A Few Words About A few words about...™ Amadeus -- in Blu-ray (1 Viewer)

[Robert Crawford]

Again, spotty when considering the industry as a whole.

http://www.hometheaterforum.com/htf/...ant-avoid.html

 

[Xylon]

The outdoor scenes to me looks very good to excellent. But yes no excuses for the extra added DNR on medium shots and close ups.

A recall? sure why not. Include The Dark Knight while we are it

 

[David Wilkins]

It's my guess that the $14.99 promotion is no accident, especially when you consider the fairly high price point that has been maintained for the Warner "book" titles.

I wonder, too, about the lack of pre-release online reviews that were available, which certainly would have affected pre-orders. I think they knew exactly what the reaction would be from the various forums.

 

[Josh Dial]

Damn - I bought the BD last week, because I assumed a movie of this calibre would be treated with only the highest regard. I even checked the forums for a post such as this!

Now I wish I hadn't opened the packaging...

 

[Brian McHale]

Personally, I'd like to see the theatrical cut of this. I didn't feel that any of the added scenes significantly improved the story, and most of them simply made the film longer. Combined with the less-than-stellar presentation they appear to be giving this on BD, I think I can live with my DVD copy until they get this right.

 

[Chris S]

I wish I had seen this thread before ordering a couple days ago. Dang it! I hate supporting overly DNR'ed release, especially inadvertently. So disappointing...

 

[Patrick McCart]

I'm surprised this was such a messed up release. Overfiltered transfer, only the DC, and low bitrate. This should have been a BD-50 with high bitrate, PCM 5.1, the music-only track, and both cuts via branching.

It's not like Amadeus isn't worth the financial risk to put more effort into. Sony was able to fix The Fifth Element, so why not Warner with this? I'd be happy to pay $30 for a proper transfer and both cuts.

If WB doesn't have a lot of control over these outside projects from Zaentz, Morgan Creek, and others, they simply need to stop being so passive. This is what resulted in the embarrassing PAL converted Chaplin DVDs from MK2 when pristine 1080p and 2K masters existed! Why should they waste money on subpar releases when their licensees are doing it half-assed?

 

[Brandon Conway]

If they have to make a whole new HD master such a process is not cost effective, running much higher than $5 or so a replacement. That's the unfortunate business side of things.

 

[Brandon Conway]

I'm not sure what they can do. And even if they are going to companies they only distribute for and yelling/screaming/pleading/begging them to release at a higher quality one shouldn't expect to read about it publicly.

 

[frankie108]

That's certainly a possibility. Another factor could be that fans of this film would have recorded this title to their HD DVRs from the splendid recent HDNET high definition broadcast. An introductory price of $15 for a premier catalog on BD will, I hope, jumpstart sales. Personally, I hope this title sells like hot cakes and sends a message to the studios that there is an audience out there that's willing to buy catalog titles en masse if they're reasonably priced. I think this message is more important them some subjective PQ issues, IMO.

 

[Aaron Silverman]

This is just insult on top of the injury of permanently replacing the original theatrical cut. The Director's Cut, whether one likes it or not, is *significantly* changed from the movie that won the Oscar for Best Picture. It is a different and far less subtle film.

My recommendation to anyone who wants this movie is to just buy the old flipper disc from 1997. At least it's anamorphic (and IIRC it includes an isolated score track).

 

[Powell&Pressburger]

I only hope a film you really look forward to never comes out on blu ray with any subjective PQ issues.

The point is to correct the issues so they don't happen again... WBs seems to repeat their mistakes.

 

[Dave H]

From what I've heard from insiders at another site, Warner is the most stubborn of all studios and will not listen to any input from folks who know what they are talking about. As a result, they continue to filter and use low bit rates on too many titles.

I just watched the UK version of Batman (1989) which will be the same transfer as the US version - it too has been filtered down and most of the grain removed giving the image a "clean" look.

 

[Loregnum]

I think it is silly to make a generalization that the "videogame generation" is why these transfers are being processed so much. As I am 30 and am in the "video game generation" since I am an avid gamer, and can say that I can't stand DNR and other processing work done, I find this to be ridiculous. If anything, I would say it is more middle aged people who bitch and moan about grain and other things and want their films to look like the video based HD programs they watch on TV.

I am also with Xylon...if this were to get recalled then recall The Dark Knight as well since every non IMAX scene is an over processed mess as well.

All I can really say is I am getting sick and tired of there being a high profile disc seemingly every week that has been processed like this...just release the damn transfers without messing with them since it leads to them looking WORSE.

Me thinks the people who thought doing this was a good idea are the same people who thought having close to indestructible plastic packages for most things was a good idea since they obviously are a pain to open and most throw them in the garbage which does nothing good for the environment. I cut open a plastic package today for one of my xbox live points cards and I thought my scissors were going to break.

Then there are the 3 security stickers on DVD/blu-ray cases that are extra sticky but thankfully all but Lions gate seems to have clued in you do not need 3 and the one at the top that is easy to peel off does the job. Nice to see it took them all these years to finally get it.

 

[MatS]

I think both are very important
and considering who the subject is I value his subjective opinion

 

[MatS]

so this guy is flat out lying then, correct?

High-Def Digest | Blu-ray & HD DVD News and Reviews in High Definition

I guess he could be telling the truth when he says (at the end) "good things come to those who wait"

 

[Brandon Conway]

Mr. Feltenstein probably has little to no control over titles Warner only distributes (New Line pre-fold in, Saul Zaentz, Morgan Creek, etc.)

 

[ManW_TheUncool]

This sure is a big disappointment now. :frowning:

I was all ready to pounce on it for $15 from Amazon. Not too sure if I'm actually all that glad I didn't do that before reading this thread. OTOH, I don't want to buy another overprocessed great film on BD, but in this case, it's also not too clear to me whether it'll be a satisfying enough upgrade (for the $15). And yeah, the lack of the major awards winning theatrical version also bites.

Think I'll just hold off on this one for now...

_Man_

 

[Dan M]

This is so disheartening. After all these years I still hang on to my old flipper disc. The image looks rough blown up on my 100" screen but it's the only way I can enjoy the theatrical cut. It's such a shame being how far we've come in terms of technology but this film still has not yet been done right.

Give us the option to watch the directors cut along with the original Oscar awarded theatrical cut with the proper transfer. Sans the digital cleanup please. Thats the only way to fully justify the release of Amadeus. Is that asking too much?

 

[JonZ]

I picked this up but havent had a chance to watch it.

Scanning through it a bit I thought the bright scenes looked pretty good with nice color rendition. You can see details on the beautiful architecture of the walls and such and the nice clothing designs.

The dark scenes definitely were a bit more problematic.

I did think the pic looked a bit soft, but had soon forgotten about that as I was too busy looking at the lovely reds, blues, etc.



Im also watching this on a 32+ screen so I might not be seeing some of the things others with larger screens are.

oh and I agree - the studios need to start giving us more choices. The theatrical cut should have been included.