Your thoughts on Kino-Lorber Blu-rays (1 Viewer)

[Bryan^H]

I continue to be shocked by those who rely on screen caps as to the quality of a blu ray transfer. The only accurate way to determine the quality of a blu ray's transfer is the old fashioned way ..... watch the disc. Call me arrogant but unless I see it with my own eyes I take everyone else's opinion with a grain of salt. There have been too many times when I've heard what a gorgeous transfer ABC is only to watch it and go "Huh? It looks no better than my DVD!". And vice versa, I've heard how awful and bungled a blu ray transfer is and after watching it wondering what "they" were talking about, it looks nice.

I don't know about that. I follow that site, and 99% of the time the direct screen captures they post are spot on with how the color timing is displayed. I don't agree with the reviews many times, but the screen caps are certainly a good way to gauge the color timing, or artificial looking DNR.
There are a few instances where I bought a movie on BD hoping it wouldn't turn out the way the screen caps presented it, and then when it ends up looking exactly like the caps provided I curse myself for throwing $30 down the drain.

Color timing is a make or break deal with me concerning movies. If it looks off to me, it is garbage. Game over. I'm thankful that site exists to inform me of what I'm getting into. Now there are other sites that post screen caps that are wildly off, and I have never trusted them, and never will, as they are spreading misinformation.

 

[OliverK]

I continue to be shocked by those who rely on screen caps as to the quality of a blu ray transfer. The only accurate way to determine the quality of a blu ray's transfer is the old fashioned way ..... watch the disc. Call me arrogant but unless I see it with my own eyes I take everyone else's opinion with a grain of salt. There have been too many times when I've heard what a gorgeous transfer ABC is only to watch it and go "Huh? It looks no better than my DVD!". And vice versa, I've heard how awful and bungled a blu ray transfer is and after watching it wondering what "they" were talking about, it looks nice.

You have to do what works for you and I have had cases, too where movies where praised and turned out to have little more than DVD resolution but one can easily see that in screencaps. Resolution increases or a lack thereof, is quite easy to see.

I have watched a large number of Blu-rays by now and that helps a lot with putting screencaps in perspective for me. As I have never seen caps like the ones for Foxfire, from two different sites, and afterwards liked the transfer this is good enough for me after all these years, the same goes for reviews that I trust. If that wasn't the case I would have to buy every Patton, The Longest Day, Spartacus etc. and then demand my money back which is ridiculous especially given the fact that I import many of my purchases.

What irks me even more that by purchasing these discs I would support work that I deem grossly incompentent especially in cases where people go out of their way to make movies look worse than they would look without the excessive manipulation and cleanup. I have bought my number of stinkers (for me) by the way and The King and I, the UK version of Zulu or the Spartacus HD-DVD looked every bit as bad as I would have expected them to look by the screencaps, sometimes even more so in the case of the first two as certain effects look worse (for me) in motion.

 

[Thomas T]

I don't know about that. I follow that site, and 99% of the time the direct screen captures they post are spot on with how the color timing is displayed. I don't agree with the reviews many times, but the screen caps are certainly a good way to gauge the color timing, or artificial looking DNR. There are a few instances where I bought a movie on BD hoping it wouldn't turn out the way the screen caps presented it, and then when it ends up looking exactly like the caps provided I curse myself for throwing $30 down the drain. Color timing is a make or break deal with me concerning movies. If it looks off to me, it is garbage. Game over. I'm thankful that site exists to inform me of what I'm getting into. Now there are other sites that post screen caps that are wildly off, and I have never trusted them, and never will, as they are spreading misinformation.

You have to do what works for you and I have had cases, too where movies where praised and turned out to have little more than DVD resolution but one can easily see that in screencaps. Resolution increases or a lack thereof, is quite easy to see.

I have watched a large number of Blu-rays by now and that helps a lot with putting screencaps in perspective for me. As I have never seen caps like the ones for Foxfire, from two different sites, and afterwards liked the transfer this is good enough for me after all these years, the same goes for reviews that I trust. If that wasn't the case I would have to buy every Patton, The Longest Day, Spartacus etc. and then demand my money back which is ridiculous especially given the fact that I import many of my purchases.

What irks me even more that by purchasing these discs I would support work that I deem grossly incompetent especially in cases where people go out of their way to make movies look worse than they would look without the excessive manipulation and cleanup. I have bought my number of stinkers (for me) by the way and The King and I, the UK version of Zulu or the Spartacus HD-DVD looked every bit as bad as I would have expected them to look by the screencaps, sometimes even more so in the case of the first two as certain effects look worse (for me) in motion.

Bryan and Oliver, well, I'm glad "that" site has some fans as usually it gets dumped on by the group here. Movies are short hand for motion pictures, emphasis on motion. That is how they are meant to be seen. A screen grab/screen cap is a still, not a movie and I've seen more than my share of the still/cap/grab looking less pleasing than they look in the motion picture being watched. And similarly, I've seen mediocre public domain copies suddenly looking much better in a screen grab/still/cap than they do in motion. If screencaps work for you, more power to you. Personally, I think Foxfire looks very pleasing in motion. How it looks in a screencap, I will leave for everyone else to debate. Since I watch movies, not screencaps, it's not relevant to me. When I see screencaps posted of something like The King And I which don't remotely look like the blu ray of The King And I that I've just watched, do you honestly expect me to take screengrabs seriously?

 

[OliverK]

It was my intention to thank Bryan^H for mentioning Crossfire, not to derail this thread, sorry for that. I could write more regarding screencaps but I do not think it is necessary to convince anybody to use them or explain how they should be used to even make valid statements about their usability in this thread.
Maybe some other day in a different thread that is actually dedicated to screencaps and not taken over by another discussion about them

 

[Bryan^H]

Movies are short hand for motion pictures, emphasis on motion. That is how they are meant to be seen. A screen grab/screen cap is a still, not a movie and I've seen more than my share of the still/cap/grab looking less pleasing than they look in the motion picture being watched.

I couldn't agree more. That is why I use the caps for a representation of the color timing. Something that does not change with motion.

 

[AnthonyClarke]

I find DVDBeaver a terrifically useful site for getting the first impression and comparison of transfers as a guide to whether to upgrade or not ..or whether to look to buy a Region A or Region B release.
Of course it's not a definitive site. But it will be a sad day when such a site created with such obvious love and dedication disappears.

 

[Kino Lorber Insider]

Lost Highway

We reached out to Mr. Lynch via email to oversee and color grade a new 4K transfer (from the original camera negative) and get his approval on the dozen or so extras we had planned to include. Once we knew he was not interested in working with us, we had no choice, but to go ahead with the current Universal master and the few extras we had already produced and acquired. To our surprise, the master in question was a very good one, so we were happy to release it with some extras. We found out later that the extras and packaging also had to be approved by him (not the norm) and we sent email after email without one response. We delayed the release by a month, hoping we could at least get him to approve the trailer, the essay and our packaging, at this point we knew the interview and commentary were not possible, but after a few more weeks, we dropped the essay, the trailer and changed our front art to the previously approved DVD art. The BD only includes the film on a dual-layered BD50 disc, maxing out the feature at 30mbps with 5.1 surround and 2.0 lossless audio. We were planning to take the high road and not play the blame game, but after his tweet this weekend, we felt like we had to respond.

We’re still huge David Lynch fans and are proud to release one of his masterpieces on Blu-ray.

 

[skylark68]

Sorry about Mr. Lynch's non-responsiveness and then subsequent tweet. That's too bad. I'll still buy the blu-ray as the original US release DVD was extremely poor.

 

[Ruz-El]

I wont be purchasing.

 

[OliverK]

Lost Highway

We reached out to Mr. Lynch via email to oversee and color grade a new 4K transfer (from the original camera negative) and get his approval on the dozen or so extras we had planned to include. Once we knew he was not interested in working with us, we had no choice, but to go ahead with the current Universal master and the few extras we had already produced and acquired. To our surprise, the master in question was a very good one, so we were happy to release it with some extras. We found out later that the extras and packaging also had to be approved by him (not the norm) and we sent email after email without one response. We delayed the release by a month, hoping we could at least get him to approve the trailer, the essay and our packaging, at this point we knew the interview and commentary were not possible, but after a few more weeks, we dropped the essay, the trailer and changed our front art to the previously approved DVD art. The BD only includes the film on a dual-layered BD50 disc, maxing out the feature at 30mbps with 5.1 surround and 2.0 lossless audio. We were planning to take the high road and not play the blame game, but after his tweet this weekend, we felt like we had to respond.

We’re still huge David Lynch fans and are proud to release one of his masterpieces on Blu-ray.

View attachment 59942

Thank you for telling your side of the story. It it is rather puzzling that David Lynch would make a tweet now instead of working with you on this release when you reached out to him. It does not seem to make any sense but then it may be a fitting side story to a release of Lost Highway that has not been known to make sense to everybody who watched it either

Again, thanks for sharing and I hope that you will be able to produce the disc that you had originally intended at a later point.

 

[Detour (1945)]

Yeah, I'm out, too.

 

[Josh Steinberg]

The BD only includes the film on a dual-layered BD50 disc, maxing out the feature at 30mbps with 5.1 surround and 2.0 lossless audio.

Given the lack of a quality presentation available in the U.S., I will gladly take the above as an upgrade over what I currently have. The UK Blu-ray is a standard definition PAL-upscale with the speedup, and the digital streaming version available domestically has poor audio. A new disc, even a bare bones disc, is still a big upgrade over what's currently out there for U.S. customers.

 

[TheSteig]

I got it and Im happy. Extras arent critical for me. Plus at least now the words "Lost Highway" aren't upside down like they were on the import

 

[JohnMor]

Dear KL Insider, it’s come out in the reviews of Sweet Charity that while it looks and sounds spectacular, it is missing about 7 minutes of music: the Entr’acte that plays between the Intermission and the start of Act 2, and the Exit Music after the closing credits. They both appear on the Universal Laser Disc and VHS editions, and the Entr’Acte was on the Universal DVD, although that dropped the Exit Music. Without them, it really ceases to be the Roadshow version and becomes essentially the General Release version. Were these left off by accident perhaps? Is it possible this can be rectified? Being advertised as the Roadshow version was very exciting news and it would be terrific to really get that, as great as the rest of the transfer is.

Entr’acte:


Exit Music:


Thank you.

 

[dagover]

I'm done with Kino. I have a bunch of Kino dvd silents I wanted to upgrade to Blu. I ordered the Lang silent Blu set last spring and 1 of the 12 discs wouldn't play in my 2 blu players. I called and they were very pleasant and said another set would be sent out with instructions to mail the old set back. After a month with no response, I sent a message via the site asking the status and never heard back. i got the message. Fool me once, shame on me. Fool me twice, shame on you. Never again.

 

[Dan_Shane]

Fool me twice, shame on you. Never again.

Backwards.

Or maybe not.

 

[Mike Frezon]

Peg and I watched Sunset in the West last night (starring Roy Rogers and Trigger--the Smartest Horse in the Movies!).

Could someone explain to me why there was such inconsistency in the quality of the transfer from scene to scene?

There are times when the image is crystal clear and has incredibly fine detail and the very next scene (actually, sometimes the very next shot in the same scene) can be really blurry and dull. And then, just as quickly, after another edit, the image looked great.

This was rather constant throughout the film. But, to be honest, most of the film looked really great

I still highly recommend the disc and film for those interested in the genre.

 

[AnthonyClarke]

I've never seen 'Song of Norway', which has just been announced by Kino Lorber.
But I have thoroughly enjoyed reading the reviews posted for the movie on IMDB ... they're pretty well all of one mind, but my favourite is this one, posted by '3matrix':
"Adjectives fail this film. "Dreadful" isn't enough. "Awful" seems mild. "Stupifyingly bad" can't convey the experience of it, either. If you are familiar with the poet Helen Steiner Rice, imagine one of her poems set to film and you will begin to dimly grasp how bad, how truly bad, how amazingly bad this motion picture is. Imagine a trailer park filled with lobotomized people sitting in lawn chairs watching a version of "The Sound of Music" made on the cheap especially for them. Imagine the film being projected on a bedsheet attached with clothes pins to a wash line. Imagine the wind blowing. Imagine no one paying attention. Then imagine you are there and you are shackled to a stake in the ground so that you cannot escape the evening's entertainment unless you chew off your own foot. If you can imagine all this, you can imagine the witch's brew of butchered classical music, litter-free travelogue sterility, and lifeless robotic acting that was captured for eternity on one unlucky batch of film stock from the Kodak factory and slapped with the label, "Song of Norway." It is truly the worst film ever made. The only advantage of viewing it is that from that day forth, ANYTHING you see at the movies will look passable by comparison. And I do mean ANYTHING."

I must look up Helen Steiner Rice ........

 

[Johnny Angell]

I've never seen 'Song of Norway', which has just been announced by Kino Lorber.
But I have thoroughly enjoyed reading the reviews posted for the movie on IMDB ... they're pretty well all of one mind, but my favourite is this one, posted by '3matrix':
"Adjectives fail this film. "Dreadful" isn't enough. "Awful" seems mild. "Stupifyingly bad" can't convey the experience of it, either. If you are familiar with the poet Helen Steiner Rice, imagine one of her poems set to film and you will begin to dimly grasp how bad, how truly bad, how amazingly bad this motion picture is. Imagine a trailer park filled with lobotomized people sitting in lawn chairs watching a version of "The Sound of Music" made on the cheap especially for them. Imagine the film being projected on a bedsheet attached with clothes pins to a wash line. Imagine the wind blowing. Imagine no one paying attention. Then imagine you are there and you are shackled to a stake in the ground so that you cannot escape the evening's entertainment unless you chew off your own foot. If you can imagine all this, you can imagine the witch's brew of butchered classical music, litter-free travelogue sterility, and lifeless robotic acting that was captured for eternity on one unlucky batch of film stock from the Kodak factory and slapped with the label, "Song of Norway." It is truly the worst film ever made. The only advantage of viewing it is that from that day forth, ANYTHING you see at the movies will look passable by comparison. And I do mean ANYTHING."

I must look up Helen Steiner Rice ........

That was entertaining. I never new film stock could be unlucky.

 

[Camps]

My wish-list from the just-announced deal in which Kino gets another (yet-to-be-disclosed) 200 Universal titles: