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

[Robert Harris]

So my question is this;

I was reading the "other" site about Torsten Kaiser receiving the same master for his TV broadcast work in 2011 as of course reported at the "other" site, so did the master he receive which was apparently de-noised by an outside vendor, that's according to Torsten and it seems also contrast boosted among other things, well back on point and to my basic question, does this blu ray release come from a different master to the one Torsten Kaiser used for broadcast or is this the basis for this blu ray release. ?

The review worries me, especially the remarks about it looking like a digital presentation, why can't it look more film like than digital, other releases do.

It IS a digital presentation. Nicely cleaned up, and looking very nice.

RAH

 

[RolandL]

I watched it last night and I have to admit with a film like this it is sometimes hard for me to nitpick the image when I am so caught up in the story. That said I had no complaints, could see grain present, did not think it looked overly manipulated but did recognize the "softness" of some shots. I chalked that up to the fact that is how the film always looked.

Add all this to the fact that this blu-ray of a classic "event" film can be had for $5.00 at Best Buy right now and less than $10.00 most everywhere else and I would think people would have no problem snapping this up.

The $5 U&S at Best Buy is only for in store stock which none of them have according to their web site.

 

[Winston T. Boogie]

The $5 U&S at Best Buy is only for in store stock which none of them have according to their web site.

Well, I know when I picked up a copy yesterday at a local Best Buy I grabbed what seemed to be the second to last copy on the shelf. So at least some stores have/had them. I think what they had may have sold quickly because people did take advantage of the $5.00 off or just liked the $9.99 price.

 

[Dr Griffin]

A t about 1 hour 30 minutes or so into the movie we get a fade to an extended black screen and I was fully expecting an Intermission card. Anyone else notice that? It would be a good point for an intermission. Also I was slightly annoyed by the lack of a main menu and the fact the movie will play in a cycle even while you're scrolling through the extras.

 

[Nelson Au]

I should have my copy before the end of the week and I look forward to seeing this! It is an event film! I remember the first time seeing it, was on TV broadcast over two nights and I recorded it on audio tape. And not having seen it before. It sounds like the cropping will be fine as well as the image quality? I recall one Laserdisc version I have where we see the edge of the cooler set when Hilts is bouncing the ball against it.Just to help me understand terminology used here, when RAH says its a nice digital presentation, what does that mean? This sort of follows up an earlier question by another poster that asks what that means? Would the blu ray of Lawrence of Arabia also be called a nice digital presentation! Just looking for things to look at to compare as I know that disc is highly praised. When does a disc, or can a disc, look film-like, a term I've read used here. When I saw Jaws, I thought that looked fantastic, but I still have not had a chance to put time aside to see Lawrence. For example, MGM's release of 2010: The Year we Make Contact on blu ray is a nice upgrade from the DVD. But I can see its deficiencies. Some shots did look kind of video-like. At any rate, sorry for the digression, I'm looking forward to the Scrounger, the Tunnel King, The Cooler King, The Forger, Big X, and the rest!

 

[Mark-P]

Some of the posters on the other site are now trashing RAH's review with comments like "4.5? What was he smoking?" I was compelled to leave a comment explaining that RAH's ratings reflect how transparent a Blu-ray is to the original film presentation. Which is why the soundtrack of an 80-year-old film like Dracula can score a perfect 5 despite its limited range.

 

[TravisR]

Also I was slightly annoyed by the lack of a main menu and the fact the movie will play in a cycle even while you're scrolling through the extras.

For some reason, that's been the standard for MGM releases for the last year or more.

 

[Dr Griffin]

For some reason, that's been the standard for MGM releases for the last year or more.

Another cost-cutting measure maybe.

 

[Robert Harris]

Some of the posters on the other site are now trashing RAH's review with comments like "4.5? What was he smoking?" I was compelled to leave a comment explaining that RAH's ratings reflect how transparent a Blu-ray is to the original film presentation. Which is why the soundtrack of an 80-year-old film like Dracula can score a perfect 5 despite its limited range.

I'm quite certain that this was not an easy element to work with, and probably needed quite a bit of digital help, inclusive of clean-up. It has a light patina of grain, which may not be original, but is not either problematic or intrusive. I'm betting that the OCN on this was probably nicely worn, and an IP may have been used as a source, although their are few bits of evidence left for perusal after the clean-up.

There are some situation in which a digital look, without going DNR, etc is the better alternative, especially if budgets may be tight. In the end, it's what's on the screen that matters, and the film has nothing that takes away from the experience.

RAH

 

[FoxyMulder]

It IS a digital presentation. Nicely cleaned up, and looking very nice.

RAH

Yes and many of your other reviews of digital blu ray presentations remark about the film like image, so why is this more digital than film like, i am not questioning your score, i just want to know why this release needs to look more digital than film like.

You answered this with the post above this one so no need to answer again, i understand.

 

[Robert Harris]

Yes and many of your other reviews of other digital blu ray presentations remark about the film like image, so why is this more digital than film like, i am not questioning your score, i just want to know why this release needs to look more digital than film like.

Because the "grain" that I'm seeing may not be original, but the overall look of the image is not problematic. I have no idea what work was performed, but UA negatives were not always treated with the greatest care -- and by that I'm not referring to any current MGM employees, who are constantly trying to deal with old problems.

What it does not look like is a new scan off the OCN at 4k, restored at 4k and down-rezzed to Blu-ray.

Other than that, it looks very acceptable for the film stock, age and use.

RAH

 

[haineshisway]

So my question is this;

I was reading the "other" site about Torsten Kaiser receiving the same master for his TV broadcast work in 2011 as of course reported at the "other" site, so did the master he receive which was apparently de-noised by an outside vendor, that's according to Torsten and it seems also contrast boosted among other things, well back on point and to my basic question, does this blu ray release come from a different master to the one Torsten Kaiser used for broadcast or is this the basis for this blu ray release. ?

The review worries me, especially the remarks about it looking like a digital presentation, why can't it look more film like than digital, other releases do.

As you've by now seen, you have completely misinterpreted Mr. Kaiser, and you are assigning a meaning to "digital presentation" that I don't think Mr. Harris means.

 

[FoxyMulder]

As you've by now seen, you have completely misinterpreted Mr. Kaiser, and you are assigning a meaning to "digital presentation" that I don't think Mr. Harris means.

I'm not sure why you feel i misinterpreted Mr Kaiser or why you think you can read my mind about my meaning of "digital presentation."

I was asking for more information that's all and really there is no need for your post to come across so snarky but i feel it does, its often been the case ever since i disagreed with your opinion on the blu ray release of Zulu, maybe you don't realise it but that's how some of them appear at times, its almost like you feel you are "better" than others, i simply was asking for info, the info has been supplied and i am happy to leave it at that and i thank Mr Harris for his reply to me.

 

[Geoff_D]

Thank you RAH. I had a feeling that yours and Mr Kimmel's reactions would be nothing like the hellfire and damnation so readily available elsewhere. My copy is on the way.

I haven't even seen the movie for years because the SE DVD was so poor (I couldn't stand watching it for more than a few minutes), although prior to that I practically wore out my ultra-widescreen VHS version.

 

[haineshisway]

I'm not sure why you feel i misinterpreted Mr Kaiser or why you think you can read my mind about my meaning of "digital presentation."

I was asking for more information that's all and really there is no need for your post to come across so snarky but i feel it does, its often been the case ever since i disagreed with your opinion on the blu ray release of Zulu, maybe you don't realise it but that's how some of them appear at times, its almost like you feel you are "better" than others, i simply was asking for info, the info has been supplied and i am happy to leave it at that and i thank Mr Harris for his reply to me.

No snark intended at all - just commenting on your initial post. Whatever differences we have on Zulu don't enter into anything else.

 

[Mark-P]

Malcolm, I think the word "digital" has acquired a negative connotation in the home theater community in recent years, though Mr. Harris has often said that the judicious use of digital tools can be a good thing.

 

[FoxyMulder]

No snark intended at all - just commenting on your initial post. Whatever differences we have on Zulu don't enter into anything else.

Okay then my apologies for thinking that, at the end of the day we are all taking part at this site because we love cinema and films.

 

[haineshisway]

Okay then my apologies for thinking that, at the end of the day we are all taking part at this site because we love cinema and films.

You bet.

 

[haineshisway]

Malcolm, I think the word "digital" has acquired a negative connotation in the home theater community in recent years, though Mr. Harris has often said that the judicious use of digital tools can be a good thing.

Well, the amusing thing is that Blu-ray is a digital medium. Everything we watch on Blu-ray is a digital presentation. Every transfer is a digital transfer of some sort. For me, this presentation of The Great Escape looks like the film The Great Escape - yes, there may be uses of digital tools, but there are in every transfer in one way or another.

 

[Robert Harris]

Well, the amusing thing is that Blu-ray is a digital medium. Everything we watch on Blu-ray is a digital presentation. Every transfer is a digital transfer of some sort. For me, this presentation of The Great Escape looks like the film The Great Escape - yes, there may be uses of digital tools, but there are in every transfer in one way or another.

Thank you!