DVD Review HTF REVIEW: Heat - Two Disc Special Edition (1 Viewer)

[JohnRice]

Sometime next week when this thread finishes loading its over 7MB of images, I'll see if I have some feedback. In the meantime, may I introduce you to the concept of jpg. You can use low compression (say about a 10, if you have Photoshop) jpg images with no discernible loss of image quality but with about 1/6 the file size.

 

[Herb Kane]

Hey John, you're welcome...

Re: Photoshop, I don't. But if you're offering, I'll gladly send you the files to reduce them and host them...?

 

[TonyD]

vincent, is that your theory?

if you think thats what mann was going for, it doesnt work for me.

plus it's unnecessary, why bother with that?
just put them in the scene together.
sometimes being artistic just isnt good for the overall "picture".

 

[MarcoBiscotti]

Am I the only one confused by the dissapointment that everyone seems to be expressing?

To my eyes, the new transfer certainly looks like it has the better resolution... just look at the guy standing behind Pacino in the second to last caption. It's not the most significant pq upgrade, but it is a plus. And all we have to go by are 4 screen grabs on the internet...

Regardless of the transfer however, we are getting a brand new commentary track, an extra disc's worth of supplemental bonus features and brand new and much improved packaging over the cheap flimsy snapper disc released 3 or 4 years ago...

What's the problem here?

Imo, the original transfer looked pretty darn good to begin with and wasn't really in need of that much improvement. It's been awhile since I sold the original release, but it definitely wasn't given shoddy treatment.

I don't understand why you guys see reason to complain, it seems like that's what we're best at here and with all the phenomenal effort that Warner Bros. has been putting into their DVD's recently, I'm shocked that somebody even saw fit to question whether the studio might be slipping to the ranks of Columbia or something along those lines...

We hated the snapper cases, we made a fuss.

Phased out.

We wanted a commentary track.

Roger.

We get all excited about the addition of bonus features.

Roger that too.


So why would anyone not upgrade to this Special Edition?

It might not be DVD of the year, but it's certainly an improvement over the initial release and lightyears from a substandard production...

Just think of all the exceptional product we've gotten from Warner Bros. in the past few months, not every release can get the full-blown Casablanca treatment... and than when studios work hard to remaster films and produce extra features, etc. we complain that our favorite movies are taking too long to come to DVD and fuss about the many obscure titles that have yet to come out.

Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

Personally, I can't wait to pick this Special Edition up, especially since I sold my older copy years ago and haven't watched the movie since. I'm looking forward to adding this to my collection!

 

[JohnRice]

No problem Herb

There are a few solutions. You don't have to send them to me, I will just download them and do some decent JPGs. Then, I can send them back to you, host them permanently or host them temporarily for you to grab them, move them to your server and change the links. I'll let you decide. I'll be back in a few with optimized images.

 

[JohnRice]

OK Herb, here you go. You can download these and load them up to your server and update the img links to jpg instead of bmp, or you can just link to them on my server. Just let me know so I know whether to remove them.

I used a very low compression level (90% Quality) but thanks to the letterbox, they average 90% smaller files.


















The names of the images are the same, just with a jpg suffix instead of bmp. Should be easy enough to update.

 

[JohnRice]

BTW, the reason I suggest changing them is, if someone is on dial-up, it will take roughly an hour to open the first page.

 

[TonyD]

going by the last set of imgs.
the bottom picture looks much clearer.
there is on grey hair on deniro's temple that is going in a different direction then the rest.
it is not so easy to see on the top image.

 

[MarcoBiscotti]

^ The pq and contrast has definitely been improved, just look at the texture and hue of the metal bar railing in the last pic. You can see all the fine detail and the rise in contrast is obvious. The picture above looks glossed over in comparison. There's also more dteail and contrast in the shadows.

 

[TonyD]

then again, i forgot these are not exactly the same frame.
notice last pic, ear in one no ear in other.:frowning:

 

[CraigL]

anyone want me to do the same with the japanese DTS disc?

 

[ArthurFlew]

Looks better to me, slightly more detail.

 

[PeterTHX]

Hear hear! What Marco said!!!!!

"Heat" isn't an old transfer. I was surprised myself when they announced a 2-disc SE.

Exactly like "My Fair Lady", same telecine, new DVD master, recompressed and re-authored. Folks: this is as good as we can probably get on DVD. Doubtless the same master will be used for the HD-DVD version.

 

[ArthurMy]

So, if Warners does occassionally issue less-than-stellar DVDs we shouldn't complain (haven't watched Heat yet, so don't know about that one), but it's perfectly fine to endlessly lambast Columbia and Universal, despite the many fine DVDs they've issued. Have I got that right?

I do find it amusing that people do tend to forgive Warners their occasional sin but not others. Just look at The Broadway Melody or Little Caeser - both of which have transfers that are no better than the Universal early Marx Bros. transfers. Guess which studio gets lambasted and guess which studio gets "they did the best they could - bravo Warners".

So, it's funny that when there's a thread where someone actually says something negative or is nitpicky about a Warners transfer, someone shows up and says we shouldn't criticize.

 

[PeterTHX]

Except that for Columbia and Universal (ESPECAILLY Universal lately) the fine DVDs are exceptions to the rule. With a weak Warner transfer (and Heat is NOT among those) THAT is the exception. Why does it take a Superbit to be special, Columbia? Why do you cram so many extras on one disc (instead of two) at the expense of the feature's bitrate Universal? Why are kids titles almost always Foolscreen (when kids are the LAST ones to complain about the black bars)? The list goes on.

If Warner farks up something I'll criticize it. "Heat SE" does not merit that.

 

[Chet_F]

The transfer looks no different and I'm not an "extras guy". I'll skip it and buy something more worthwhile.

 

[George_W_K]

The original Heat DVD looks pretty good for the most part. But, there are some scenes where the quality drops dramatically. For instance, at about the 1 hour mark, when Pacino goes back to the Policeman's dinner party to pick up his wife. Horrible. Is this fixed? There are a few scenes like this.

 

[MarcoBiscotti]

Arthur, that's a silly comparison...

Little Caeser is a 75 year old film, who knows what shape the original negs were in and the transfer is far from terrible. In fact, I think it looks pretty damn good compared to just about every other print I've ever come accross in the past 22 years I've been around. It also features a well informed commentary track by film historian Richard Jewell, a featurette documentary on the film, a classic Spencer Tracy short, a rare early Warner Bros. Bosko cartoon which hadn't seen prior release and a 1930 newsreel to top it off. It was also packaged with 5 other great films, all of which recieved beautiful pristine remastered transfers and at an incredible bargain price to top it off. The Marx Bros. Collection from Universal was poorly managed. Little effort went into the set at all. The transfers were simply ported over from an earlier release and the only extras offered were of little interest... some 20 minutes of interviews from The Today Show from the 60's. These were some of the greatest comedies of all-time. That shows little thought. I wouldn't go so far as to say that The Marx Bros. Silver Screen Collection is an out and out bad set. But you cannot compare any one disc from that collection to Little Caesar or any of the recent Warner classic releases. I don't see how anyone can justifiably mention Warner Bros. (or any studio for that matter) in the same sentence as Columbia. They are consistently the worst studio around. What little they find viable for release gets horrible treatment, many films STILL being issued in incorrect aspect ratios and they just make it obvious that they have no understanding or appreciation for the films that they are putting. Heat is far from a substandard release. In fact, I find it hyppocritical of anyone who'd think otherwise. The film received a terrific transfer the first time around and we asked for the Special Edition treatment. Well, we got it. Commentary tracks, featurettes, interviews, an entire discs worth of extras along with brand new packaging to replace the old cheap snapper case which we all professed so much disdain towards and the pq was upped slightly to boot. What more can you ask for? You might not be into extra features or commentaries and that's fine... but than that doesn't reflect on the quality of the new set, that's your own personal gripe. Just because you might not justify an upgrade for what's being offered here does not make the DVD any less of a great production. I'm sure there are many people that would have picked it up it had just been reissued a la Universal, FOX or New Line with a slight price reduction and/or new packaging (sans-snapper). We have a full-blown 2-disc Special Edition here. Nobodies forgiving Warner Bros. for anything... I don't see what we'd have to forgive them for? Delivering us the DVD that we've been asking for years now? I'll be the first to criticize any company when a substandard product is released. I just don't see hwo this qualifies, and I find it even more amusing that the only reason we're bickering here is because of the screen captions above. If the old release were in shittier condition, we'd all be sitting here praising Warner Bros. for a terrific transfer. The captions posted look excellent and despite what conclusions you've happened upon without even viewing the new set, to my eyes there is an obvious enhancement in resolution and detail. This can be seen plain as day if you look at the railing bar in the last shot. If you don't think that's significant, perhaps it's due to the fact that it is shown in a tiny frame on a messageboard. That's not how most of us watch our movies. I imagine it would look way more significant on a largte projection screen and if you are simply viewing your discs on an old 4x3 television screen that it shouldn't impact you either way. It's ridiculous how we're sitting here scrutinizing these screen grabs as if it will determine whether or not Warner have in fact delivered us a quality DVD. How's about looking at those above captions and showing me where YOU find fault in them instead? I think you'd be hard pressed to come with any reasonable distinction. The fact of the matter is, that we all love to complain and will go out of our way to look for reasons to do so. This is why we're considered messageboard nerds and the like and not taken seriously when issues like this arise. Any customer who walks into a video retailer and comes upon the current DVD of Heat and this new Special Edition and weighs them in considering the price, etc. will think this is a great deal! Here we are, condeming one of the most efficient studios around right now who is doing absolutely everything in their power to cater to us... the buying public who appreciate and understand films... and all because the transfer looks great but a little to similair to the similarly great previous transfer. Excuse me if I think that sounds ridiculous.

 

[TravisR]

"The fact of the matter is, that we all love to complain and will go out of our way to look for reasons to do so. This is why we're considered messageboard nerds and the like and not taken seriously when issues like this arise."

If a more true statement has ever been made, I've never seen it

 

[Peter Svensson]

I´m definitely no expert, but I can´t see any difference between the PQ of the old and new edition.