Andy_MT

at least it doesn't come in a crapper case.

but still, a very sad day if this is true. is this the end of warners' dominance of consistent quality DVDs ? i hope not. glad i didn't pre-order "once upon a time in america". think i'll wait to see how this turns out. i'll no doubt buy both releases, but if they're not good, it'll be later rather than sooner.

Martin S

So, the isolated score music...is it exactly the same cues that are on the CD? Is there no extra music at all? this was one of my main reasons for getting this.

Qui-Gon John

I don't care that they did not include the Bryan Adams video. That sappy song was the main thing I did not like about this movie. I even thought Costner's performance was pretty good, and loved Rickman and Freeman.

Geoff_D

I'm sorry guys, but I stand by my "travesty" remark regarding the transfer. Is it the worst I've ever seen? Hell no. But with the razor-sharp transfers and restoration jobs that we've been treated to over the last couple of years, PoT is way behind the times. And after the competent (if not overly spectacular) look of older films that Warner has re-issued, this new transfer looks like utter crap IMHO. Again, strong words, but I've got movies in my collection that are twice as old as RHoT and yet the transfers look twice as good. Many of these titles will have had restoration, yes, but at least Warner could've struck a new print or found a pristine IP for this new release. But the print they've used is so devoid of fine detail and awash with grain and print damage that it's uncomfortable to watch. I half expected reel markers to keep popping up in the right corner of the frame.

And yes, it would've been hard to create a technically proficient transfer from a print like this, but they don't even give it a go, as some bad haloing does it's best to ruin the image further. For a good example, check out the outline of Marion's cloak as she bids farewell to Robin by the lake in chapter 26. Simply put, the look of RHoT is compounded by fault after fault and I cannot find any merit to it. The unimaginative extras are the nail in this set's coffin - but as this is the best we're gonna get for a good long while, it's still worth picking up.

Qui-Gon John

Anyone got some screenshots?

Adam_WM

To say I'm not disappointed would be a lie. I'll still buy it, but my expectations have just fallen in the toilet. Oh well.

POWERFUL THE DARKSIDE IS... I caved and bought the Star Wars re-release after saying the whole time that I wouldn't.
http://adamcomic2.dvdaf.com/ IM: AdamWM629

John O

Here's a review link
http://dvdauthority.com/reviews.asp?reviewID=3311

apparently opinions vary regarding the quality of the video transfer

Andy_MT

i don't believe that's ever happened before.

Sean Moon

The DTS is nice to hear about, but the poor video is chapping my ass right about now. I cant wait to get this and see for myself.
Really cannot wait for the 5.1 score though. I just wish it was with the movie itself, and not a seperate feature.

http://doctordoom.blogspot.com

We must stand in awe of the infinite capacity of the human mind to reject the introduction of useful knowledge.

Geoff_D

I reckon you'll probably see many reviews like the one in the link above. That guy seems to be so happy that it's anamorphic that he doesn't really recount the transfer's failings. Like I said above, it's not the worst transfer you'll ever see, and many will be quite pleased with it. But this is 2003, and the RHoT picture is simply not up to current standards IMO.

jeff lam

Well, considering the movie is 12 years old, do you really expect it to be up to current standards?

Just because they remaster it doesn't mean it's going to be of the same video and audio quality of today's movie releases.

Heck, I'm happy enough that it's in anamorphic and it's not a flipper!!!

Sure, I would love for the thing to be of outstanding video and audio quality but I'm sure not expecting it.

Andy_MT

but you should be jeff. this is warner. they've done great work on much older material (one flew over the cuckoos nest, charlie & the chocolate factory, the mission to name a few). this film is only 12 years old. i see no reason why it shouldn't be up to their usual standards. especially since it's a special edition, so it's obviously been deemed important enough.

warner have set their standards high, and we expect them to retain this level. we won't except anything less. well, ok we probably will, but not without a heavy session of throwing toys out of pram!