Gladiator Blu-ray - release date 09/01/2009 - Read before buying! (1 Viewer)

[Mark Zimmer]

Originally Posted by ChadMcCallum



We're the minority for sure. When Ghostbusters came out I saw many complaints about how grainy the transfer is and how it should have been "remastered" to remove that grain. I tried to explain why a film from 1984 with heavy optical effect usage would look grainy and included links to discussions here but they mostly fell on deaf ears. If it doesn't look like a brand new movie or tv show then its "wrong". On the other hand there's the people who don't care about any problems like those on Gladiator and think that just because its on blu-ray it must be perfect.

I try to do my best to inform people but I don't argue with them any more. Most either don't care or don't listen and nothing I can say or show them is going to help so why bother?

Exactly. This transfer is designed to appeal to the knotheads who can't stand grain and want it gone from their Blu-ray picture. Well, it's gone, and so is half the detail. Very annoying indeed.

 

[Jesse Blacklow]

If this transfer is indeed from 2000 as rumored, then I highly doubt it was because of "knotheads", it was because they were making a transfer (and possibly monitoring it) for DVD where these flaws wouldn't show up. The absence of DNR/EE from the extended scenes (supposedly from 2007) and the fact that another AAA title that came out the same day (also transferred recently) looks pristine are pretty strong indicators of this.

 

[Carlo_M]

Ugh, I'm weak and couldn't resist Best Buy's $10 off deal (making my walk out price $39 with tax). Add to that the $10 current DVD owner rebate for each, and my net will have been $19 for both.

I figure HTF and the "other" site are on the case. This has been brought to Charlie D's attention. Between all those sources hopefully Paramount/Dreamworks/whoever will rectify this situation in the future due to our combined pressure and exposure of the problem. Meanwhile, I'll have gotten a steal on the pricing, versus waiting for a corrected version (which may or may not come) and paying what will likely be full price for it then.

Did I mention I was weak?

 

[Jeff Cooper]

I've done an AB comparison on the Blu-Ray versus the Signature Series DVD and the upconverted DVD actually looks better than the Blu-Ray.

Note that this is only on the first 11 minutes of the movie, I haven't checked out the rest of the Blu-Ray yet.

Equipment:

For the upconverted DVD I used an HD-XA2 HD-DVD player running firmware 4.0 as the source outputting at 720p.
For the blu-ray I used a PS3 running firmware 3.0 outputting at 720p.

Both are connected via HDMI to the following chain-> Denon AVR-2807 -> HDMI -> Optoma HD70 @720p front projection to a 106" screen.

Right away on the blu ray, the opening text on the smokey background kind of "bounces" around very slightly like you see when a film is getting threaded correctly on the reel.

The DVD text is rock solid and does not move.


On the blu-ray the "GERMINIA" subtitle flickers and has black spots that come in and out of the text, especially at the right side.

The DVD subtitle is completely solid throughout the duration.


On the brief panning shot of the field with the fireballs and flaming arrows streaking across,on the DVD you can clearly see a lot of flaming arrows sweeping across the sky for the duration of the shot.

On the blu-ray, only a few arrows are actually visible with fire at the beginning of the shot, and you can't really see any of them at the end of the shot. All you see is a sky full of smoke trails. Also the fireballs kind of flicker in and out, while on the DVD they remain solid throughout.


Pretty sad state of affairs here, the blu ray is actually worse than the old DVD. Again take the disclaimer that I only have watched the first 11 minutes.

 

[Brian Sallot]

Braveheart got, Gladiator not...What a shame since it is also a favorite film of mine. I will wait for the eventual re-release.

 

[RobertR]

Originally Posted by Mike Frezon




RobertR: Since I don't know where that quote came from...can you tell me what particular scene the poster was referring-to in connection with their impression of overall sub-par audio?


Thanks!

It's the opening battle scene.

 

[Mark Booth]

Got both Gladiator and Braveheart for net $7.98 each (after all rebates) from Best Buy. Watched Gladiator yesterday and Braveheart today. Braveheart has an OUTSTANDING transfer. 10 out of 10 as far as I'm concerned.

Gladiator, on the other hand... (wait for it)... looks better than I expected given all the hype! Sure, I can see the EE and the effects of DNR in some areas but it is far far far from a pile of garbage. I guess I made the mistake of watching the movie (eg, the story) instead of incessantly watching for defects because, frankly, the defects just didn't bother me. I give the Gladiator transfer 7.5 out of 10.

It is most DEFINITELY an upgrade from the DVD. Any fan of the movie should go ahead and add it to your Blu-ray collection because, frankly, I don't expect we'll see a remaster for years and years to come.

Mark

 

[RobertR]

It is most DEFINITELY an upgrade from the DVD.
Mark

Practically any Blu Ray is an upgrade from DVD, so that's hardly saying anything at all. What I want to know is, how how close does a Blu Ray come to FILM (which is the whole point of hidef)? On that score, I haven't seen anyone dispute that this BR is a failure.

 

[David Coleman]

I've not been the biggest fan of Gladiator, in fact it's only been in the past couple of years i've begun to appreciate the film. When I saw it theatrically, I remember falling asleep a couple of times. Subsequent viewings didn't do alot to shake my initial feeling, however last year I saw it on Cinemax and began to appreciate it. No, I don't think it's great cinema, however it's a fair Hollywood film. I still think I get creeped out by the brother/sister relationship. Still and all, a decent if not great film.

I remember when I saw the film on Cinemax I thought to myself what a nice transfer it had. It was better than i'd seen on any of the DVD's i'd rented, so I was expecting a pretty stellar transfer on BD in it's proper aspect ratio. I've read so many of the reviews and looked at the screenshots and while there are some definite opinions to the absence of quality, figured I better take a look at it myself.

My opinion?

Count me in the disappointed category.

No, it doesn't look like an upscaled DVD, in fact there are some moments of sharpness in the film, in fact I can't say it looks all that soft, there is even some detail that shines through from time to time. What holds this transfer back is that it definitely looks "digital" and that's not a good thing. Don't get me wrong, you can see a Lowry transfer that doesn't look exactly film-like, but it always looks good. This one doesn't look that great. Yes, there is DNR and some definite edge-enhancement. I do believe as has been suggested that they used the 2000 transfer and added the extended edition material which looks much better into the master. One thing for sure a missed opportunity.

I was really curious about the audio and while that's gotten pretty good reviews, I can't go there. Yes, there are some really powerful moments of this sountrack, but where was the inner detail? Honestly this track sounded harsh, congested to me, I didn't sense any openess in the mix. I really expected Zimmer's best score to shine through but it felt restrained. Oh, why did I have to boost the DTSMA track about 5 clicks over standard? I got a feeling that Paramount may have "dialnormed" this one as I suspect Warner did with "Watchmen" and what I suspect Disney does with their DTSMA titles. One thing for sure I was underwhelmed.

Not an ideal way to launch a "Sapphire Series".

 

[Larry Sutliff]

BRAVEHEART is on its way to me , but I cancelled my GLADIATOR pre-order. Subpar transfers on a film of this scale just aren't acceptable on BD at this point.

 

[TravisR]

Originally Posted by RobertR




Practically any Blu Ray is an upgrade from DVD, so that's hardly saying anything at all.

Yes but someone in another post said that the DVD looked better than the Blu-ray. I don't have either disc to compare but I find it impossible to believe that the DVD looks better.

And just so no one misunderstands (or twists my words), I'm not saying that the Blu-ray is acceptable or that people should just be happy with it, I'm only saying that I can't believe that the DVD looks better than the Blu-ray.

 

[Brian Borst]

Originally Posted by David_B_K




Over at AVS, someone has already written to Universal and they received the curt reply from Universal that this is Paramount's doing and that all correspondence should be addressed to Paramount. Maybe both studios are playing "tag" with this title?

Seems like it. If the earlier dvds were done by Paramount, it seems like this is very much Paramount's fault. And that raises the question why they would give one movie a better release than another movie when they're both equal. But it happened with the Star Trek movies too, so I'm not really suprised.

Originally Posted by Mark Booth

It is most DEFINITELY an upgrade from the DVD. Any fan of the movie should go ahead and add it to your Blu-ray collection because, frankly, I don't expect we'll see a remaster for years and years to come.

If someone's a fan of the movie, I would think he would wait to get the best version. And this really isn't. It's better than the dvd, but it's not the best the movie can look.

 

[RobertR]

Quote:Yes but someone in another post said that the DVD looked better than the Blu-ray. I don't have either disc to compare but I find it impossible to believe that the DVD looks better.

If it's even in dispute that it looks better than the DVD, that makes it even less sensible to buy it.

 

[Vegas 1]

Bill Hunt said it's the best version so far but not up to BR standards, even Gangs of New York BR looked better than the SDDVD but that's not saying much.

 

[Ray_R]

Originally Posted by AL KUENSTER /forum/thread/292119/gladiator-blu-ray-release-date-09-01-2009-do-not-buy/90#post_3602421

 

[Paul.S]

Originally Posted by Ray_R ">[/url]

If Bill Hunt suggested people to jump off a bridge, would you have taken his advice? . . . I'd rather hear an opinion about it directly from Charlie or even Ridley about this compared to some "industry insider".

 

[TravisR]

Originally Posted by Ray_R

If Bill Hunt suggested people to jump off a bridge, would you have taken his advice? I bet he doesn't even import anything.

We get it, you hate Bill Hunt. If you hate him so much, why mention him all the time?

 

[Ray_R]

Originally Posted by Paul.S



LOL re the Bill and "jump off a bridge" comment. :tu: +1 on hoping Charlie will chime in. I'd be surprised if "The Governor" made public comments. Kinda ironic that Michael Bay was/is "too" vocal about his home vid releases, but Sir Rid will likely stay mum on this contretemps.

I'm thinking that, after nursing my righteous indignation borne of having sold the Signature DVD two months ago and procrastinated on getting the Deluxe for many more months than that in eager anticipation of the BD, I'll buy a used copy in about a year. It will be cheaper and I have dozens of purchases and Netflix rentals to keep me occupied meanwhile.

Someone will correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think Par has ever done a DVD (or BD) replacement motivated even in part by consumer complaints about (lack of picture) quality. It would be diff if it was a situation like POtC and Orlando Bloom's head getting chopped due to a framing error. I'd think the odds better if all the supps from the Deluxe weren't included herein, thereby providing a marketing hook on which to hang a re-release that includes them while not explicitly acknowledging a problematic master. But they gave us the full existing supps monty on the first release. I would be very surprised if Paramount did a replacement.

Well if Charlie tells Rid and he raises hell about this, demands Universal to provide a new transfer to Paramount supervised by him, a free disc exchange/replacement program, I'm all for it. It's the main reason why I bought the Blu-ray disc release in the first place. I still own both the Signature Selection 2-Disc DVD and the Extended Edition 3-Disc DVD, it just gives me an excuse to use Disc 2 from the Sapphire Series release to watch the extras in the meantime. I mean I sold my 2-Disc Special Collector's Edition of BRAVEHEART but I found out it doesn't carry over the individual interviews from the DVD. Or is that a PiP for the first disc?
I even sold my SCE of Forrest Gump.
So I'd rather hear about it from the source, i.e. Charles de Lauzirika and/or Ridley Scott. Hell, if I were a director/producer, you fucking bet I'd let everyone know if I personally demanded a replacement program and possibly other things.

 

[Ken_McAlinden]

Having never owned the extended cut on DVD, I went ahead and picked it up despite the warnings. The low price at Best Buy when you purchased it as well as Braveheart made the decision easier. It'll do until something better comes along. Kind of like the Terminator 2 "Skynet" Edition.

Regards,

 

[Adam Gregorich]

What Bill Hunt or any of you say about the disc is relevant to this conversation, personal feelings about Bill or his site aren't.