Favorite Blu Ray.......With a Lousy Transfer (1 Viewer)

[Cinescott]

I am sure this happens with everyone. One of your favorites is announced for hi def release, you wait patiently for the day, spend your hard-earned money and.........Ugh. Not what you expected. Blu Ray is fantastic, but every once in a while, a studio just doesn't seem to care.

For me, that title would have to be Out of Africa. Thanks to Universal, this one could have stayed on DVD. There's not much difference with the blu ray folks. A bit, yes. Not much. It's easy to compare, too, since the DVD version is on the flip side of the blu ray.

Out of Africa's still highly watchable, but I yearn for the day when a proper transfer to hi def will be mastered.

 

[Walter Kittel]

The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly.


Terribly disappointing. I was labeled a 'whiner' by a fairly major reviewer for comparing this title to a variety of other catalog titles and finding it (TGBU) wanting in one of the HTF threads dealing with this release of the R1 Blu-ray disc. There was a thread over at AVS that compared the R1 release against an Italian release with a series of screen captures and the results were heavily in favor of the Italian release. The level of detail in the Italian release was markedly superior.


- Walter.

 

[Jeff Robertson]

So would it have to one I bought but didn't realize it was lousy until viewed? That is hard to say since the internet allows buyers like myself to make better decisions. I can tell you that I *was* all geared up for the Back to The Future set but then canceled it after the reviews came in. Another one from Universal, incidentally. Same is true for the Lord of The Rings set....although, even if the transfer quality was great, I think I still would have held out for the ext. cuts.


There's also another approach-- a Blu-Ray you had to have and knew it was bad but bought it anyway. For me, that was "The Last Starfighter". I already had it on HD-DVD but wanted the Blu-Ray for the extras. And, what do you know...*another* Universal title. Ohhhh Universal......

Originally Posted by Cinescott

I am sure this happens with everyone. One of your favorites is announced for hi def release, you wait patiently for the day, spend your hard-earned money and.........Ugh. Not what you expected. Blu Ray is fantastic, but every once in a while, a studio just doesn't seem to care.

For me, that title would have to be Out of Africa. Thanks to Universal, this one could have stayed on DVD. There's not much difference with the blu ray folks. A bit, yes. Not much. It's easy to compare, too, since the DVD version is on the flip side of the blu ray.

Out of Africa's still highly watchable, but I yearn for the day when a proper transfer to hi def will be mastered.

 

[Cinescott]

Originally Posted by Jeff Robertson

There's also another approach-- a Blu-Ray you had to have and knew it was bad but bought it anyway.

Yes, this is the case for Out of Africa. I knew the transfer would not be the best, but it was worse than I feared. I read the bad image quality reviews, but bought it anyways, since it is on my favorites list. In some cases, I don't agree with online reviews so tend to largely buy titles I know I will enjoy regardless. OOA's reviews were accurate, though. Maybe too kind.

 

[Matt Hough]

Count me as another who was extremely disappointed with Out of Africa's Blu-ray release.

 

[Michael Reuben]

Near Dark.


Thankfully, though, I didn't buy it.


Runners-up: Face-Off and Trading Places, but they don't really count, since I avoided the Blu discs, once I confirmed they were unchanged from the HD DVDs.

 

[Todd H]

Back To The Future. Scream is a close second.

 

[Ronald Epstein]

Been waiting for From Dusk Till Dawn which was

recently released with reviews that state it's a pretty

bad transfer.


Now I have to decide whether to pick it up or not.


So, yeah, consider it a favorite with a bad transfer.

 

An American Werewolf in London. It has been dvr'd to death. And then it looks like fake grain placed over it.

 

[Stephen_J_H]

The Good, the Bad and the Ugly here. The only saving grace was that it came as part of the Man with No Name Trilogy set from MGM, with vastly superior transfers of A Fistful of Dollars and For a Few Dollars More in a Boxing Day sale for $15.

 

[Dave H]

Originally Posted by eric scott richard

An American Werewolf in London. It has been dvr'd to death. And then it looks like fake grain placed over it.

Yeah, there's something about An American Werewolf in London release that looks unnatural and digital.


Trading Places was mentioned earlier; too much DNR without a doubt, but for a few brief moments it's as if the DNR was turned off and more film grain and detail was briefly noticeable which teased at how it could have been a solid release.

 

[Ed Lachmann]

For every splendid blu-ray of a beloved film like "The Ten Commandments" there is a heartbreaking jumble like "Spartacus". Sometimes you get a pleasant surprise, like "Taras Bulba" and then another what-were-they-thinking like "The Greatest Story Ever Told". DNR filtering gone mad is a major culprit in many, old technology masters sufficing is another. More specialized companies, like Kino and Masters of Cinema UK, seem to always do a wonderful job. So happy with the gorgeous "Pandora and the Flying Dutchman", for example. Maybe if studios like Universal, MGM and Fox would lease more of their catalogue to these smaller boutique labels, we would see our beloved films treated with greater respect.

 

[Geoff_D]

Fox's The Longest Day is #1 on my 'meh' list. Forget about Patton, as it's TLD which has the most destructive application of DNR I've yet seen on a major release. Any semblance of texture and vitality and life has been blitzed away. They might as well have released the colourised version, 'cause it wouldn't be much worse than the abomination that's currently on Blu-ray.

 

[john a hunter]

Originally Posted by Geoff_D

Fox's The Longest Day is #1 on my 'meh' list. Forget about Patton, as it's TLD which has the most destructive application of DNR I've yet seen on a major release. Any semblance of texture and vitality and life has been blitzed away. They might as well have released the colourised version, 'cause it wouldn't be much worse than the abomination that's currently on Blu-ray.

Can only second this.

 

[Lord Dalek]

Dark City. The DNR is so bad in some places that even the individual frames of motion in the film become blurred.

 

[Ethan Riley]

Well I don't like the first two Harry Potter movies on blu, but I only have the first editions that came out in the early days of blu. I haven't seen the special editions that are floating around--they're a bit...pricey. Is the transfer better on those releases? Anyway, I'm expecting a huge boxed set of all 8 movies, probably in time for Christmas or at least early next year.

 

Ethan...just curious...does you copy of the first Harry Potter have the WB logo with the AOL byline? I have the Ultimate Edition and the logo has now been changed.

 

[Ethan Riley]

Originally Posted by eric scott richard

Ethan...just curious...does you copy of the first Harry Potter have the WB logo with the AOL byline? I have the Ultimate Edition and the logo has now been changed.

No it just has the regular WB shield. This blu is old though--I think it's actually the first bluray disc I ever purchased. I don't like it because it's hardly even in hi-def--it's definitely a port of the older dvd version but it doesn't look like much of an upgrade whatsoever.

 

[Cinescott]

Also, quite probably the worst transfer of a decent film I have ever seen: Leaving Las Vegas. A Best Buy exclusive that is a complete abomination. Awful contrast, bad color timing, washed out, grain galore. I could go on.

 

[Jonny P]

The Bourne movies (all three).


Maybe it is just a general issue with Universal's "catalog" titles, but each of these left me fairly underwhelmed when comparing them to their DVD counterparts. They looked alright, but they didn't look as good as they could have looked.


And I would concur on the "Back to the Future" trilogy.