A Few Words About A few words about...™ The Big Sleep (1946) -- in Blu-ray (1 Viewer)

[AnthonyClarke]

I'll be repacking mine in the old original snapper-case. So much better than the all-plastic cases!

 

[Oblivion138]

Ugh...those bloody snapcases that Warner tried to convince us for YEARS was a reasonable way to package DVD media. The Big Sleep was doubly infuriating. It's one of my favorite films of all-time, and the DVD was a flipper in a snapcase. I am absolutely thrilled to finally be rid of it. haha

 

[Robin9]

Ever since DVDs first appeared, there have been vitriolic attacks on snapcases. I have never understood why some people hate them so much.

 

[warnerbro]

I always LOVED snap cases because they gave us more artwork and they were like a book. The bluray of THE BIG SLEEP looks very nice. I am still disappointed that the 1945 version wasn't included in HD because it is my favorite of the two.

 

[Paul Penna]

Ever since DVDs first appeared, there have been vitriolic attacks on snapcases. I have never understood why some people hate them so much.

One downside is that they tend to take adjoining cases with them when you take them off the shelf.

 

[Robert Crawford]

My mailman just came so I'm off to the home theater for some movie entertainment.

 

[Patrick Donahue]

My mailman just came so I'm off to the home theater for some movie entertainment.

Mine as well. I was waiting by the front door like a puppy, tail a waggin'

 

[Robert Crawford]

I just watched the movie only and thought the video presentation was very good. I'll be watching the bonus material during the snowstorm we're expecting in our area tomorrow and Thursday.

 

[ScottHM]

Ever since DVDs first appeared, there have been vitriolic attacks on snapcases. I have never understood why some people hate them so much.

One reason is that the cover art is unprotected against abrasion. Another is that the plastic snapper tends to get caught on adjacent cases. A third reason is that if the plastic gets broken you can't just insert the cover art in another cheap keep case.

How many reasons do people need to dislike snappers?

---------------

 

[AshJW]

One reason is that the cover art is unprotected against abrasion. Another is that the plastic snapper tends to get caught on adjacent cases. A third reason is that if the plastic gets broken you can't just insert the cover art in another cheap keep case.

How many reasons do people need to dislike snappers?

---------------

I agree on all three points.
But compared to a keep case it looks simply superior. And that is probably the reason why many people liked the snapper cases.

 

[Robin9]

One reason is that the cover art is unprotected against abrasion. Another is that the plastic snapper tends to get caught on adjacent cases. A third reason is that if the plastic gets broken you can't just insert the cover art in another cheap keep case.

How many reasons do people need to dislike snappers?

---------------

You seem to be a person things happen to. I've never experienced any of those problems.

 

[Oblivion138]

Ever since DVDs first appeared, there have been vitriolic attacks on snapcases. I have never understood why some people hate them so much.

Because the cardboard was easily crushed, creased, or otherwise damaged, and the inner hubs broke more easily than any other home video packaging in recorded history? I can't count the number of times I brought home a movie in a snapcase, only to open it and find the hub smashed to bits and the disc surface rendered unplayable by scratches from the broken bits of plastic. And yes, as mentioned above, once the hub breaks, you're pretty much screwed. It's not like an Amaray, where if the hub breaks, you can replace the case with ease. Overall, Amaray cases are just much sturdier, and protect the media better. Which is what packaging should do.

I agree on all three points.
But compared to a keep case it looks simply superior. And that is probably the reason why many people liked the snapper cases.

Eh, I always thought they looked cheap. Flimsy cardboard packaging doesn't represent class or prestige in my book.


Regarding The Big Sleep on BD (just typing that makes me smile, as I've waited quite impatiently for this release since the dawn of the format), I watched it last night and it looks simply beautiful. The theatrical cut, that is. The pre-release version (my personal preference) still might as well be DVD. Oh well...it is what it is. Still thrilled to finally own this fantastic noir in HD.

 

[larryKR]

The pre-release version (my personal preference) still might as well be DVD. Oh well...it is what it is. Still thrilled to finally own this fantastic noir in HD.

The pre-release version on the new Blu-ray is 480i, while the old DVD is 480p, so the older DVD version should look better.

 

[Robert Crawford]

The pre-release version on the new Blu-ray is 480i, while the old DVD is 480p, so the older DVD version should look better.

Will most of us be able to distinguish how better it looks is my question?

 

[Will Krupp]

Will most of us be able to distinguish how better it looks is my question?

It depends, I suppose, on whether or not your BDP is capable of playing DVD's back at 24fps. If so, then the old, progressively stored DVD will look markedly better to the naked eye as the new, interlaced disc can't even take advantage of an old progressive scan DVD player. If you don't play them back that way then the difference may be negligible or, at least, greatly reduced.

 

[Robert Crawford]

It depends, I suppose, on whether or not your BDP is capable of playing DVD's back at 24fps. If so, then the old, progressively stored DVD will look markedly better to the naked eye as the new, interlaced disc can't even take advantage of an old progressive scan DVD player. If you don't play them back that way then the difference may be negligible or, at least, greatly reduced.

Even with that scenario, I wonder if we did an "A" versus "B" test, how many of us can distinguish the difference between the two discs.

 

[Josh Steinberg]

Even with that scenario, I wonder if we did an "A" versus "B" test, how many of us can distinguish the difference between the two discs.

I don't have "The Big Sleep" Blu-ray yet, but I have "Strangers on a Train" also from Warner which is a similar release - the main version of the movie is in HD, the alternate version is SD. On my display the difference is noticeable, but I think it falls under the category of things that some people won't see, but if it's pointed out to you, you won't be able to unsee it.

On my display, it basically manifests as interlace artifacts - they're not visible 100% of the time, but if there's movement in the shot (especially camera movement), it becomes more apparent. The DVD version plays perfectly fine. The Blu-ray version of the SD copy has some visible lines that become noticeable at various points, particularly when the camera is in motion. It looks a little less fluid and appears to be a little more choppy, for lack of a better description.

The difference isn't night and day and I don't think everyone will see it. Although it's not the same as "edge enhancement", I think people will react similarly in that some people won't see it, some people will only see it if it's pointed out, and then a smaller percentage of that group won't be able to unsee it once it's been pointed out to them. On smaller screens it's less noticeable. On my 50" television, I don't really notice any problems. On my projector it's easier to notice.

I wouldn't call it unwatchable, but it is less than ideal. I'll probably keep my DVD just in case (which I hate having to do).

 

[Scott Merryfield]

My mailman just came so I'm off to the home theater for some movie entertainment.

I already told my wife this is what we are watching for our Friday night movie night!

 

[Oblivion138]

The pre-release version on the new Blu-ray is 480i, while the old DVD is 480p, so the older DVD version should look better.

I didn't watch the whole of the '45 version on the BD, nor did I compare it directly to the DVD...but from my usual seat, what I saw looked more or less like what I remember from the DVD. If it is in fact inferior to the DVD transfer, it is only slightly so...and I'm not going to go out of my way to convince myself that it's worse. I'm already disappointed enough that it's not HD. I feel no need to make myself feel more disappointed. haha

 

[Robert Crawford]

I didn't watch the whole of the '45 version on the BD, nor did I compare it directly to the DVD...but from my usual seat, what I saw looked more or less like what I remember from the DVD. If it is in fact inferior to the DVD transfer, it is only slightly so...and I'm not going to go out of my way to convince myself that it's worse. I'm already disappointed enough that it's not HD. I feel no need to make myself feel more disappointed. haha

This weekend, I'm going to watch the DVD release again and then the DVD version from this Blu-ray release just to see if I can notice any significant differences between the two with my Oppo 103 and Panny VT plasma.