A Few Words About A few words about...™ Goldeneye -- in Blu-ray (1 Viewer)

[brioni]

i'd like to see all the Bond films re-visited, see them correctly colour timed and get rid of the contrast boosting, retain the film grain, do it right, i think these films on blu ray could look amazing, some people already think they look amazing, i don't

You can say the same thing for a large amount of blu ray releases - not just Bond. For now, it's a step up from the previous UE DVD's and their good enough for me to lose myself in a couple of hours of escapism...and not wait another 5 years.

 

I haven't seen all of the Bond films. So, for me it is time to finally jump in. I can't wait to see these.

 

[FoxyMulder]

Originally Posted by brioni /t/324219/a-few-words-about-goldeneye-in-blu-ray/60#post_3992403
You can say the same thing for a large amount of blu ray releases - not just Bond.

I usually do same the same thing. The other point is i have seen all the films before, thus i don't want to reward the studio with my money for a cheap 50th anniversary boxset cash in.

As for those talking about Ultra HD 4K, it's coming, probably Sony releases at first but it's coming whether you want it or not.

 

[Worth]

As for those talking about Ultra HD 4K, it's coming, probably Sony releases at first but it's coming whether you want it or not.

Displays, yes, but content...?

 

[FoxyMulder]

Originally Posted by Worth /t/324219/a-few-words-about-goldeneye-in-blu-ray/60#post_3992524
Displays, yes, but content...?

Sony have already said or at least hinted to the fact they are releasing content, their next console is going to be 4K capable, they will want to have content other than games that play on it, especially since most of the games won't be 4K and will most likely be 1080p, they will also have their 4K displays, they will want content to sell the display, it won't be much at first but i think it will happen, of course it might be a niche market and never take off, i just hope streaming doesn't kill off the physical media market, i don't want the excessively strict digital rights management they will put on the inferior streaming versions.

 

[Moe Dickstein]

Well, unless Sony sells Columbia to CBS....

 

[Osato]

I'm not sure what Lowry did in 2005 but their process wasn't so perfect back then, see Star Wars as another example, i'd like to see all the Bond films re-visited, see them correctly colour timed and get rid of the contrast boosting, retain the film grain, do it right, i think these films on blu ray could look amazing, some people already think they look amazing, i don't, i hope five years from now i am writing on this very forum about how great the new Bond releases look in 4K or Ultra HD as the consumer electronics association have decided to call it, of course i'll just settle for a quality 1080p blu ray which hasn't had excessive digital manipulation.

+1
Looking forward to the future with 4K and 8K.
I'm happy with the Bond 50 set.
However these discussions about some of the films with the color / dye issues, have me interested to see how they are mastered in the future.
If you have a chance please read Robert's post about YOLT as well.
I would like to know more and especially about the color comparisons. I still don't feel like I quite understand it or why the decision would be made to make a film look so different then it was originally.
That reminds me to take a look at my Thunderball VHS and compare with the blu ray...

 

[tenia]

For reminder : http://www.screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/147158
I believe that anybody dismissing intrusive post-processing due to low quality material and laboratory issues at the time is missing too big of a part of the problem on the BR.
Otherwise, you couldn't have a frame so nice and sharp just frames after a frame completely blurry like this. Especially since the sharp frame is in a fade-in - fade-out.

 

[FoxyMulder]

Originally Posted by tenia /t/324219/a-few-words-about-goldeneye-in-blu-ray/60#post_3992979
For reminder : http://www.screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/147158
I believe that anybody dismissing intrusive post-processing due to low quality material and laboratory issues at the time is missing too big of a part of the problem on the BR.
Otherwise, you couldn't have a frame so nice and sharp just frames after a frame completely blurry like this. Especially since the sharp frame is in a fade-in - fade-out.

There is EE on both those frames, it's been artificially sharpened, its an old master, this looked just fine at the cinema to me, the blu ray is degrained and sharpened.

Both frames look processed, although one does look sharper than the other, i believe a new 4K master and a new blu ray encode would have looked stunning and i don't believe low quality material and laboratory issues were ever a major enough problem for this film to look this bad on blu ray, its just a convenient excuse for the poor quality blu ray.

 

[Bryan Tuck]

You know General, sometimes the men don't know when you're acting.

Apparently not

 

[Kevin Sharp]

This may be my favorite Bond movie (yes, I'm the one), so I had to break down & get it. I pushed play, squinted my eyes, and prepared for disaster.
It was ok. Certainly watchable.
Some scenes looked really good (on a 50" plasma). Some scenes featured pinkish, waxy faces. There didn't seem to be any rhyme or reason to when people would look this way.
All in all, I'd say it looks like a really good DVD. I'm not thrilled, but I'm not going to use it for a coaster either.

 

[Mikey1969]

I agree that it's watchable, and not the washout some are claiming. At least they got the framing right. Fortunately, it's one of my least favourite Bond films...I find it too viiolent, poorly directed with many sequences that should be trimmed down or removed altogether, poor music, a Bond who is still finding his way in the role and a Bond girl who's bland and dresses like a school librarian. It's also an ugly film, awash in monotonous colours.

 

[Nelson Au]

With the less then positive review this blu-ray is getting, I jumped ahead last night after having seen On Her Majesty's Secret Service, which looked great, to Goldeneye to see what all the fuss was about.
I also like Goldeneye. I have the laserdisc and DTS laserdisc from back in the day, 1996 or so. I've seen this movie quite a few times and on the Ultimate Edition and earlier DVD releases. But recently, I've held off watching in anticipation of the blu ray. So I don't have a fresh memory of my last viewing.
If there was excessive DNR, I don't know where to look to see it. I'm watching on a 65" plasma rated the best plasma of 2011. It's reasonably calibrated and produces an excellenent image from the best blu-ray releases. So, like the Connery blu-rays I've already seen, Goldeneye to me is looking pretty good!
There are close-ups on Brosnan's face where I see lines and stubble. I always look at hair as a good indication. I can see a lot of hair texture and I can see the early few bits of gray hair showing on Brosnan. I've never seen Izabella Scorupco look so good. But perhaps her face was scrubbed from the DNR?
If this blu-ray was badly converted, it's technically outside of my knowledge to see it. Sometimes ignorance is bliss.
The only thing that bugged me during my viewing of this disc was a certain desaturation or some kind of darkness was happening. Like i was wearing sunglasses. The car chase scene with the Aston Martin and Ferrari looked a little like a nightnscene filmed in the day, but made to look like a night shot. But it also looked like an early morning scene. I was thinking maybe the image might look brighter during the Cuba scenes. But it was similarly filtered. I popped in the Ultimate Edition DVD and it looked the same. So it must be the same source. But it looked awful to me after seeing the blu ray! So perhaps this film always looked this way.
I agree it had a very weak film score by Serra. Should have convinced John Barry to come back.

 

[brioni]

He was convinced - they just couldn't afford him!
the monotonous colours, the dimmed filtering....it shouldn't look like that. It was bold and vibrant in '95. It stood out amongst many other releases at the time. Although I think the previous film I saw before this would have been Se7en!

 

[Spencer Draper]

I hated how they dimmed the sound on the UE, and was okay with the unnecessary tweaks to the color. now we have a DNRed image similar to a higher-res version of the old SE DVD that is uncropped. Oh joy. If they had only released a lossless version of the original sound mix it would at least be palatable. I have the THX laser and on both mixes it kicks serious tail-but the DD 5.1 has unbelievable LFE. Looking for the DTS version to compare.

 

[Nelson Au]

Okay, i've got the 1999 DVD on hand and will compare to that tonight. My laserdisc player is no longer in the main system, so I won't compare to that. And I even have the 1997 DVD disc from those early first DVD releases of the Bond films on hand to compare. Let's see how dimmed the blu ray got.
Too bad Barry's price prevented his participation on Goldeneye.

 

[Lord Dalek]

I think the old Goldeneye dvd's Dolby was only 384. Don't quote me on that though. I kinda threw my copy away when it started freezing in the middle on every computer I own.

 

[Kevin Sharp]

a Bond girl who's bland and dresses like a school librarian

On this we can agree. Xenia is such a dynamic character as the villain, that the good girl comes off even more bland.

 

[JoshZ]

If there was excessive DNR, I don't know where to look to see it. I'm watching on a 65" plasma rated the best plasma of 2011. It's reasonably calibrated and produces an excellenent image from the best blu-ray releases. So, like the Connery blu-rays I've already seen, Goldeneye to me is looking pretty good!
There are close-ups on Brosnan's face where I see lines and stubble. I always look at hair as a good indication. I can see a lot of hair texture and I can see the early few bits of gray hair showing on Brosnan. I've never seen Izabella Scorupco look so good. But perhaps her face was scrubbed from the DNR?
If this blu-ray was badly converted, it's technically outside of my knowledge to see it. Sometimes ignorance is bliss.

Some examples of things to look for:
03:57 - Nice, thick edge halo around Bond's face.
18:19 - The grain pixelates and has a nasty electronic texture over the white in Bond's tux, but nowhere else in the shot.
18:47 to 18:49 - Look at the cards. They're noisy at first, but then the noise suddenly vanishes mid-shot when the DNR filter kicks in.
Even at its best, the transfer only has a mediocre level of detail comparable to a middling cable broadcast.

 

[Nelson Au]

Noted for review later today. Anything else?