Blu-ray Review HTF BLU-RAY REVIEW: Close Encounters of the Third Kind (Highly Recommended) (1 Viewer)

[Richard Gallagher]

https://static.hometheaterforum.com/imgrepo/4/4b/ronsreviews_covers_90324.jpg">

 

[don monteith]

Thanks for the review. I agree with you totally. I thought the Video was amazing, especially for the age of the film. I thought the audio was a bit harsh though. I had to keep turning the volume up and down. Some parts were too low and some were too loud. And yes, my sub did get a work out.

 

[Shane Martin]

I don't know if WM is different but mine included the motion picture soundtrack. A great set for $34.99

 

[Rachael B]

I watched the Director's Cut which I had never seen. It was, "an event socioligue". I liked it more than the other two versions which I've seen more times than I can count. I didn't need the visual aids to know when I was seeing new footage.

I played the Dolby True audio...is it not loseless? It sure was good for an elder film, I thought.

 

[Carlo_M]

I don't know if WM is different but mine included the motion picture soundtrack. A great set for $34.99

On a third disc? If so, then it's different. I only got two discs on mine [after my odd need to exchange, see the other CE3K thread if you're interested], but I haven't had a chance to watch it yet.

 

[Stephen_J_H]

Rachael, Dolby True HD is lossless. Some on here have expressed concern about the fact that dialnorm is automatically used unless disabled by mastering tech, but that shouldn't be an issue here, since Sony has indicated that all True HD releases coming from them will have dialnorm turned off.

 

[Shane Martin]

On a third disc? If so, then it's different.

Yes, a 3rd disc.

 

[Carlo_M]

Ugh, sucks that WM got a different version. I'm morally opposed to shopping there. Okay, and the fact that there isn't one within 20 miles [and in Los Angeles traffic that can be 45 minutes to an hour and a half in traffic!] plays a part...

 

[RobertR]

I find it rather sad that defensive language is used to describe the presence of grain, as if that's some great evil or flaw. Quite the contrary, any time film grain is preserved, the studio is to be congratulated.

 

[Douglas Monce]

The 1080p Blu-ray widescreen transfer is extremely sharp, vivid and stable. Yes, there is some grain, which is fairly noticeable in some scenes and barely visible in others. As I understand it, the grain is there by design, as Spielberg is said to believe that some grain is desirable.

I find this statement interesting, because when I first became interested in filmmaking and Spielberg in particular (this was around 77) I read several interviews where specifically stated that he didn't like to see grain on the screen. He must have changed his mind somewhere along the way.
Having said that I have just had the chance to watch the blu-ray of Close Encounters and I think the film looks quite natural and not overly grainy at all. A few of the effects shots have more pronounced grain. Particularly the shot where all the people have gathered at the hill top, think they see UFOs coming, and it turns out to be helicopters. This shot has very heavy grain, but only in the area where the lights of the helicopters are, the rest of the shot looks normal.
Doug

 

[Jari K]

Ugh, sucks that WM got a different version.

What is WM? It has exclusive Blu-ray-version with ST CD?

 

[Carlo_M]

What is WM? It has exclusive Blu-ray-version with ST CD?

Jari, WM = W*lm*rt. (I can't remember if there's rules about posting an exact name, might only be for pre-sales, but better safe than sorry).
And apparently, according to what Shane experienced, yes.

 

[BrettB]

Thanks for the review.
Everything about this set is first class. Props to everyone involved in the release. I watched the Theatrical version and got more emotional than I can ever recall on previous viewings. Perhaps the top-notch AV at work.

 

[Richard Gallagher]

I find it rather sad that defensive language is used to describe the presence of grain, as if that's some great evil or flaw. Quite the contrary, any time film grain is preserved, the studio is to be congratulated.

Just to clarify, I wasn't complaining about the grain. However, I've seen it mentioned in other threads, at times by people who don't like it, so I felt that it was important to point out that there is some grain.

 

[Richard Gallagher]

I find this statement interesting, because when I first became interested in filmmaking and Spielberg in particular (this was around 77) I read several interviews where specifically stated that he didn't like to see grain on the screen. He must have changed his mind somewhere along the way.

I recently read this, from an article about the making of the new Indiana Jones movie:
Producer and friend George Lucas tried at length to convince
Spielberg to film the movie digitally but Steven resisted. He joked
that he is the last person in Hollywood still cutting the film
negatives, and that he learned from the greats and they all worked
that way. He says that he has still never used an Avid to edit, and
won't do so until Tintin."
"Steven gushed about how a film frame is alive with movement and film
grain and that digital video is "too perfect." Lucas tried to convince
Steven that they could add the film grain to the digital image, which
Spielberg found totally amusing because doesn't that defeat the whole
purpose? And wouldn't it just be easier to shoot the whole thing on
film?"

 

[JamesTLewis]

This, along with Blade Runner is why I am going for Blu Ray. I adore CE3K, and cannot wait to see it in HD.

 

[Jordan_E]

I can't believe it, but CE3K is one of the few movies that still evokes an emotional response from me after all these years. Seeing Roy look back before going up the ramp just gets to me, and John Williams fantastic score at that point is simply perfect.

 

[Richard Gallagher]

I played the Dolby True audio...is it not loseless? It sure was good for an elder film, I thought.

Yes, it's loseless, but it still sounded a tad harsh to me. That's why I'd like to compare it to an LP of the original soundtrack to see if there is any difference.
Not a big deal, though.

 

[Sanjay Gupta]

Pardon the off topic post, but I really don't understand the logic behind using the acronym DVD attached to Blu-Ray or instead of 'BD'. Blu-Ray Discs are Blu-Ray discs and DVDs are DVDs, both are technically & legally different products/formats. I could to some extent understand the average person using the term Blu-Ray DVDs out of naivety, but I would think more can be expected from this forum and that too in a 'BD' review thread.
Thanks.

 

[Jefferson Morris]

This, along with Blade Runner is why I am going for Blu Ray.

FYI, the upcoming Blade Runner final cut will be available in both high-def formats.
--Jefferson Morris