A Few Words About A few words about...™ Goldeneye -- in Blu-ray (2 Viewers)

[Bryan Tuck]

Got it. I just read another review that seems to confirm that it's an old master.
Real missing opportunity here huh?
I guess I'll have a reason for the next upgrade huh?
It's really too bad they did not have Lowry do a new master for the film. Sounds like the audio could've been tweaked a bit as well.
Next time?

I dunno. There's really no excuse for a late-90s video master being used for such a high-profile Blu-ray release in 2012.
The Lowry master was ridiculously cropped (although I read at the time that they were provided with the wrong materials, but I'm not sure), so I guess this is better than that, but surely a new image harvest could have been performed, especially considering this is still one of the more successful films in the series. The Spy Who Loved Me should not look better than Goldeneye in HD (not saying TSWLM shouldn't look great, just that they both should).
Another minor annoyance, the teaser trailer included in the "Ministry of Propaganda" is shorter than the one on the SE and UE. Pierce Brosnan's "You were expecting someone else?" line is missing for some reason. Little thing, but I always liked that trailer.

 

[Osato]

I dunno. There's really no excuse for a late-90s video master being used for such a high-profile Blu-ray release in 2012.
The Lowry master was ridiculously cropped (although I read at the time that they were provided with the wrong materials, but I'm not sure), so I guess this is better than that, but surely a new image harvest could have been performed, especially considering this is still one of the more successful films in the series. The Spy Who Loved Me should not look better than Goldeneye in HD (not saying TSWLM shouldn't look great, just that they both should).
Another minor annoyance, the teaser trailer included in the "Ministry of Propaganda" is shorter than the one on the SE and UE. Pierce Brosnan's "You were expecting someone else?" line is missing for some reason. Little thing, but I always liked that trailer.

It's disappointing, but pretty much out of our circle of control isn't it?
Hopefully they get it right next time or even do a new disc shortly, but I doubt it.
The Bond 50 set is great, but there was really very little work put into the set overall.
The masters for the blu rays (aside from Goldeneye) were done and the bonus disc is pretty much promotional features and weblog videos...

 

[brioni]

IMDB is suggesting 35 mm (Eastman EXR 50D 5245, EXR 200T 5293, EXR 500T 5298)
Presumably the films credits confirm this?

Another minor annoyance, the teaser trailer included in the "Ministry of Propaganda" is shorter than the one on the SE and UE. Pierce Brosnan's "You were expecting someone else?" line is missing for some reason. Little thing, but I always liked that trailer.

It is a fantastic trailer to herald in the new era of Bond after such a long absence from the big screen. It’s probably my most watched and favourite trailer of all time! mainly due to the specific scene's shot with Pierce and the awesome remix of the theme. Is it presented in SD or HD? that would depend on my level of annoyance!

 

[EnricoE]

Another minor annoyance, the teaser trailer included in the "Ministry of Propaganda" is shorter than the one on the SE and UE. Pierce Brosnan's "You were expecting someone else?" line is missing for some reason. Little thing, but I always liked that trailer.

good catch there. when i watched, i had a feeling something was missing because after bond shots the M to a 7 he freezes. i guess another reason to keep my old dvd.

Is it presented in SD or HD? that would depend on my level of annoyance!

the teaser (miles better then the trailer) and the trailer (with godawful voice over) are presented in hd and oar.

 

[BIP]

Really sad to hear this. I tend to have a soft spot for Goldeneye, the opening stunt is breathless... and I've liked Sean Bean since the Sharpe series. I have no plans to get all the Bonds but this was one I had in mind.
I really hoped they'd do a good job, but alas... So no buy for me on this.
Disappointing.

 

[Mikey1969]

Are you sure it wasn't the DVDs..checked at FS today and they only had the six titles on bluray...the same ones they had on their site.

 

[FoxyMulder]

Originally Posted by Robert Harris /t/324219/a-few-words-about-goldeneye-in-blu-ray#post_3984033
Not Recommended.

RAH

At last, someone looking at this Bond set without rose tinted glasses on, i agree with your thoughts on Goldeneye, i wont buy this, i wanted to.

 

[Kevin Korom]

Picked this one up after following all the reviews, since I still had the original DVD & figured it had to be a sizable improvement, and it was only $10. It is most definitely a pretty big step up from the old DVD. Unfortunately, it's also in the lower tier of the worst BRs I've seen. Too bad it didn't get the treatment something like LALD got , it's one of my favorite Bonds; but it was still worth $10 to me. Someone really dropped the ball here, since the 14 other Bond BRs I have look at least very good, and sometimes fantastic.

 

[Stephen_J_H]

Personally, I wouldn't describe this as Patton bad, but it's clearly a dated master. Everyone looks so....... shiny. To say I've seen worse BDs is damning with faint praise, which seems the appropriate response. I doubt if MGM would do a new image harvest, but since the film's only 17 years old, restoration shouldn't be necessary, which would take the overall cost of the pocess down.

 

[FoxyMulder]

Originally Posted by Stephen_J_H /t/324219/a-few-words-about-goldeneye-in-blu-ray/30#post_3991950
I doubt if MGM would do a new image harvest, but since the film's only 17 years old, restoration shouldn't be necessary, which would take the overall cost of the pocess down.

I'm not sure what Lowry did in 2005 but their process wasn't so perfect back then, see Star Wars as another example, i'd like to see all the Bond films re-visited, see them correctly colour timed and get rid of the contrast boosting, retain the film grain, do it right, i think these films on blu ray could look amazing, some people already think they look amazing, i don't, i hope five years from now i am writing on this very forum about how great the new Bond releases look in 4K or Ultra HD as the consumer electronics association have decided to call it, of course i'll just settle for a quality 1080p blu ray which hasn't had excessive digital manipulation.

 

[TravisR]

i hope five years from now i am writing on this very forum about how great the new Bond releases look in 4K or Ultra HD...

I think 5 years is incredibly optimistic.

 

[FoxyMulder]

Originally Posted by TravisR /t/324219/a-few-words-about-goldeneye-in-blu-ray/30#post_3991992
I think 5 years is incredibly optimistic.

Playstation Orbis ( 4 ) launching late next year, limited movie content probably released in 4K using the new improved codec in 2014, Bond movies by 2017, nah, not too optimistic at all, just a realistic timetable of events, i think it will happen, they need to sell everything to us all over again, i'll bite if it's done right next time.

 

[TravisR]

Who is going to pay $25,000 for a TV? No doubt the price will drop as time goes by but it's not going to drop fast enough in 5 years that it'll be a product that anyone beyond the very wealthy and very interested in massive TVs will own. I can imagine that most at HTF (and other similar places) would want one but even if the price comes way down, how many people here could afford to spend $10,000 or $15,000 on a TV? Until there's a real base of consumers, I don't think studios are going to more or less waste their time and money on releasing 4K product to a market that will be extremely small.

 

[Dave H]

Who is going to pay $25,000 for a TV? No doubt the price will drop as time goes by but it's not going to drop fast enough in 5 years that it'll be a product that anyone beyond the very wealthy and very interested in massive TVs will own. I can imagine that most at HTF (and other similar places) would want one but even if the price comes way down, how many people here could afford to spend $10,000 or $15,000 on a TV? Until there's a real base of consumers, I don't think studios are going to more or less waste their time and money on releasing 4K product to a market that will be extremely small.

Some forum members on this site said the same thing about 1080p not all that long ago (early 2000s). Now look where we are or even were by late 2000s.
I remember a number of people claiming 1080p was total overkill (and that upscaling was more than enough), 1080p displays were going to be way too expensive for many, many years to come, no one would re-purchase their movies, players would be too expensive, Blu-ray would never exceed a tiny little niche, the format will die in a few years, etc., etc. etc.

 

[Dave H]

Playstation Orbis ( 4 ) launching late next year, limited movie content probably released in 4K using the new improved codec in 2014, Bond movies by 2017, nah, not too optimistic at all, just a realistic timetable of events, i think it will happen, they need to sell everything to us all over again, i'll bite if it's done right next time.

Agreed.

 

[TravisR]

Some forum members on this site said the same thing about 1080p not all that long ago (early 2000s). Now look where we are or even were by late 2000s.
I remember a number of people claiming 1080p was total overkill (and that upscaling was more than enough), 1080p displays were going to be way too expensive for many, many years to come, no one would re-purchase their movies, players would be too expensive, Blu-ray would never exceed a tiny little niche, the format will die in a few years, etc., etc. etc.

I'm not saying that 4K will never happen or that it's overkill or that it won't ever exceed a niche, etc. I'm saying that I don't think movies will be available to buy in the next 5 years simply because the price of 4K TVs is going to keep people away and without TVs in homes, there's no reason to release product.

 

[Mark Oates]

I think 4K screens will drop in price very rapidly because IMHO they'll drive a new viewing paradigm - moving from a passive relationship with the screen (viewing at say 1.5x screen width) to anything between wallpaper and point-blank. You'll wind up with a screen that can be viewed conventionally at a distance, but up close is like Apple's retina display. Think how you could interact with a screen like that with touchscreen.
I think where 4K may falter is content provision. I can't see Hollywood okaying asset-protection quality copies of its product to be handled out in the wild without demonic levels of DRM and copy-protection. Physical media? No way. Streaming? Almost certainly. Probably a black-box approach with a handful of manufacturers making boxes that hook into ultra-ultra secure networks and exchange million digit encryption keys before you get to see your movie.
Veering back on to subject, being in the UK, the new Blu-ray is actually the best we've seen the movie on home video formats. Before now, the movie has always been cut (shorn of Xenia's penchant for headbutts), and of course the UE DVD was so messily reframed. AFAIC, the Bond 50 version of the movie is the best we'll see for a while.

 

[rsmithjr]

I think where 4K may falter is content provision. I can't see Hollywood okaying asset-protection quality copies of its product to be handled out in the wild without demonic levels of DRM and copy-protection. Physical media? No way. Streaming? Almost certainly. Probably a black-box approach with a handful of manufacturers making boxes that hook into ultra-ultra secure networks and exchange million digit encryption keys before you get to see your movie.

Interesting thought but I don't agree that copy protection concerns will ultimately have this effect. For over 35 years, Hollywood has done the unthinkable with its content for the simple reason that it was profitable. With Blu-ray, we already have copies that are in many cases better looking and sounding than any extent 35mm print, and copyright concerns have not thwarted this that much.
If it appears profitable in the short run, Hollywood will do it.

 

[David Dias]

This is actually one of my favorite Bonds, so count me as supremely disappointed. I thought the audio was fine, but the video is pretty mediocre.

 

[Worth]

Interesting thought but I don't agree that copy protection concerns will ultimately have this effect. For over 35 years, Hollywood has done the unthinkable with its content for the simple reason that it was profitable. With Blu-ray, we already have copies that are in many cases better looking and sounding than any extent 35mm print, and copyright concerns have not thwarted this that much.
If it appears profitable in the short run, Hollywood will do it.

I think that's exactly why we're unlikely to see 4K content anytime soon - and by soon, I mean the next decade - as there's very little profit to be made from it. I can't see the studios getting excited over pushing yet another new video format in order to sell a handful of copies of titles. On top of that, all 4K sales would come at the expense of blu-ray, as those purchasing 4K discs would otherwise have bought blu-ray.