Re: Bits now confirms - Warner drops lossless audio for Speed Racer BD
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by DaViD Boulet
Paul,
I'm not saying that folks shouldn't attempt to have a reasonable conversation.
I'm just saying that what's "unwatchable" or "unlistenble" to an enthusiast who's passionate about his or her transparent audio/video is not the same as what's unwatchable/unlistenble to someone else.
Would you say that an image that's VHS quality is "unwatchable" if it showed up on a DVD? Would you say it's "unwatchable" if it was also Pan and Scan? Would the average shopper at Walmart agree with your description of unwatchability? It should be obvious that Webster's definition is being used by both parties... they each, however, have different *criteria* as to what makes the image watchable or unwatchable (criteria that Webster doesn't specify because it can't be generalized).
We all use terms to reflect our passion for HT that others outside our hobby would think are misapplied. And even within our group the varying levels of passion on particular points will cause differences. I'm sure there are plenty of HTF members reading this thread who think that the EE-ridden Phantom Menace DVD is perfectly watchable, while others consider it un-watchable. If we can have this sort of disparity for our regard for image quality, why would audio be any less subjective per an individual's own values and perceptions?
|
If I found something that fit the scenario above, here's how I would describe it in a place where people go to learn something of use (actually, I'll use something that's on my shelf):
Guilty By Suspicion is a disappointing release from Warner Brothers on several fronts. Available only in pan and scan, we are deprived of seeing the film as it was intended. Furthermore, its image quality is far from impressive, being only somewhat better than the VHS edition (owing entirely to the superior nature of DVD as a format, not to any extra effort made by the studio to make it look good). Moreover, it does not have a 5.1 audio option--perhaps not a big loss because it is largely dialogue driven and has no effects shots to speak of, but even quiet dramas can benefit from a nice ambient surround mix. They've been made for far older films, so there is little excuse for the lack of one here. Overall, neither the video nor the audio is anywhere near the potential of the DVD format and should not be anyone's choice as a "demo disc". I've watched it on a regular SD TV, a small HD monitor and via my HD PJ onto a 64 inch 16x9 screen. It looks "best" on smaller screens. Don't bother firing up the whole HT for this one. Perhaps Warner will revisit this title, but I think it unlikely.
Should one buy the film? Unless one has a reason to do so (I do, as the topic of the film is relevant to some of my courses), I would say no. It is a mildly interesting film with some good performances, but it is not something people should feel sad about overlooking. At best, a rental recommendation if you are interested in a reasonable glimpse of what the atmosphere was like in Hollywood during the HUAC hearings of McCarthyism fame.
If asked for a shorter review just of A/V quality, I'd simply provide this:
Overall, neither the video (pan and scan only) nor the audio (no surround option available) is anywhere near the potential of the DVD format and should not be anyone's choice as a "demo disc". I've watched it on a regular SD TV, a small HD monitor and via my HD PJ onto a 64 inch 16x9 screen. It looks "best" on smaller screens. Don't bother firing up the whole HT for this one.
Of the 500 or so titles in my collection, I'd rank this one in the bottom ten for A/V quality--yet it is not "unwatchable" nor would I use that to describe it. I certainly don't derive as much pleasure from it as I otherwise might (if it were in anamorphic widescreen with a nice surround mix) and I'm not afraid to say so, but I don't feel I need to call it "unwatchable" without qualification.
