WHV Press Release: The Lord of the Rings Trilogy (Blu-ray) (1 Viewer)

[Jesse Blacklow]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flemming.K

I ain't putting down money for this release. Looking af some DVD shots compared to the BD, reveals more details in skin on the DVD, even though hair is more detailed and sharp. Someone has been messing excessively with the blur effect. This looks BAD!

I'm detecting a bit of research failure here, considering that (as mentioned above) all comparisons have been between a 1080p broadcast and the Blu-ray. There is a single shot of a DVD comparison, and the HD versions compare favorably to it. After all, the DVDs, especially the US versions, had really bad PQ.

Could you link to the DVD-BD comparisons?

 

[media-junkie]

Well, I'm not putting down any money on this release either and so are countless others but nothing to do with Flemmings remarks. It's because the wrong version is being released.

 

[Jason Charlton]

Originally Posted by media-junkie /forum/thread/295947/whv-press-release-the-lord-of-the-rings-trilogy-blu-ray/90#post_3676618

 

[cafink]

You mean the version that won 17 Oscars, grossed 3 billion dollars, and averaged 94% positive reviews on Rotten Tomatoes? That wrong version?

 

[Mike Frezon]

Ya know, I'm one of those guys who prefers the EEs to the theatrical versions...but when I read comments like those it makes me want to place my pre-order and support those films which I enjoyed so much in the theater.

 

[Jason Charlton]

I'm not sure if I'm up for more Kemcha shenanigans... those circular arguments get exhausting after a few dozen laps...

 

[Robert Crawford]

I'll have this boxset today as I patiently await the UPS truck to deliver it. I bought it from WB for 49.24 and even though it might have some video flaws, it will last me until a EE version comes out sometime next year or so.





Crawdaddy

 

[Mike Frezon]

Originally Posted by Jason Charlton /forum/thread/295947/whv-press-release-the-lord-of-the-rings-trilogy-blu-ray/90#post_3676646

 

[Paul Hillenbrand]

Originally Posted by Robert Crawford April fools joke Robert?

 

[Bryan^H]

Originally Posted by cafink

You mean the version that won 17 Oscars, grossed 3 billion dollars, and averaged 94% positive reviews on Rotten Tomatoes? That wrong version?

Ouch!

 

[Robert Crawford]

Originally Posted by Paul Hillenbrand April fools joke Robert?

Nope, I have the boxset in my hand. I was shocked that it shipped yesterday and received it today, but then realized the point of shipment is less than 90 miles from me.

I'm going to watch the first film tonight. I'll try to do the other two titles between now and Monday.



Crawdaddy

 

[CraigF]

Heck, they wouldn't ship them out early here (Canada) even though there is no mail between now and next Tuesday anyway.

Looking forward to see if I get as fussed as some other people. Usually I notice most problems, but whether they really bother me is totally different. Sure I'd like everything to be close to perfect, but the number of BDs that are quite excellent PQ-wise is still the smaller portion...I do tend to be more critical of an upgrade though. I'm pretty sure these'll beat the DVDs.

 

[Flemming.K]

Originally Posted by Jesse Blacklow ">[/url]

Quote:

I'm detecting a bit of research failure here, considering that (as mentioned above) all comparisons have been between a 1080p broadcast and the Blu-ray. There is a single shot of a DVD comparison, and the HD versions compare favorably to it. After all,

 

[nolesrule]

The skin on that DVD image looks compressed compared to the HD image.

 

[Brandon Conway]

Video noise is also quite apparent on the DVD image.

 

[Jesse Blacklow]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flemming.K

To me some of the screenshots in the pix comparison for Fellowship of the Rings, "shows better skin" on the DVD than the BD does. No doubt, the BD is sharper (i.e. the hair on the screenshots below), but looking at the Gandalf image below, his skin on the DVD looks more detailed and the BD red and mushy as if his skin has been photoshopped with a blur tool. Same difference, same manipulation of skin, were noticed when comparing Gladiator extended edition scenes with the theatrical on the latest blu-ray release.

DVD image: http://i166.photobucket.com/albums/u98/adzez/Lord%20Of%20the%20Rings/Fotrdvd1.png
Blu-ray image: http://i166.photobucket.com/albums/u98/adzez/Lord%20Of%20the%20Rings/Fotrbd1.png

Yeah, I'm not seeing it. The DVD is highly compressed with blocking everywhere that the BD shows actual grain (see the background to the left of his head), and the BD shows pores, especially on Mckellan's nose and cheeks, that just don't exist at all on the DVD. The BD does look like DNR was applied, but it's neither at Gladiator levels, nor is it resolving less detail than the DVD. Even most of the toughest members at AVS don't believe it's as bad as Gladiator, and that's just for FOTR. The other two get much higher marks from said members.

Also, the HTF member that took those screengrabs does note that there's DNR, but I've yet to seem him agree with your conclusion.

 

[Robert Crawford]

Let me say right now that I'm not trying to convince anybody to purchase this BRD boxset or not to do so. What others do with their hard earned money is their own personal business. I'm just going to share my opinion about this release and limit my comments to that regard only.

Just a few notes from my viewing of the first film on BRD. Each movie is on one disc with a second disc that contains the special features. They're all contain in one case while a second case has the digital copies of the three films.

As far as the video presentation, I must say this BRD looks much better than the SD DVD. Tomorrow, I'll cue up the SD DVD to confirm that initial opinion. I'll sample about 3-4 segments 5 minutes or so in length for both the BRD and SD DVD. I don't want to spend too much time doing so because I rather spend my leisurely time watching discs in their entirety for my own personal enjoyment. Now, it does have some excessive DNR, but it's inconsistent in which there are some parts of the film that look really good while there other scenes not as good. Again, overall, I think it's quite a bit better than the DVD, but I'll set you know moreso on that comparison tomorrow. The BRD audio with its DTS-HD Master Audio 6.1 blows the SD DVD out of the water and it really immerse me into the film. There were several moments during the course of my viewing that I got caught up in the storyline of this great film so I had to constantly remind myself to make note of the video presentation as the playing time moved forward. By any means, not a good way to enjoy a film viewing.

In closing, I think the video on the BRD could've been better, but overall, I'm please to have this BRD in my collection as it might be some time before they revisit this again for blu-ray. With "The Hobbit" coming out in 2011, it might be 2012 or later before the extended versions come to blu-ray.





Crawdaddy

 

[dpippel]

I'll withhold my judgment concerning the video quality of the LOTR films on Blu-ray until I have a chance to actually see them for myself. However I will say this - if the high definition home video release of these three important films isn't a slam-dunk blow-me-out-of-my-seat affair, well, then that's a tragedy. These movies were a worldwide phenomenon both artistically and financially. They dominated the box office. As a body of work The Fellowship of the Ring, The Two Towers, and The Return of the King have touched untold millions of people around the world and generated BILLIONS of dollars in revenues for the principles involved. To give them anything less than flagship treatment for this Blu-ray release would be a travesty. These three movies should be raising the BAR for Blu-ray audio and video quality. If they're anything less than that I'm one film fan who's going to EXTREMELY disappointed.

 

[Brandon Conway]

Originally Posted by dpippel

I'll withhold my judgment concerning the video quality of the LOTR films on Blu-ray until I have a chance to actually see them for myself. However I will say this - if the high definition home video release of these three important films isn't a slam-dunk blow-me-out-of-my-seat affair, well, then that's a tragedy. These movies were a worldwide phenomenon both artistically and financially. They dominated the box office. As a body of work The Fellowship of the Ring, The Two Towers, and The Return of the King have touched untold millions of people around the world and generated BILLIONS of dollars in revenues for the principles involved. To give them anything less than flagship treatment for this Blu-ray release would be a travesty. These three movies should be raising the BAR for Blu-ray audio and video quality. If they're anything less than that I'm one film fan who's going to EXTREMELY disappointed.

Then prepare to be disappointed. From everything I've read those that have their bar this high will be upset. The appears to be that FOTR needs a new DI to look any better, and the simple truth is that Warner isn't investing the few million dollars or so it would take to do that right now.

(And keep in mind that Warner didn't necessarily make billions on these films. Those billions have essentially been squandered by a series of flops released by New Line before Warner shut them down as being an independent studio.)

 

[Bryan^H]

"Excessive DNR" (however frequent or infrequent) through the films is unacceptable to me. The video should match the stellar audio.

Complete conspiracy theory taking over, but do you think this was done on purpose? Could the extended editions(which should have branching video to watch either theatrical or extended) be DNR free hence forcing a double dip for those who just wanted the theatrical version and jumped the gun with this release?