A PEEK AT HEAVEN AND EARTH (1 Viewer)

[Robert Crawford]

Good for you. But then you should realise that you simply don't have good enough vision or viewing conditions to see such issues. Practically ANY issue can be made to go away when sitting far enough away or deviating from 20/20 vision in the unwanted direction. There is no difference between HD and SD, for example, from a safe distance. That does not mean HD has the same detail as SD, does it? Dismissing people who see the issue (which is a fact and clearly demonstrated on stillls from the disc) is silly. Does not help get the issue fixed and does not explain anything but your inability to see the issue.

There seems to be some dismissal or sense of superiority from both sides of this argument.

 

[Konstantinos]

I just want to say these:

1) I love TT even more than eg. Criterion, because it brings most films I'm interested in. Especially in these last months, I'm interested in almost all the titles..
2) TT has the highest percentage of titles in my modest collection (15.5%) (16 titles).
3) I'm perfectly content with all the titles, except maybe Demetrius and Gladiators, and I see they're doing an exquisite work.
4) I'm perfectly fine with the limited model and the price (given of course that each Bluray lives up to that price)
5) Judging from the screenshots I see for Heaven & Earth I don't like what I see (and I see them in a 25'' monitor. I would believe the problem will look worse in a 50'' TV)

Just had to write 1, 2 ,3, and 4 to show that I try to be as objective as possible in my opinion (5).


Edit:
Also wanted to comment on this:

Forgetting1. Stone approved/wanted it released

That doesn't say anything.
The first French Connection Bluray was personally supervised and approved by the director.
Yet, another Bluray with new transfer and color timing was released afterwards (after viewers' criticism), again approved by him.

 

[Yorkshire]

So there isn't a public feud between some BR.com reviewers and TT? If so that thread in question mentions some personal comments made on TT's FB page that appear to confirm some disagreements between certain parties. That's not true?

As to the ten year old transfer, I have plenty of BDs with such transfers and have been happy with their video presentations.

My understanding is that it's not so much it being a 10 year old transfer per se, as it being a 10 year old transfer made by Warner for DVD. BTW, TT have confirmed thus themselves on their FB page.

Similar transfers made by Warner for DVD from that era for other films were 1080i and their early HD DVD & Blu-ray Disc releases showed artefacts consistent with 1080i masters which it is being claimed are also visible on this release.

I've not seen this disc - I merely pass on to you that which I received.

Steve W

 

[EddieLarkin]

There is of course a noteworthy difference between a good 10 year old master and a bad 10 year old master. With the anomalies present on the Blu-ray of this film, I'd place it firmly in the latter camp.

With many of these debates, you often get two sides. One side typically takes issue with film or element based problems, such as colour accuracy, contrast, damage and lack of clean up, fading etc., whilst the other side is more concerned with "digital" problems, such as lack of definition or the presence of digital anomalies, such as edge halos, "jaggies" and compression artifacts. The former group tends to be made up of people more familiar with and knowledgeable about physical film, how it's used and processed, whilst the latter more informed about what a digital anomaly is, how they're caused and how to spot them.

Thus you get situations where one group might be happy that their new copy of Once Upon a Time in America shows hugely improved definition over the old disc, whilst the other group can't help but feel nauseous at the new colour grade. My point being, the different groups are bothered by different things, and so a disc like Heaven & Earth is going to have detractors and defenders, with the defenders feeling the complaints are exaggerated and unjustified, whilst the detractors accuse the defenders of being simply unable or unwilling to notice the problems. In other words, neither side is right, it's simply up to each individual to decide whether the disc is right for them.

 

[Michel_Hafner]

Of course. But there is no point in denying that there is a (technical) issue when it has been proven to exist. How much it bothers someone is a personal decision, the existence of the issue is not.

In other words, neither side is right, it's simply up to each individual to decide whether the disc is right for them.

 

[Konstantinos]

Of course. But there is no point in denying that there is a (technical) issue when it has been proven to exist. How much it bothers someone is a personal decision, the existence of the issue is not.

Very objective and impartial post!

 

[Paul Rossen]

Some observations/comments on a disc I have not viewed!

1. Good enough for TT to release is a statement in itself that doesn't make sense. Not at this date in the life of Blu-ray and the price being asked.
2. Numerous comments of viewers state that the disc has flaws. No ifs and or buts about it.
3. Director and WB approved doesn't relate to an outstanding release. Oliver Stone has a great relationship with WB and they seem to accommodate many of his requests.(How else to account for the numerous versions of Alexander).
4. Attacks on the reviewer for BR.com doesn't cut it if the disc does in fact have the flaws mentioned. Any reviewer can have second thoughts about a rating which is subjective anyway.

This is all too bad for I truly believe Heaven and Earth to be one of Stone's better efforts with an outstanding score and beautiful photography. I sold my DVD in anticipation of this disc and now don't know if I'll ever replace it...

 

[bruceames]

If this (jaggies) is along the same lines as the inital WB releases of The Fugitive and Enter the Dragon, then I can live with it. I never noticed them on those movies and never knew they existed until I read about them in some forum. Now that I'm "aware" of them beforehand, they are easier to spot, but I have to really look out for them and they are only in a few scenes. Besides, I don't know if I would prefer a remaster anyway. I think Enter the Dragon remaster looks worse. Now it has less detail.

Are we to expect that Warner remaster this in these tough "layoff" times just because Stone wants a smaller label to release it? I think WB is doing a big enough favor as it is (considering) and we should just be thankful it's coming out on Blu-ray at all. For those who are angry or disappointed in TT for releasing it, just don't buy it. It seems this a transfer that will look great, or bother you, totally depending on your eyesight and seating distance to display size ratio.

 

[Jari K]

TT released some older transfer and it's good-but-not-great. It happens. What's the problem? Reviewers all have freedom of speech. Let them speak, it's not that you've to agree with them.

 

[Robert Crawford]

TT released some older transfer and it's good-but-not-great. It happens. What's the problem? Reviewers all have freedom of speech. Let them speak, it's not that you've to agree with them.

+1, IMO, if what others have said is true about TT's responses on their FB page, I think they made it worse by responding in such a personal manner. Each of these studios/companies have released titles that probably could've been better in some way or another. It happens, as none of them are perfect.

 

[Keith Cobby]

If this was a blu-ray I wanted (which I don't) I would be satisfied that TT had released it. I bought Journey from them and will buy again if the new release is a reasonable upgrade. At this stage in the format I would be grateful for some of my most wanted films to be released as long as they were a significant upgrade to the DVD. We can wait and wait and wait and hope for a reissue that will never come.

 

[bruceames]

If this was a blu-ray I wanted (which I don't) I would be satisfied that TT had released it. I bought Journey from them and will buy again if the new release is a reasonable upgrade. At this stage in the format I would be grateful for some of my most wanted films to be released as long as they were a significant upgrade to the DVD. We can wait and wait and wait and hope for a reissue that will never come.

For someone who often upgrades from DVD, this is the most important thing to me. Some movies like King Kong (1933) get 5 stars for video but frankly I can barely notice the difference between it and the DVD. All the Bond movies the difference is HUGE, even though some titles get low PQ marks. I would rather watch a movie knowing it's a huge upgrade from the DVD rathering than knowing the reviewers give it high marks. Just as important to compare a movie against itself than to compare with others in the same era, IMO.

 

[haineshisway]

Good for you. But then you should realise that you simply don't have good enough vision or viewing conditions to see such issues. Practically ANY issue can be made to go away when sitting far enough away or deviating from 20/20 vision in the unwanted direction. There is no difference between HD and SD, for example, from a safe distance. That does not mean HD has the same detail as SD, does it? Dismissing people who see the issue (which is a fact and clearly demonstrated on stillls from the disc) is silly. Does not help get the issue fixed and does not explain anything but your inability to see the issue.

Oh, okay.

 

[ROclockCK]

If this (jaggies) is along the same lines as the inital WB releases of The Fugitive and Enter the Dragon, then I can live with it. I never noticed them on those movies and never knew they existed until I read about them in some forum. Now that I'm "aware" of them beforehand, they are easier to spot, but I have to really look out for them and they are only in a few scenes. Besides, I don't know if I would prefer a remaster anyway. I think Enter the Dragon remaster looks worse. Now it has less detail.

Are we to expect that Warner remaster this in these tough "layoff" times just because Stone wants a smaller label to release it? I think WB is doing a big enough favor as it is (considering) and we should just be thankful it's coming out on Blu-ray at all. For those who are angry or disappointed in TT for releasing it, just don't buy it. It seems this a transfer that will look great, or bother you, totally depending on your eyesight and seating distance to display size ratio.

...and unfortunately what's been getting lost in this dead-end fixation over the geometry of some static zoomed pixels, rather than the film itself in motion, was the absolutely gorgeous DTS-HD Master Audio on this disc. Ditto its generous 50GB dual-layer footprint. Ditto its AVC encoding with robust bitstream. What else could TT have done to squeeze every last ounce of quality out of that legacy WB HD master? By any reasonable standards, this was not shabby production at all.

But who'd ever know that from the toxic tone of some of these criticisms? For cripes sake, where's the balance?

 

[Paul Rossen]

...and unfortunately what's been getting lost in this dead-end fixation over the geometry of some static zoomed pixels, rather than the film itself in motion, was the absolutely gorgeous DTS-HD Master Audio on this disc. Ditto its generous 50GB dual-layer footprint. Ditto its AVC encoding with robust bitstream. What else could TT have done to squeeze every last ounce of quality out of that legacy WB HD master? By any reasonable standards, this was not shabby production at all.

But who'd ever know that from the toxic tone of some of these criticisms? For cripes sake, where's the balance?

That's what I've been waiting to hear. Something very positive about the release. Thanks

 

[haineshisway]

That's what I've been waiting to hear. Something very positive about the release. Thanks

Apparently you didn't read the long-winded screed that began this thread - it was all positive.

 

[Paul Rossen]

Apparently you didn't read the long-winded screed that began this thread - it was all positive.

Too many words...

 

[ROclockCK]

Too many words...

Ha! That's usually my style...

 

[Cine_Capsulas]

I thought only reviewers watched Blu-ray movies with their eyes virtually glued to the screen, as a means of thoroughly inspecting the image. You know, for technical, professional purposes.

Apparently, I was wrong.

Don't expect me to do it, because I will still want to use my healthy eyes in my old age and avoid crippling headaches.

 

[Richard Gallagher]

I have reason to believe that the esteemed Mr. Harris will be chiming in on this before long.