DVD Review HTF REVIEW: The John Wayne / John Ford Film Collection (HIGHLY RECOMMENDED). (1 Viewer)

[Nils Luehrmann]

:star: If you have the 1997 release DO NOT GET RID OF IT!!!!!

I had only skimmed through The Searchers... which looks amazing, but then I saw that Gary had posted a comparison review of both editions of Stagecoach and was really surprised how over filtered the new 2-Disc edition transfer looked. I still had my copy of Warner's 1997 release and so I compared them on my front projection system as well as my 46" RPTV, and I'm very sad to say that despite all the flaws in the 1997 transfer, the new transfer has lost a great deal of fine detail with no trace of any film quality/grain to the picture.

This is much worse than the effect all the added digital filtering had on Warner's Citizen Kane 2-Disc release.

Having said that, while I will be keeping the 1997 edition for viewing the film, the extras on this 2-Disc edition are great.


BTW: For those looking to get the entire set (which I highly recommend), Costco is selling it for under $50. Well worth it in my opinion.

 

[Robert Crawford]

I haven't watched "Stagecoach" yet so I'll do that this weekend to see if my eyes are in agreement.





Crawdaddy

 

[JohnPM]

That DVD Beaver comparison on "Stagecoach" surprised me as well. We really need to think twice before getting rid of these old DVD editions.

http://greenbriarpictureshows.blogspot.com/

 

[Mike Frezon]

Nils: Thanks for the info! I hadn't checked DVDBeaver since I posted above.

It's funny. I had a copy of the new release in my hands late last night...but put it back saying I should wait until I gety an answer to my question. Up until now I couldn't even find any info to confirm if it was a different transfer at all.

In this case, the extras aren't enough to convince me to double-dip.

 

[Ken_McAlinden]

I'm not very happy with the "unfilmlike" presentation of "Stagecoach", but I'm glad it was in the box, if only for the American Masters documentary. I never bought the old disc, but I'll probably pick one up now.

Regards,

 

[James D S]

Picked up the set yesterday and am thrilled with the set.

Having never owned the previous incarnation of Stagecoach, I was living in blissful ignorance. Now I may have to pick up a copy used from somewhere.

 

[Eric Peterson]

I hate to second guess ya, but the "American Masters Documentary on Ford/Wayne" on disc 2 is worth the price of admission and then some. It's one of the best film documentaries that I've seen to date and I go out of my way to watch as many as I can find.

 

[Mike Frezon]

C'mon, Eric! I'm trying to save some money here!

Now you've put me right back up on the fence!

 

[Eric Peterson]

Sorry! If you had used budget as a constraint, I would have kept my mouth shut.

 

[Brian PB]

Regarding the Stagecoach screencap comparisons at DVD Beaver:

According to the press release, Stagecoach was "newly remastered and restored from the best available film elements."

Warner is a savvy company. Why would they go to all the trouble and expense of re-doing the 1997(!) transfer if they were unable to improve upon it? Surely their QA people did a side-by-side comparison of the 1997 vs. the 2006 transfer before having the discs pressed.

My question: Given all this, how the heck did we end up with a poorer quality DVD transfer of this essential film? Makes no sense.

 

[Ken_McAlinden]

It was a judgement call from Warner on how grainy an image their customers would find acceptable vs. how averse they would be to the digital processing. Our views may not represent the marketing "sweet spot" for this title. One man's "best possible quality" is another man's "grainy and hard to watch".

Regards,

 

[Robert Crawford]

I'm not so certain it is a poorer quality dvd transfer. I'll be firing up my dvd player this evening to see if I agree with some of those opinions.





Crawdaddy

 

[Nils Luehrmann]

Of course, even if you decide you "prefer" the new transfer, it still can be considered an inferior transfer, and even inferior to the older transfer... only that perhaps your personal preference is less about detail and accuracy and more in favor of a "clean" image with significant gamma boost.

As an example, I actually loved the first time I saw the Citizen Kane transfer.

If I recall correctly, you did prefer the new Ben-Hur transfer, and didn't find the loss of picture detail, and some of the color issues to be objectionable... so while a transfer can easily be inferior by technical standards, personal preferences are something entirely different.

If anyone finds that they prefer this new transfer, all the better for them, but I wouldn't jump to the conclusion based on personal preference that that means this new transfer is technically superior.

 

[Robert Crawford]

Nor that it's technically inferior. I need some more details before I jump to any conclusion about this new transfer. Anyhow, off to the HT.




Crawdaddy

 

[Rod]

Nor that it's technically inferior. I need some more details before I jump to any conclusion about this new transfer. Anyhow, off to the HT.


I think it's pretty clear. In the Beaver comparison, just scroll down to the close-up of John Wayne in his big white hat and tell me the original release isn't significantly better.

-Rod

 

[John Hodson]

The Beaver is a decent guide, but I've lost count of the transfers that look horrible in grabs but look perfectly okay to my eyes, on my own system. I haven't got my set yet, and I must admit to be slightly worried by what I'm seeing and reading, but, obviously, I won't make a judgement until I see it myself. Common sense.

 

[Patrick McCart]

The old Stagecoach seems to have digital noise and edge enhancement, while not being present in the new one. If you look at the subtitle sample on DVD Beaver, you can see there is more detail in the hair in the new version. I'm probably wrong, but it does look like another display of sharpening/noise making an image appear better. Either way, the old version seems to have mediocre black levels in comparision.

 

[Nils Luehrmann]

Yes, one of the problems with the 1997 transfer was some minor EE, and certainly a lot of film & digital noise, but from my comparison, viewing it is very clear that actual detail has been lost in the new transfer... no EE trickery. The white level boosting was also so bad in the new transfer I had to recalibrate my projector and TV in order to compensate for it... losing some additional shadow detail in the process.

 

[Robert Crawford]

Just got done watching the new "Stagecoach" dvd from beginning to end with the audio commentary, since I know this film so well from countless prior viewings and nothing negative in a major sense on my initial viewing of this new dvd stood out. I didn't get a chance to compare it to the original dvd because I got caught up watching both of the documentaries which were excellent. Anyhow, I'll try to do some "A" versus "B" comparisons tomorrow.






Crawdaddy

 

[Adam_S]

from the screencaps the whites look about 1/2 to a 3/4 stop hot, on the other hand the new version has no EE that I see in the old version and the old version looks quite digital while the new version looks more like film with a superior balance to the density of the overall image. the old version felt flatter, washier and the blacks were not as good. don't have the dvds to compare, but I think they're really emphasizing only the possible negative aspects of the new transfer at the beaver, just like they did with Ben Hur, and some did with Wizard of Oz... ahh the western interpretation of critique=negative. (reminds me of the differences in watching the judges on Iron Chef vs Iron Chef America)