The Good, The Bad And The Ugly Announced in Region B - now in Region A as well (1 Viewer)

[Robert Crawford]

Well Paul, it looks like we have some common ground here. IMO, this release looks better than "The Longest Day" and "Patton", but is not quite as good as "Zulu". I'm glad I kept my copy and watched it.





Crawdaddy

 

[Terry Hickey]

I just finished watching it, and I thought it looked presentable. I wasn't to crazy about the audio remix (5.1 or mono) though. It would have been nice, if they had included the theatrical cut on this release. Anyway, I enjoyed this disc and that's what really counts for me.

 

[Lyle_JP]

Well, we can forget that. As far as I can tell, the entire mono track is a mixdown of the DTS, with all the fancy new gunshots and other ridiculousness. Why did they even bother to include this? Did they really think we were all clamoring for a newly remixed mono track? :rolleyes

 

[Brian Borst]

What, really? The mono track was the only thing that might have made the double dip for me, despite the picture quality. Never mind then.

 

[BillyFeldman]

I was curious about comments on this disc, which I thought only okay. I'm new to Blu-Ray, but I absolutely cannot believe someone here had the temerity to criticize the import of Zulu - I put that on a couple of days ago and I could not believe the beauty in front of my eyes - with achingly beautiful color and clarity - maybe the best color disc I've ever seen. Sometimes this anal fixation on whatever people perceive as whatever people perceive is absolutely perplexing. I'll go along with TGTBATU not being perfect, but Zulu - sorry, it's spectacular. I'll tell you what else is spectacular - ITV's Black Narcissus. Amazing.

 

[Walter Kittel]

I had the pleasure of viewing the Bd release this evening. I believe that the presentation is decent enough, with the main flaw being softness and lack of detail in the medium distance shots, and some evidence of DNR with regards to skin textures (on an intermittent but not pervasive basis).

On the plus side, most of the closeup shots look good, color performance is (once again) decent, and the presentation is absent the digital artifacts that were present on the DVD release. I did not notice any edge enhancement (which is always a good thing.)

Not a spectacular release by any stretch of the imagination, but for fans of the film a step up from the DVD. I'd give the video 3 or possibly 3.5 / 5 stars.

Kind of wish that the theatrical cut was an option as I find the revised voiceover work a bit of a distraction, but oh well.

All in all, a moderate recommendation from me, and no regrets on the purchase.

- Walter.

 

[OliverK]

Zulu has been robbed of a lot its finer grain and detail through an automated dustbusting process. That it still looks rather spectacular is a testament to its stunning original cinematography and being shot in Super Technirama 70.

So you have something to enjoy right now and you can also look forward to an even better looking version if the movie is treated properly in the hopefully not too distant future

ITV's Black Narcissus is a Blu-Ray that seems to be faithful to the look of the film elements it is derived from, and I do like it a lot.

 

[Geoff_D]

It's mad, isn't it? Better attention should've been paid to the original mono audio when the movie was restored to this length in 2002, but in the restoration featurette they make it clear that a remix was foremost on their minds. :frowning:

 

[Jim_K]

Watched this two nights ago and thought the pq was decent enough. Perhaps not as much detail as there could have been but still a significant enough upgrade (on my system at least) from the DVD.

I saw nothing that merits some of the histrionics I've read about this release. Not that I'm surprised.

 

[RobertR]

I see that you have Patton and The Longest Day in your collection. If you also consider those "decent enough", that will tell me a lot.

 

[JonZ]

"As a Techniscope film, there may not be much additional detail to get out of the elements, but if whatever fine detail there is is going to be mostly obscured by filtering/DNR, I'll be passing."

sigh

Another pass for me. This is ridiculous.

 

[Jim_K]

Actually I returned Longest Day and Patton for PQ issues. It took a couple of rounds of back and forth with multiple copies to get a refund but it was worth it.

I figured returned product with a reason was more productive than an ineffectual hissyfit on a messageboard forum. Perhaps if all the waxy-eyed DNR blowhards would do the same, the studios might take notice.

 

[TravisR]

Hehehe.

 

[Jim_K]

 

[Paul_Scott]

Hey Guys- I'm willing to concede I've been a fool and my lying eyes can't be trusted, and that this doesn't look film-like after all and is in fact a travesty, and an abomination.
But before I can comfortably get on board that train, I was hoping someone could provide a time code and a specific example of a specific detail that has been removed or obscured- something that should be visible but isn't- because of inappropriate tampering. I'll take a frayed thread in a jacket, a wisker, the detail in a button...anything. Just post the timecode and tell me where I should be looking.
I realize this may be difficult to do since many of the people most certain of it's inadequecies refuse to actually view it, but I'm sure many of you have personal 35mm prints in reserve you can consult in its stead. I'll try to wait...but the next abominable travesty is just around the corner, so I'd like to get on the bandwagon for this one asap.

 

[Edward Schatz]

I returned mine to Amazon as "defective" and listed the waxy DNR as the explanation. It was unopened.

 

[Brandon Conway]

:rolleyes

Some people put way too much trust in internet reviews, IMO. I almost feel like I'm venturing into an alien environment whenever I happen to enjoy a film that is from an "inferior presentation" on Blu-ray. It makes reading these boards a somewhat surreal experience.

 

[Edward Schatz]

:rolleyes

And some people can't accept criticism no matter what. It's not just one opinion, but several. My comments to Amazon were not for dramatic effect, because simply returning it and saying "I don't want it" would not have made any impression.

Why would I want to spend 20 dollars on something that in the eyes of a sizable group of people in this thread looks bad? I am in the camp of people who dislike DNR greatly, so I tend to agree with them.

If you enjoy it, carry on. I would have preferred an image with next to no DNR finagling regardless of how lousy it looked. At least it would have stayed true to the nature of film.

Of course, someone here is going to say, "and if that film deteriorated to the point it had no color would that be staying true?" Just to insulate myself, NO. I am ONLY talking about DNR.

 

[Brian Borst]

If I had ordered it, I would have watched it as well and then decide whether to return it or not. But it seems in the US you can't return items when they've been opened.

 

[Edward Schatz]

Pretty much. Amazon is more lenient than most outfits, though. The whole opened thing has bitten me several times at Best Buy which is why I was whiney about it earlier in the thread. I generally rely on multiple reviews before I buy something but I had preordered this movie.