DVD Review HTF REVIEW: Stir of Echoes (New Special Edition) (1 Viewer)

[CraigF]

Paul: My SoE came in a box (with Scorsese Collection) so it wasn't shipping damage...only got that once from amazon, as you say too much in the cardboard wrapper and it was the snapper, of course, that took the beating that time.

The thing is, the way my SoE was shrinkwrapped with the misaligned/loose slipcover, it was about 3/4" taller than a normal keepcase. I presume the SW process crumpled the cover, don't know how these left the factory, obviously not right. Then again, it's Lions Gate, which is second on my $#!+list after AA. My slipcover looks as though it would fit over 1-1/2 keepcases, it's that loose.

 

[Paul_Stachniak]

^Well then I can only assume their all like that.

 

[CraigF]

Thanks Paul. I still haven't seen this (Can. version) in the local stores, so I had nothing else to compare with. It's a shame this disc doesn't seem to be getting a wide local retail distribution (so far).

 

[RyanAn]

My cousin got the pillow bit immediately...


This is one of the most underrated films ever... I love the movie and I will be picking this up eventually.

Ryan

viva los double dip!

 

[David Ruiz]

I can not tell you how disappointed I am with this new so-called "Special Edition."

It's actually far more compressed than the previous version. Here are some actual numbers for you guys to look at:

(Original Stir Of Echoes):

5.1 Dolby Track = 291 MB
Total amount of space, entire movie occupies (with DD 5.1 track) = 5,502 MB

(SE Stir Of Echoes):

5.1 Dolby Track = 382 MB
Total amount of space, entire movie occupies (with DD 5.1 track) = 4,024 MB

So, right away, we know that the movie is taking 1,478 MB *LESS* space than the previous version.

Let's not forget about the extra audio tracks:

DTS = 552 MB
Commentary = 141 MB
DD 5.1 Track = 382 MB
------------------------
Total amount of space that audio tracks occupy = 1,075 MB

All of this is of course eating into the video bitrate.

So not only is the new version *FAR* more compressed than the previous version, it's also got far more space eating into the video bitrate!

This is an outrage! I bought this new version thinking that I was going to be getting better video and audio, but all we get is better audio, while video is suffering MAJOR compression that the previous release did not suffer from.

Please tell me that I'm not the only one upset about this!

 

[Dave Mack]

Thanx Dave,

1 less dvd for me to buy.

 

[David Ruiz]

You're not supposed to be happy! I'm furious! I spent all this money only to get a worse product than I originally had!

 

[CraigF]

I can only speculate, not having the original disc...this is one of those cases where we really need DVDBeaver to do its thing.

But as discussed in other threads, I'll throw out a possibility: there are better compression algorithms these days, so a higher video bitrate does not necessarily guarantee a better picture.

Since the reviewer didn't notice an obvious PQ degradation, we could guess the source may have been processed better and more efficiently this time. It would be good to get some other opinions from those very familiar with the original disc though.

 

[David Ruiz]

I too, have not seen either disc on my HDTV yet. I own both, and only have seen the original disc on my tiny 27" TV. I didn't have a chance to re-watch the movie on my 65" Widescreen HDTV.

But even though I have not seen either version on my TV, I highly doubt that the new version is going to look any better than the previous version....why? Because the new version is 1.5 GB smaller. That's a *LOT* of space. There's gotta be some major compression errors on the new disc no matter what. There's no way that it wouldn't suffer from MAJOR compression artifacts.

What they could have done (to make it take less space) is filter the movie from any natural grain, (making it look blurry) but far easier to compress.

Then it would clearly explain why it's much smaller now...but again, it would look blurry.

One thing is for sure though...it's obviously not the same transfer. There is too much difference in the amount of space that each movie occupies on each disc.

I agree that DVDBeaver or better yet, Bjoern Roy, take a look at these two DVDs on his extremely high quality setup, and give us a thorough review.

I could always take a look at both discs myself, but I doubt I would notice any sort of difference on my tiny 65" Widescreen TV. Bjoern of course has an enormous CRT front projector that really reveals what DVDs *TRULY* look like.

How does DVDBeaver compare DVDs? What type of display device do they use in order to compare each title?

 

[CraigF]

I believe Bjoern and Gary share results, DVDBeaver has many contributors...unfortunately, DVDBeaver is not currently operating, what I meant by this is when we need it.

My screen is even smaller than yours, and besides, I can't sit close to very large screens (gives me a headache like a migraine), so I'd be useless for a detailed comparison even if I had both discs (I sometimes take discs to work and use the 20' screen after hours).

From his post it sounds like Robert Harris is going to be looking at this soon, and with his trained eye he should pick up the flaws, perhaps to be reported on Digital Bits. His post may also give a tiny clue as to what new processing may have resulted in the file size difference, perhaps a "better" retoration??

 

[David Ruiz]

Ok. Here it goes.

My equipment:

ISF Calibrated 65" Widescreen HDTV.
Radeon equipped HTPC upscalling all my DVDs to 1080i.
I sit exactly 8 feet away and have 20/20 vision.

I first put both versions onto my computer, so I could easily switch between the two versions.

When comparing, I only compared the last 30 minutes of each movie. What I mostly did was watch 1 minute of the original version, and then watch the same minute of the Special Edition. In some instances I would only watch 10 seconds of the original, and the same 10 seconds of the Special Edition, that way the images were fresh in my mind.

Both DVDs look pretty damn good. As I said before, I hadn't seen this particular movie on my Widescreen display. I didn't expect the movie to look this good.

The original release had a fair amount of grain. This grain never once bothered me. I absolutely love grain to death, and it makes me nervous when I *DON'T* see any. Luckily, it's almost always present.

The Special Edition does have a fair amount of grain as well - in exactly the same places as on the previous release.

Both releases look nearly identical at all times...except for a few instances. Read further:

What I looked at most, was the color RED. The reason I did this, is because the color red, is by far the hardest to compress. If there are any compression artifacts, you will most likely seen them in any red object. Unfortunately for us, there is a whole lot of red in this movie. During the last 30 minutes, an overweight man wears a red/maroon sweater. We also have very red fleshtones on Kevin Bacon's face when he's down in the basement digging. We have red all over the place. Even furniture that cast red shadows.

In the original release, whenever we see the overweight man wearing the red sweater, I noticed that the entire sweater is made up entirely of pure grain. It might sound awful, but it looks very nice (especially since I love the way grain looks).

Switching over immediately to the Special Edition, we see that the sweater is no longer made up of pure grain. It has now been replaced with very tiny compression blocks. These "blocks" are the ones that make up the entire sweater. Keep in mind that these blocks are extremely tiny on my TV (and would probably not be noticable at all on smaller displays).

On the original release, we see the red shadows cast by the wooden furniture in the room. These red shadows are also made up entirely of grain.

On the Special Edition, these red shadows that were once made up of grain are now replaced with extremely tiny compression blocks.

Other than RED objects seen throughout the movie, the transfers are identical. They have the same amount of grain, in the same exact places. They have the same amount of detail. They look exactly the same.

It's only in RED objects that one can notice a difference in the two DVDs. In the original release, these red objects are more often than not made up of grain, and in the Special Edition, these red objects lose their grain and appear to be blocky.

Both DVDs use the same exact amount of edge-enhancement.

Since I only watched the last 30 minutes of each movie very closely, I can only assume that the first hour of each DVD is very similar to what I noticed in these final scenes.

I'm going to have to say that the original release is in fact better than the new Special Edition. But this would only be noticed on high quality displays. For those of you who don't have revealing systems with the capability to upscale your DVDs, probably wouldn't notice any bit of difference between the two DVDs.

I did not compare the sound between the two releases at all. All I know is that the Dolby Track has a higher bitrate on the Special Edition than the previous release. Also, the Special Edition has a DTS track as well. Truth be told, I'm not very good at reviewing audio. I hardly ever notice any difference between DD and DTS. It is only when DVDs use an extremely different mix, that I am able to notice any difference at all.

 

[Chris Rein]

A great movie indeed. Loved every minute of it and the sound on this new disc is awesome. Very enveloping and never overdone.

Now, what I LOVED about the first release was the back, "16x9 Fullscreen" LOL! What in the hell is that? Maybe 16x9 1.85:1 ?

I didn't see any complaints on the video (110" projection via DVI). Maybe it was because I was sucked in by the movie and the sound!

Good god I love the red sequences. Gets me every time. The sound, the quickness of it. Some scenes had the hairs on my arm stand up...and I've seen this movie at least 5 times!

In my opinion, LIGHT YEARS better than Blair Witch Project (hated it with a passion) and better than The Sixth Sense. Totally agree with previous comments on SOE getting the shaft from the previous two movies. Oh well.

 

[CraigF]

David: Thanks for looking into it. Sounds like it's basically a decent picture still, though probably not worth getting the SE for those who are interested in just the film and have the previous disc.

 

[Rolando]

So any reason to keep the old release? anything not get ported over? AND has anyone else compared the PQ on these? Is it worth the upgrade or did the PQ take a hit?