Gladiator Blu-ray - release date 09/01/2009 - Read before buying! - Page 4

Seems like it. If the earlier dvds were done by Paramount, it seems like this is very much Paramount's fault. And that raises the question why they would give one movie a better release than another movie when they're both equal. But it happened with the Star Trek movies too, so I'm not really suprised.



If someone's a fan of the movie, I would think he would wait to get the best version. And this really isn't. It's better than the dvd, but it's not the best the movie can look.

Bill Hunt said it's the best version so far but not up to BR standards, even Gangs of New York BR looked better than the SDDVD but that's not saying much.

If Bill Hunt suggested people to jump off a bridge, would you have taken his advice? I bet he doesn't even import anything. My sig still vastly applies. I'd rather hear an opinion about it directly from Charlie or even Ridley about this compared to some "industry insider".

I purchased this anyway for $17.99 at Best Buy and will patiently await a possible disc replacement program for the film disc. No, I don't read The Digital Bits. Yes I have taken full advantage of disc replacement programs from Universal and Disney.
Here's hoping if Saving Private Ryan will get released in a future Sapphire Series wave, Spielberg himself will personally supervise the transfer. SPR in DTS HD Master Audio in 5.1? SIGN ME UP NOW!

LOL re the Bill and "jump off a bridge" comment.  :tu:  +1 on hoping Charlie will chime in.  I'd be surprised if "The Governor" made public comments.  Kinda ironic that Michael Bay was/is "too" vocal about his home vid releases, but Sir Rid will likely stay mum on this contretemps.

I'm thinking that, after nursing my righteous indignation borne of having sold the Signature DVD two months ago and procrastinated on getting the Deluxe for many more months than that in eager anticipation of the BD, I'll buy a used copy in about a year.  It will be cheaper and I have dozens of purchases and Netflix rentals to keep me occupied meanwhile.

Someone will correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think Par has ever done a DVD (or BD) replacement motivated even in part by consumer complaints about (lack of picture) quality.  It would be diff if it was a situation like POtC and Orlando Bloom's head getting chopped due to a framing error.  I'd think the odds better if all the supps from the Deluxe weren't included herein, thereby providing a marketing hook on which to hang a re-release that includes them while not explicitly acknowledging a problematic master.  But they gave us the full existing supps monty on the first release.  I would be very surprised if Paramount did a replacement.

We get it, you hate Bill Hunt. If you hate him so much, why mention him all the time?

Well if Charlie tells Rid and he raises hell about this, demands Universal to provide a new transfer to Paramount supervised by him, a free disc exchange/replacement program, I'm all for it. It's the main reason why I bought the Blu-ray disc release in the first place. I still own both the Signature Selection 2-Disc DVD and the Extended Edition 3-Disc DVD, it just gives me an excuse to use Disc 2 from the Sapphire Series release to watch the extras in the meantime. I mean I sold my 2-Disc Special Collector's Edition of BRAVEHEART but I found out it doesn't carry over the individual interviews from the DVD. Or is that a PiP for the first disc?
I even sold my SCE of Forrest Gump.
So I'd rather hear about it from the source, i.e. Charles de Lauzirika and/or Ridley Scott. Hell, if I were a director/producer, you fucking bet I'd let everyone know if I personally demanded a replacement program and possibly other things.

 Having never owned the extended cut on DVD, I went ahead and picked it up despite the warnings.  The low price at Best Buy when you purchased it as well as Braveheart made the decision easier.  It'll do until something better comes along.  Kind of like the Terminator 2 "Skynet" Edition.

Regards,

What Bill Hunt or any of you say about the disc is relevant to this conversation, personal feelings about Bill or his site aren't.

Disclaimer: My post mentions the format war, but it is for historical reference, and not meant to cause a discussion of the format war, the thread is still about Gladiator....

I had a meeting with some Universal executives during the format war, about 4 months before WB ended it.  They had done a new transfer  and were trying to get Ridley Scott to approve it.  They were having difficulty due to scheduling conflicts with some other projects he was working on.  While I can't remember exact details I believe they had had a hard time finding clean elements and were originally trying to do a Q4 HD DVD release, but the delays with elements and getting the transfer approved had pushed it back.  The format war ended causing it to be shelved for a while (along with Charlie Wilson's War which I actually watched on an HD DVD check disc--Since the encode is done Universal needs to release it on BD!).  I have verified with sources that this Blu-ray is a new transfer and has been approved by Ridley Scott.  I am assuming that it is the transfer that was done for the intended HD DVD release by Universal.


Make room in that boat for me....

Fine with me I think I have him on ignore nor do I encroach on his personal sub-forum in the Insiders Area. I would raise hell if he ever posted in a thread I made of course.

The your other post. What was approved for a different format might not work with a different one. I dunno though. So this is approved in 2007? If it were me I'd make sure to have them do an entirely new one if I were a director/producer. That's just me though and I would've made sure to release GLADIATOR in correspondence to the titles 10th Anniversary in 2010.
Too bad I'm not a DVD/Blu-ray producer, I'm just stuck where I am. I already know which titles I'd like to work on. Damn pipe dreams... I'd still be slightly hesitant meeting the people to be interviewed for the extras and such!
EDIT: I don't even know if anyone would be interested in knowing the titles I'd work on if I were a DVD/Blu-ray Producer.

A quality HD transfer is not format specific.  Arguments could be made about encoding for the different formats, but that debate ended when we went to one format and I don't want to resurrect it .  I don't know if it was approved in 2007, but it had just been transferred, or was in the final stages in late 2007.  My conversation happened mid Q3 and they were working on getting approval.  Whether Ridley approved that specific transfer or not I don't know (I would assume so).  As to release dates, it was the format war, they wanted a tent pole catalog release for the holidays.  Lots of crazy things happened with title releases on both sides back then .  My main point is that Universal was working on a new transfer in 2007 with the intention of releasing it on HD DVD, and I am assuming that it was the transfer ultimately used, as doing a transfer is expensive and it can take awhile to have an opening in a directors schedule to approve it (think James Cameron).

I agree too. A Director can approve of a transfer but it's also down to the encoding to be on disc. Such as for example the raw transfer could've had all the film grain retained with nary any DNR/EE/Jaggies-on-location-titles. I think it's just a botched encode with settings clicked on which didn't need to be of which is what I'm just assuming.
So ya, I think I'll blame the encode if that's the case. If I were a high-calibre director, you'd bet I'd take the time and effort to supervise both transfer and encode. And of course tell anyone who uses the DNR/EE options to take a hike.
Of course GLADIATOR isn't my movie but I sure as hell am quite a fan of it. As I've already said, I purchased the Blu just on the fact not having to swap the special feature DVD discs. Here's hoping for another re-encoding.

EDIT: About Cameron, Van even said himself he's far too busy with Avatar to do any new transfers/encodes at this time. Personally, I'm not sure if I'll be seeing Avatar since those blue whatevers are hard on the eyes.

I'm confused, Adam, which is it?  Verified or assumed?

If that Blu-ray transfer was indeed new and approved by Ridley Scott himself, then I would like to offer the phone number of my optometrist to Sir Ridley.

Adam's statements are very clear:

1. It is verified that the transfer is new and approved by Ridley Scott; and
2. It is assumed that it is the same transfer that was being worked on in 2007, originally intended by Universal for an HD DVD release, although it's possible (but unlikely) that it was done later.

Well, they weren't to me, or else I wouldn't have asked.  I honestly could not tell whether it was verified or assumed that a new transfer was used for this BD. 

I guess the bottom line here then is that there was a new transfer done sometime in or after 2007 that was used on this Blu-ray Disc and approved by Ridley Scott, correct?  If so, I'm with Shawn. 

Though I'm only mildly surprised; this isn't the first time a director has seemed to care less about how his film is presented on home video than the fans, but I would've never guess Ridley Scott fell into that group.

After giving it some thought I changed the thread title from "Do Not Buy" to "Read Before Buying"  Does this appear to be the release everyone was hoping for? No, but for someone like myself who only had the initial DVD release it makes sense to buy this at the current sale price as it is better than the DVD version. 

Correct.

After some internal debate, I made the same decision.




Crawdaddy

If I remember correctly, the Spielberg directed films went with him and Dreamworks when they broke from Paramount. Ryan would likely be released by Touchstone if that holds true.

Doug

But that steals gonna require you to mutilate the BD cover (for the rebate) on top of the already mutilated PQ, no?    Did I already mention in this thread I wish these studios would provide better ways for us to do the DVD-to-BD upgrade rebate so we don't need to cut up the BD cover?   I've literally forgotten to send in a couple rebates because I kept putting it off while debating whether I want the $10 enough to cut up the covers -- yeah, I guess I'm slightly OCD about that kind of thing though probably not as much as some others here.

If it makes you feel any better, I'll confess here and now that I finally broke down and bought The Last Emperor on BD from the recent DDD/DVDPlanet 25%-off sale (on top of whatever discounts, Bing cashbacks, etc) after giving it a rent.  I'm actually still very conflicted about owning it right now.  Part of me thinks I should just get rid of it after giving it another spin (and check out the various extra features), and part of me wants to give it every last chance to win me over at its filmmakers-imposed (not merely approved) 2.0:1 MAR since that's really gonna be the only way to get it in HD for the forseeable future.  It also complicates things that Criterion (for whatever reasons) only offers the original theatrical version on the BD (even though the DVD set has both), and I'd prefer to own both -- well, I guess I should be glad that the only version is at least the theatrical one even though I also like the longer version.

And of course, there's also the Spike-Lee-approved Do the Right Thing BD w/ the apparent removal of the original color cast too...

_Man_

As picky, adamant and vocal as you seem to be, I'm surprised you'd settle for buying now w/ the hope that they'll eventually replace the disc for you, especially since we're talking about Paramount here, not one of the better studios in terms of customer satisfaction.

And now that it sounds like the current transfer was likely approved by Scott, that makes such a free exchange/replacement essentially impossible to happen me thinks (as if being a Paramount release wasn't enough).  So I'd think you should feel compelled to go return your BD asap and get your $ back (while raising more hell w/ Paramount, et al about this whole fiasco).


I also never owned the extended version, and still have the original DVD release.  But unlike T2 (or Amadeus or some others), I will not be upgrading in this case.  It's just not worth it to me consider both the (lack of) technical quality *and* the (less-than-great) quality of the film itself (to my mind of course).  I would've only upgraded if it had excellent PQ/AQ, but it really sounds like this is one of the worst transfers (and seemingly worse than the others I knowingly purchased and accepted).

But yeah, the line to draw will vary for everyone based on various factors.  Heck, I just confessed above that I finally broke down and bought the 2.0:1 MAR-ed-from-Criterion(!) BD of The Last Emperor -- and I'm still conflicted about that decision right now...

_Man_

Man, I jumped on buying both BRAVEHEART and GLADIATOR from Best Buy for $17.99 each. Personally I consider myself more obligated to inform Paramount/Universal/DreamWorks about this fiasco since I did purchase this title fully knowing about the PQ fiasco. Guess it gives me more leverage as a consumer since it also puts me in the spotlight as someone who's interested in the title and more at ease in informing Paramount/Universal/DreamWorks about my wish for a disc replacement program.
Just a feeling if they do see all the reviews INCLUDING substantial sales, they might even be more willing to plunk down the money for a new encode and pressing of discs. Hopefully with actual disc art this time! I'm slightly irked that BRAVEHEART didn't carry over the interviews from the SCE.

Picked this up with Braveheart earlier and took a look at some scenes. It's not a complete travesty, but I do feel heavy DNR and digital sharpening produce an ugly image, and this is no exception. I certainly would've been happier had Universal/Dreamworks/Paramount just included a transfer based off of the untweaked HD master (used for TV broadcasts, etc). I certainly would take a soft and noisy, but more filmlike transfer over this digital processing.

As bad as I want this title because I love this movie, I will not buy it on Bluray !  I will continue to enjoy my SD-DVD until this transfer is corrected and it arrives on retail shelves!    I will also say no to any other title and will let other people know when shopping for movies not to buy a title if it is messed up !  I find it embarrassing and pathetic that a top notch title like Gladiator gets such a poor quality transfer.  This is not how a studio pushes a format to consumers, especially in a down economy when money is tight.  

What're you talking about? I bought this for $17.99 which is practically a steal. IF you're not searching for great prices for releases that's your own fault and no one elses.
Yep, I'm still awaiting a new encode, disc replacement program and slightly satisfied with the film disc. I'd rather be perfectly satisfied but for the price I purchased this at, I'm a bit more relieved and patient awaiting news, if any, for the dilm disc.
Hopefully in your case they won't muck it up right off the bat for Holographic Versatile Disc in 2018!

He's not talking about you and why you bought the disc.  He's talking about the choice he made for himself when it comes to this BR release.  Furthermore, if you don't like his choice then that's your problem so stop trying to convince others about the alleged error of their ways.





Crawdaddy

I have it in my Netflix queue to see how good/bad it looks. But it is looking like my SD original version with the 6.1 DTS will likely be my keeper version. I had rented the DVD extended cut and did not feel the movie benefited from the new scenes.

The original DVD nooks pretty good upconverted, IMO.