Jump to content



Sign up for a free account!

Signing up for an account is fast and free. As a member you can join in the conversation, enter contests to win things like this Logitech Harmony Ultimate Remote and you won't get the popup ads that guests get. Click here to create your free account.

Photo
- - - - -

Behold! Excalibur in HD DVD


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
25 replies to this topic

#1 of 26 AaronSCH

AaronSCH

    Second Unit

  • 284 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 10 2006

Posted October 31 2006 - 03:31 PM

Forged when the format was young... I couldn't wait to pop this into the HD A1 when I got home this evening. Though I didn't have time to view the whole film, what I have seen so far looks spectacular. Though much of this film was photographed in soft focus, the increased detail and rich colors delivered by this HD DVD really pay tribute to Alex Thomson's cinematography. The daylight forest scenes reveal details in every leaf of foliage and pebble on the ground. Excalibur shimmers in the daylight as it rises from the lake...just beautiful. My only complaint is the lack of extras and the photoshop cover. Please Warner Bros., use poster art whenever you can.

#2 of 26 JonZ

JonZ

    Lead Actor

  • 7,793 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 28 1998

Posted October 31 2006 - 04:08 PM

I dont understand the complaints about this transfer. I think it looks beautiful.

Just finished watching it.

#3 of 26 Stan Rozenfeld

Stan Rozenfeld

    Stunt Coordinator

  • 199 posts
  • Join Date: May 27 2000

Posted October 31 2006 - 06:22 PM

Thanks for the reviews, guys. I can wait to watch it.

#4 of 26 Shawn.F

Shawn.F

    Supporting Actor

  • 561 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 16 2005

Posted November 01 2006 - 12:23 AM

I...URYENS! WILL TRY (and pick up this disc sometime this weekend)!!!!!!!!! Posted Image

#5 of 26 Craig S

Craig S

    Producer

  • 5,454 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 04 2000
  • Real Name:Craig Seanor
  • LocationLeague City, Texas

Posted November 01 2006 - 01:06 AM

One of the problems with the SD version was that it appeared the framing was a little tight. Can anyone out there who's seen both the SD and the new HD-DVD discs comment on the framing, and if there are any improvements?

Three truths about movies, as noted by Roger Ebert:

 

* It's not what a movie is about, it's how it is about it.

* No good movie is too long, and no bad movie is short enough.

* No good movie is depressing, all bad movies are depressing.


#6 of 26 DeeF

DeeF

    Screenwriter

  • 1,676 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 19 2002

Posted November 01 2006 - 08:22 AM

The framing does seem tight. How do I know what's correct?

#7 of 26 Jace_A

Jace_A

    Second Unit

  • 293 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 19 2005

Posted November 01 2006 - 09:05 AM

The framing on the SD-DVD wasn't tight in so much as it was badly misframed. The DVD was matted incorrectly. Hopefully the HD-DVD has fixed this, but I'm not hopeful.

#8 of 26 Ric Easton

Ric Easton

    Screenwriter

  • 2,812 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 06 2001

Posted November 01 2006 - 12:04 PM

I'd also like to know if it was framed correctly. I'm still hanging on to my old laserdisc. Alas, I've been hoping for a DVD re-issue of this movie (I haven't jumped in to HD-DVD yet). When I heard it was coming out in an HD format, I was quite suprised.

#9 of 26 DeeF

DeeF

    Screenwriter

  • 1,676 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 19 2002

Posted November 02 2006 - 02:39 AM

There are a lot of heads being cut off mid-forehead. I don't know if it's right or wrong, just noting it...

#10 of 26 Dave>h

Dave>h

    Second Unit

  • 365 posts
  • Join Date: May 01 2004

Posted November 02 2006 - 06:33 AM

For anyone who has seen this HD DVD, how was the sound track?

Did they do anything special to it? AS I recall on the SD DVD, it was a 5.1 remix but it was not very good. The only use of surrounds at all was the scene with the Grail at the end...

Thanks for the comments.

Dave

#11 of 26 DeeF

DeeF

    Screenwriter

  • 1,676 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 19 2002

Posted November 02 2006 - 07:59 AM

I can't really comment on the soundtrack. I have to use PCM, which puts out a 2.0 track.

#12 of 26 Jace_A

Jace_A

    Second Unit

  • 293 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 19 2005

Posted November 02 2006 - 08:36 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by DeeF
There are a lot of heads being cut off mid-forehead. I don't know if it's right or wrong, just noting it...

This means the HD DVD is misframed in the same way as the DVD.

#13 of 26 Paul_Scott

Paul_Scott

    Lead Actor

  • 6,546 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 18 2002

Posted November 02 2006 - 11:04 AM

Has Boorman commented on the misframing? presumably if he'd given a commentary track he was watching the same transfer we are seeing.
If he hasn't commented on this issue in the last 5 or 6 years, either he hasn't seen it, or else he didn't think it was as big a deal as the viewers.

I used to have the LD and the only thing I remember about it was being disappointed to learn that the film wasn't shot in 2.35 but a much less wider AR.

#14 of 26 Ric Easton

Ric Easton

    Screenwriter

  • 2,812 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 06 2001

Posted November 02 2006 - 12:08 PM

Quote:
This means the HD DVD is misframed in the same way as the DVD.

Great. This probably would have been one of the first movies I purchased when jumping into Hi-Def DVD. Looks like I can still sit out the format war. Very disappointing that they couldn't get this properly framed for even the HD version. Some movies get no respect.

#15 of 26 Mark Bendiksen

Mark Bendiksen

    Screenwriter

  • 1,090 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 16 1999

Posted November 04 2006 - 02:34 PM


I cannot attest to the quality (or lack thereof) of the HD-DVD release, but I can say one thing definitively: The current SD-DVD of Excalibur COMPLETELY sucks. I'm so desperate for something better that I'll even settle for a marginal improvement in picture quality.


#16 of 26 Ric Easton

Ric Easton

    Screenwriter

  • 2,812 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 06 2001

Posted November 05 2006 - 02:15 AM

I asked during the last chat if there was any chance of us getting a new version, since this year was the 25th anniversary and all. They said there were no plans.

I still just can't believe the HD version got the same mis-framed crap. I guess it will be a cold day in Hell before we get any version that is properly framed.

#17 of 26 DeeF

DeeF

    Screenwriter

  • 1,676 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 19 2002

Posted November 05 2006 - 04:28 AM

I did a comparison of the new HD-DVD and the standard DVD, showing them simultaneously on my monitor. The HD-DVD has been opened up, ever so slightly.

#18 of 26 Ron-P

Ron-P

    Producer

  • 6,283 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 25 2000
  • Real Name:Ron

Posted November 05 2006 - 05:48 PM

Just picked it up today, my local BB had only one copy. Can't wait to watch it.
You have all the weapons you need...Now fight!


#19 of 26 Stephen_J_H

Stephen_J_H

    Producer

  • 3,861 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 30 2003
  • Real Name:Stephen J. Hill
  • LocationNorth of the 49th

Posted November 06 2006 - 06:15 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by DeeF
There are a lot of heads being cut off mid-forehead. I don't know if it's right or wrong, just noting it...
Being cut off mid-forehead is not "proof" of misframing, as others are indicating. I only quote DeeF because his quote is the only one providing any clarity. A director or DOP will have various reasons for framing shots in a certain way. We cannot assume that this is misframed just because tops of heads are lopped off. We're talking about a movie here, not a family portrait.
"My opinion is that (a) anyone who actually works in a video store and does not understand letterboxing has given up on life, and (b) any customer who prefers to have the sides of a movie hacked off should not be licensed to operate a video player."-- Roger Ebert

#20 of 26 Scott Calvert

Scott Calvert

    Supporting Actor

  • 885 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 02 1998

Posted November 06 2006 - 11:25 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stephen_J_H
Being cut off mid-forehead is not "proof" of misframing, as others are indicating. I only quote DeeF because his quote is the only one providing any clarity. A director or DOP will have various reasons for framing shots in a certain way. We cannot assume that this is misframed just because tops of heads are lopped off. We're talking about a movie here, not a family portrait.

What he said.

Although, the cropping did seem a little tight in the upper portion of the frame.


Back to Blu-ray



Forum Nav Content I Follow