Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Blu-ray and UHD' started by Richard Gallagher, Jun 30, 2008.
Great to read that this release is very good, my disc is on the way to me and I should be watching it this week.
Need to buy this straightaway. Off to Amazon.
Need to get this straightaway. Off to Amazon baby.
Sounds great! This is one of my fave Eastwood flicks and I can't wait to get it in my hands today.
I've put this in my Netflix queue, as I have never seen it.
One question though, is Rene Russo supposed to look like a deranged psychopath on the cover:
yeah, that's a pretty damn crappy photoshop cover
Also, what's up with the hollowness in Clint's eyes? It looks like he's had a run in with the 'ole alien virus from The X-Files...
Somehow I've managed to avoid this all these years, looks like I'm throwing it in the Netflix queue based on the recommendation.
Mine is in route from Amazon. Glad to hear the DVD is well done!
I love the artwork for the UK release:
Agreed, the U.K. cover is much better!
And what Kubrick film did they get that shot of Rene Russo from?
Coverart isn't a biggie with me, but I have to agree about the U.K. cover being better than the Region A. By the way, the U.K. coverart is the same as the 1997 SD DVD Region 1 release while this BR coverart is the same as the 2001 SD DVD Region 1 release.
Yeah, that was the original DVD cover and it's miles better than the crappy image they used on the SE DVD and now the Blu-Ray.
Thanks Richard for your thoughts about the BD of "In the Line of Fire".
Please don't get me wrong -no personal insult- but I completely disagree with your review as concerns PQ:
It is a VERY ordinary transfer. The BD obviously derives from a dated HD master with fake sharpness created by a more than healthy amount of edge enhancement. The picture appears to be heavily grain-reduced and filtered, although not as pervertedly digitally processed as the FOX stinkers "Patton" and "The Longest Day".
Not a disaster, but no recommendation for purists and people who like the film-like look.
In addition to that, I noticed for the first time Sony using the paranoid BD-plus "non-feature" with minutes of loading time on my Sony S1.
Something tells me that almost each BR release and review is going to be debated with disagreements about the PQ. Personally, I noticed the picture not having a lot of fine film grain, but it didn't affect my enjoyment of the disc. We have to strive for the best presentation on BR, but I have to wonder if purists will ever be really happy with most of these presentations?
Right, personally I will never ever be happy with THESE kinds of presentations...
But there were examples of the "perfect" high definition transfer in the early days of HD DVD and Blu-ray:
"Bullitt", "The Getaway", "Blazing Saddles", "That's Entertainment Box Set", "The Chronicles of Riddick", "The Searchers", "Forbidden Planet", "Serenity", "The Last Samurai".....
But these are "used-to-bees". The majority of transfers that we get right now are pure digitally manipulated shit. (pardon my language)
The incapable product managers of the major studios are going to kill the format Blu-ray for the serious film lovers and cineasts with their excessive grain-elimination,wax-figures presentations.
I think you're being a little melodramatic with your "used to bees" comment, but I understand your point.
And that's the one I'll be getting.
The UK version of the film has been cut ever since the theatrical release, but Sony have apparently put the full version on the UK BD. Sweeeeeet.
No offense taken! I did mention the lack of grain, but I had no other version (not even the LD) to compare it with, so it was not apparent to me whether any significant digital processing had been done. Usually with older films I have an earlier version to compare it with, but not in this case.