II**

                          Originally posted by GAMEC0CK2002
                          Gladiator is in 1080i. I watched it on a 720p Panny plasma and it looked darn good to me. Is it possible that a double dip is coming with a better encode? Perhaps.
                          1080i. are you sure about that? I doubt they would release a big bluray title like that in 1080 i. I hope not because I have a 52" LCD and watch only 6 feet away so I actually do notice a difference in 1080i and 1080p.

                          Comment

                          • GAMEC0CK2002
                            Stayin Alive
                            • Aug 2002
                            • 10384

                            #1513
                            Re: **Official Blu-Ray & HD-DVD Thread Part II**

                            Originally posted by Seymour Scagnetti
                            1080i. are you sure about that? I doubt they would release a big bluray title like that in 1080 i. I hope not because I have a 52" LCD and watch only 6 feet away so I actually do notice a difference in 1080i and 1080p.
                            I was mistaken. The pre-release rumor was that it was only 1080i. It is 1080p but only got a 3.5/5 for video vs. 5/5 for for Braveheart's video.

                            ------Hidefdigest video review excerpt LONG READ-----
                            'Gladiator' has been hands down one of the most hotly anticipated high-def releases since the dawn of the Blu-ray format. The wait has been long, but when Paramount announced Ridley Scott's masterwork would be one of the inaugural titles in the studio's new top-of-the-line Sapphire Series, fans hoped their Job-like patience would be well rewarded. Expectations for a super-deluxe transfer rose to stratospheric heights, and then, like a bolt from the blue, came the screenshots-heard-'round-the-world, and enthusiasm plummeted. Several days before the disc's street date, videophiles showered isolated frames from the transfer across many internet forums (including ours), and decried the heavy use of edge enhancement and digital noise reduction, as well as excessive dirt and scratch removal filtering, that supposedly plagued the film. As a result, the 'Gladiator' controversy has become quite the Blu-ray cause célèbre, and the debate continues to rage. So, has this beloved title been irrevocably ruined by shoddy workmanship, cost-cutting, and a shameful disregard for both the film itself and the fundamental principles of present-day high-def transfer methods? Or, with apologies to Mark Twain, have the reports of 'Gladiator's' demise been greatly exaggerated?
                            I hate to be a fence straddler, but the answer lies somewhere in between. While I can't pretend to be the ultimate authority on this issue – no one (except maybe Ridley Scott) can – my particular set of eyes found the transfer to possess many of the faults described above, but nowhere near to the extent some of the more vociferous posters have stated. Yes, there's edge enhancement. Yes, there's DNR. I noticed both, but neither destroyed my viewing experience. On the whole, I found 'Gladiator' to be a very worthy upgrade from the previous DVD editions and a fine addition to the Blu-ray catalogue. Clarity is much improved, colors are brighter and bolder, the print is cleaner, and the picture possesses a much greater degree of depth and dimensionality. No, it is not the breathtaking, gasp-inducing effort many fans (including myself) expected, and Paramount promised with the silly Sapphire Series label. But casual viewers who just want to enjoy the drama and spectacle of this Oscar-winning epic with enhanced video and sound should be delighted. Diehard aficionados seeking perfection, however, undoubtedly will be frustrated.
                            So let's talk specifics. I watched portions of the extended edition of 'Gladiator' on two different displays – a 57-inch Mitsubishi DLP and a 46-inch Mitsubishi LCD. (My TV of choice is the DLP, as I feel the technology provides a more theatrical viewing experience.) The "smaller" screen sizes probably somewhat diminish the offensive digital doctoring, but whether one views the film on a 40-inch or 100-inch display, there's no denying the transfer possesses a definite processed look. Film-like warmth comes at a premium. While light grain lends the picture welcome, necessary texture, a sterile coldness often prevails. At its worst, the transfer makes some images appear almost superimposed on the screen, as excessive sharpening ever-so-slightly detaches figures from their backgrounds and gives certain scenes an artificial layered look. The DLP display was much more adept at masking such deficiencies (although they were still noticeable) and replicating the look and feel of true celluloid. The LCD display, on the other hand, was more unforgiving. Noise was much more visible in solid colors, the image adopted a harsher sheen, loss of detail was more apparent in panoramic shots, and print imperfections (such as errant white dots) were easier to spot. On both displays, however, the Blu-ray still beat upconverted DVD by a wide margin.
                            Perhaps the biggest problem with the 'Gladiator' transfer is that it's not a consistent effort. Rumor has it the bulk of the film was struck from a 2000 HD master (approved by Scott) in which digital enhancements were made, while the extended scenes are taken from a 2005 HD master that reflects today's more natural transfer standards. As I watched the movie via seamless branching, I really couldn't distinguish between the two per se. Yet upon reexamination, I noticed that while the extended scenes do flaunt a slightly more realistic, film-like look, they're not head-and-shoulders above every sequence in the theatrical cut. In fact, many stretches of the theatrical version rival the extended scenes.
                            Which brings me to my next point. At times, 'Gladiator' looks spectacularly good, with moments of jaw-dropping dimensionality, terrific detail, and sumptuous color. Though the first third of the film is awash in blue tones or a golden haze, both of which slightly mute contrast, vibrancy perks up measurably when Maximus is captured by the slave traders. The blue sky, green fields, red blood, and clay-colored earth all enjoy marvelous saturation. Fabric details and uniform adornments come through quite well, fleshtones look stable and natural, and black levels and shadow delineation are both stellar.
                            Much has been made about the scratch removal process defacing the image, especially with regard to arrows and fireballs that disappear and reappear in varying degrees of intensity from one frame to the next during the opening battle sequence. If you'd like to take the time to watch the film in slow-motion to find these instances, be my guest, but you won't see them at normal speed. (That doesn't excuse their existence, but it shouldn't keep anyone from purchasing this disc.) As far as DNR goes, it's there, but not employed so excessively that the actors look like wax figures moving through a Roman tableau at Madame Tussaud's. Facial features can look a bit smooth and at times lack the striking detail we expect from Blu-ray, but plenty of close-ups are razor sharp and absolutely stunning.
                            All in all, I have to say I've made my peace with this 'Gladiator' transfer. Could it better? Absolutely. Would I trade my copy if a replacement disc was pressed? In a New York minute. Will I toss this Blu-ray in a corner and forget about it until a better version is released? No. While it's far from the knock-my-socks-off, died-and-gone-to-heaven effort for which I and many others had hoped, it's also equally far from the sky-is-falling disaster others have claimed. Until a revamped version comes along, this one will certainly suffice.

                            Comment

                            • Seymour Scagnetti
                              Banned
                              • Oct 2006
                              • 2489

                              #1514
                              Re: **Official Blu-Ray & HD-DVD Thread Part II**

                              Originally posted by GAMEC0CK2002
                              I was mistaken. The pre-release rumor was that it was only 1080i. It is 1080p but only got a 3.5/5 for video vs. 5/5 for for Braveheart's video.
                              Yeah I read that previously. I actually want your opinion because sometimes the average guy's opinion is more valuable to me than these sites because they tend to overthink themselves and nitpick to an extreme like the EE guy on this site who sees EE on everything, I can't remember his name at the moment. I remember him who swearing that EE was all over TDK and it was some sort of Imax conspiracy to make the Imax scenes look that much better. I actually looked for it when I was bored one night but no luck, I couldn't find it. It must have been subliminal.

                              I know you said that Gladiator was great but did you notice any problems that the reviewer did. I'm really not picky, only when it's obviously bad.

                              Comment

                              • GAMEC0CK2002
                                Stayin Alive
                                • Aug 2002
                                • 10384

                                #1515
                                Re: **Official Blu-Ray & HD-DVD Thread Part II**

                                Originally posted by Seymour Scagnetti
                                Yeah I read that previously. I actually want your opinion because sometimes the average guy's opinion is more valuable to me than these sites because they tend to overthink themselves and nitpick to an extreme like the EE guy on this site who sees EE on everything, I can't remember his name at the moment. I remember him who swearing that EE was all over TDK and it was some sort of Imax conspiracy to make the Imax scenes look that much better. I actually looked for it when I was bored one night but no luck, I couldn't find it. It must have been subliminal.

                                I know you said that Gladiator was great but did you notice any problems that the reviewer did. I'm really not picky, only when it's obviously bad.
                                I honestly thought it was a pretty good transfer. Nothing really that blatant stood out but you could tell it wasn't as clean as Braveheart or The Dark Knight.

                                Like I said, I traded for it but would have still been happy if I had paid $16-17 for it. I can't imagine a second encode looking that much better for 1) paying a premium price or 2) waiting months to a year for that second encode to happen.

                                Comment

                                Working...