-

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 and you won't get the popup ads that guests get. Click here to create your free account.

Photo
DVD Reviews

HTF DVD REVIEW: The Dark Knight: Two-Disc Special Edition



This topic has been archived.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

#1 of 65 Ken_McAlinden

Ken_McAlinden

    Producer

  • 6,065 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 20 2001
  • Real Name:Kenneth McAlinden
  • LocationLivonia, MI USA

Posted November 28 2008 - 06:56 AM

http://static.hometh...ers_1430124.jpg">

The Dark Knight: Two-Disc Special Edition

Directed By: Christopher Nolan

Starring: Christian Bale, Heath Ledger, Aaron Eckhart, Maggie Gyllenhaal, Gary Oldman, Michael Caine, Morgan Freeman

. Purchasers are advised not to overlook the digital copy which presents the film in a different format than on the DVD by dedicating additional video frame space for the IMAX sequences.

Regards,
Ken McAlinden
Livonia, MI USA

#2 of 65 Ben J Loews

Ben J Loews

    Stunt Coordinator

  • 95 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 01 2005

Posted November 28 2008 - 07:07 AM

I agree that the video quality isn't great.

Some sections of the film look worse than others, but generally its heading for the 8/10 score.

Those with bigger screens (LCDs) should probably get the blu ray.

Looks ok, but could have been better.

#3 of 65 Shad R

Shad R

    Supporting Actor

  • 537 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 08 2001

Posted November 28 2008 - 10:05 AM

NNOOOOOO!
What is wrong with Warner? Not only is this the biggest movie of the decade, but it was greeted with critical praise, appeased comic book fans, and had fantastic word of mouth, even possible academy nominations. This movie had amazing visuals and a surround mix that(in the theater) packed a wallop! I am very disappointed with what I'm hearing about a soft, noisy picture, and a soundtrack that suffers fidelity. Warner should have taken more care with this title. I guess I will be getting the blu-ray now.
Why would Warner do this?

#4 of 65 TravisR

TravisR

    Studio Mogul

  • 21,637 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 15 2004
  • LocationThe basement of the FBI building

Posted November 28 2008 - 10:20 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shad R
I guess I will be getting the blu-ray now.
You have a Blu-ray player but were planning on getting the DVD?

#5 of 65 Nicholas Martin

Nicholas Martin

    Screenwriter

  • 2,683 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 18 2003

Posted November 28 2008 - 10:32 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by TravisR
You have a Blu-ray player but were planning on getting the DVD?

That's a bit confusing to me too, but I'll be sure to pick up both DVD and BD steelbooks.



Sorry to hear about the quality.

This is apparently a trend with WB, right?

#6 of 65 Steve_Pannell

Steve_Pannell

    Supporting Actor

  • 583 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 04 2003
  • Real Name:Steve
  • LocationNew Albany, MS

Posted November 28 2008 - 10:39 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by TravisR
You have a Blu-ray player but were planning on getting the DVD?

Maybe because of the shifting aspect ratios on the BD?

I just got a Blu-ray player a few days ago and can't wait to see this one. I may not like the shifting aspect ratio or it may not matter but I'm willing to give it a chance.

#7 of 65 Ken_McAlinden

Ken_McAlinden

    Producer

  • 6,065 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 20 2001
  • Real Name:Kenneth McAlinden
  • LocationLivonia, MI USA

Posted November 28 2008 - 01:10 PM

Wow. I just gave my review another editorial pass and want to apologize to anyone who had to read that thing before now. I banged it out on a laptop computer in a coffee shop with WiFi since I was away from home for the holidays, and somehow I missed a ton of typos and grammatical errors. I have since fixed most of them and hope the review is more presentable.

Sorry!Posted Image
Ken McAlinden
Livonia, MI USA

#8 of 65 Aragorn the Elfstone

Aragorn the Elfstone

    Stunt Coordinator

  • 57 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 09 2008

Posted November 28 2008 - 05:09 PM

Posted Image

...and with that, I officially go Blu. It's obvious that Warner has no interest in making quality DVDs anymore. I shall finish out my DVD purchasing with the Fourth Season of Battlestar Galactica and any future (great quality) DVD only releases - but other than that, I will now fully embrace Blu-ray.

Hopefully I'll dig the switching aspect ratios. I wasn't too keen on that, but as I see it this will be the only possible way to watch this.

#9 of 65 Shad R

Shad R

    Supporting Actor

  • 537 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 08 2001

Posted November 28 2008 - 11:17 PM

I have netflix, I was planning on buying the DVD (which can be had for less than $15 bucks), and renting the blu-ray just to check it out. With all the bad things I've been hearing though, looks like I'll be buying it on blu-ray.
Plus I wanted it on DVD so I could take it over to a friends to watch it...no blu for him yet.
Just because I have a blu-ray doesn't mean I buy the discs, I just rent.
Just to clarify for you guys.

#10 of 65 Ken_McAlinden

Ken_McAlinden

    Producer

  • 6,065 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 20 2001
  • Real Name:Kenneth McAlinden
  • LocationLivonia, MI USA

Posted November 29 2008 - 01:27 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shad R
...Plus I wanted it on DVD so I could take it over to a friends to watch it...no blu for him yet....
One thing I like about these digital copies, especially with Blu-Ray titles, is that they provide me a portable SD version of the movie so I don't need a standard DVD to watch it at a friend or relatives house who does not have BD. Of course, you need a video capable iPod or other supported device and a cable to output it to a TV/display.

Regards,
Ken McAlinden
Livonia, MI USA

#11 of 65 Colin Jacobson

Colin Jacobson

    Producer

  • 5,221 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 19 2000

Posted November 29 2008 - 04:10 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nicholas Martin

This is apparently a trend with WB, right?

Not always - I thought Speed Racer looked great. But WB have been putting out a lot of crap transfers lately. Usually it's the titles that feature both WS and FS presentations on the same disc - that makes the problematic visuals of Dark Knight more confusing, since it has no competition for disc space...
Colin Jacobson
http://www.dvdmg.com

#12 of 65 Nicholas Martin

Nicholas Martin

    Screenwriter

  • 2,683 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 18 2003

Posted November 29 2008 - 05:51 AM

As well as the lower bitrate for audio. 384kbps for THIS film? Talk about a bad joke...

Perhaps those conspiracy nuts out there might find something in this issue - crappy DVD transfers which will persuade people to go Blu?

Probably not, but who knows.

#13 of 65 Aragorn the Elfstone

Aragorn the Elfstone

    Stunt Coordinator

  • 57 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 09 2008

Posted November 29 2008 - 06:07 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nicholas Martin
Perhaps those conspiracy nuts out there might find something in this issue - crappy DVD transfers which will persuade people to go Blu?

Probably not, but who knows.

Put me down as a conspiracy nut - If Warner was putting out the same quality DVD transfers as they were back a couple years ago, I'd be going for one of the DVD exclusives (probably the "Why So Serious?" Circuit City cover).

I'm quite happy with quality DVDs, why does Warner have to suck so much?! Posted Image

#14 of 65 Andrew Radke

Andrew Radke

    Screenwriter

  • 1,250 posts
  • Join Date: May 07 2003
  • Real Name:Andrew Radke
  • LocationGuelph, Ontario - Canada

Posted November 29 2008 - 06:31 AM

Well they wanted to push the format, and they found a way to do it.......unfortunately at the expense of those of us who prefer DVD (or have opted not to adopt the format at this time). They know full well that 'The Dark Knight' will undoubtedly be the most successful title on Blu so they obviously want to make it look head over heels better than the DVD counterpart. A shame really. We've given Warner our hard earned bucks over the years AS DVD collectors and now we're more or less getting the shaft in favor of the new format. That's business for you I guess.......
My DVD / Blu-ray collection:
 

 


#15 of 65 TravisR

TravisR

    Studio Mogul

  • 21,637 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 15 2004
  • LocationThe basement of the FBI building

Posted November 29 2008 - 06:40 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nicholas Martin
Perhaps those conspiracy nuts out there might find something in this issue - crappy DVD transfers which will persuade people to go Blu?

Probably not, but who knows.
Yeah, never say never but it doesn't make much sense to me. A fraction of the people buying the DVD have a discerning enough eye to see the flaws being discussed so deliberately sabotaging the release in hopes of pushing a few people over to Blu-ray seems very unlikely to me.

#16 of 65 Ken_McAlinden

Ken_McAlinden

    Producer

  • 6,065 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 20 2001
  • Real Name:Kenneth McAlinden
  • LocationLivonia, MI USA

Posted November 29 2008 - 07:38 AM

As far as theatrical new release titles over the past year, I think Warner did a good job on the transfers for 'Speed Racer" and "I Am Legend". Heck, within the last couple of weeks they released a pretty decent video presentation for "Sisterhood of the Traveling Pants 2". I was expecting better.
Ken McAlinden
Livonia, MI USA

#17 of 65 Eric Peterson

Eric Peterson

    Screenwriter

  • 2,959 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 02 2001

Posted November 29 2008 - 08:58 AM

Wow! My second favorite film of the year reduced to a rental. This really sucks, but I guess it's more more in my Christmas budget and less in WB's coffers. I'm not going to be forced to Blu until I'm good and ready and that's not going to be until I get in to a new residence hopefully sometime next year. Until then, this title is a rental.

#18 of 65 MLamarre

MLamarre

    Second Unit

  • 415 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 24 2008
  • Real Name:Matthew Lamarre

Posted November 29 2008 - 09:56 AM

Maybe they did it to give people more incentive to upgrade to the "Ultimate" edition that will undoubtedly be released in 6 months.

#19 of 65 Ric Easton

Ric Easton

    Screenwriter

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

Posted November 29 2008 - 02:25 PM

Well, even though I'm Blu, I was seriously considering picking this up so I could also watch it in a stable aspect ratio. Also, it's nice to be able to play a movie or the extras (including commentaries) in other rooms of the house. Now, I'm really on the fence after hearing that the video leaves much to be desired.

Thanks for the heads up, Ken. Even if its not what I wanted to hear!

#20 of 65 Nicholas Martin

Nicholas Martin

    Screenwriter

  • 2,683 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 18 2003

Posted November 29 2008 - 02:33 PM

My rationale for wanting both DVD and BD versions was similar - a more flexible DVD and a one-room-only BD, in addition to wanting the collectible packaging of both.

As much as I love the quality provided by Blu-ray, DVD is no slouch and I'll never think of it as inferior, because both formats have major ups and downs and its all transfer-dependent.


Back to DVD, Blu-ray & Digital Reviews



Forum Nav Content I Follow