Is it just me or is the we were soldiers transfer just very grainy....

Discussion in 'Archived Threads 2001-2004' started by todd stone, Aug 22, 2002.

  1. todd stone

    todd stone Screenwriter

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2000
    Messages:
    1,760
    Likes Received:
    0
    Probably did this on purpose to milk us for a better version with even more extra features..
     
  2. Jeff Kleist

    Jeff Kleist Executive Producer

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 1999
    Messages:
    11,267
    Likes Received:
    0
    Considering that Paramount has only done _1_ disc reissue, and that was to upgrade from a bare-bones to SE, I doubt it

    Probably just artistic grain
     
  3. Colin Jacobson

    Colin Jacobson Producer

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2000
    Messages:
    6,079
    Likes Received:
    619
     
  4. rutger_s

    rutger_s Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2000
    Messages:
    878
    Likes Received:
    0
    [angry filmmaker's voice]Its supposed to look like that[/angry filmmaker's voice]
    See also...
    Kung Pow: Enter The Fist - Film is supposed to look like a poor restoration of a '70s Hong Kong film.
    The Matrix - The color tints are normal.
    Saving Private Ryan - No, that funky ghosting was done on purpose.
    Payback - Its supposed to have dulled out colors.
    Fight Club - Yes, its that dark.
    [​IMG]
     
  5. Rich Romero

    Rich Romero Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2002
    Messages:
    731
    Likes Received:
    0
    I don't consider grain to be negative. In many cases, it makes the image appear sharper and more filmlike. Not only that, in the case of We Were Soldiers, it was the filmmaker's intention to have it be slightly grainy, I saw it in the theater, it's not just the transfer.
     
  6. DanR

    DanR Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 1998
    Messages:
    676
    Likes Received:
    0
     
  7. todd stone

    todd stone Screenwriter

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2000
    Messages:
    1,760
    Likes Received:
    0
    hmm I know what intended grain is, ie saving private ryan, but not when hes doing a speech etc. It looks like BAD TRANSFER grain is what I mean...
     
  8. Patrick McCart

    Patrick McCart Lead Actor

    Joined:
    May 16, 2001
    Messages:
    7,555
    Likes Received:
    186
    Location:
    Georgia (the state)
    Real Name:
    Patrick McCart
    Sorry, but it's not a defect of the film, nor the transfer. The film was purposely grained up (and digitally color timed) for a gritty look. When we screened We Were Soldiers at the theater I work at, it was very gritty.

    The DVD accurately shows the film the way it was made.
     
  9. Bruce Hedtke

    Bruce Hedtke Cinematographer

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 1999
    Messages:
    2,249
    Likes Received:
    0
    I wasn't bothered by the grain at all. It's becoming a common technique to use for "artistic" purposes. So common that it's awkward to NOT see grain. [​IMG] As for the other elements to the transfer, I thought it was fairly poor. Fine detail was lacking and alot of scenes had pixellation. Definitely could've been a whole lot better.
    Bruce
     
  10. Julian Lalor

    Julian Lalor Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 1999
    Messages:
    975
    Likes Received:
    0
     
  11. YANG

    YANG Second Unit

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 1999
    Messages:
    471
    Likes Received:
    2
    "The DVD accurately shows the film the way it was made."

    The grains that you see,appears in the housewives chat session only.Other than this scene,the grains are virtually unnoticeable,because of brighter lights during the jungle scene and the hanger scene.

    You think that the R1 version looks grainy,The R3 release shows more grain.

    I believe that the grains,are inherited from the original theatrical print.
     
  12. Jay Sylvester

    Jay Sylvester Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2002
    Messages:
    521
    Likes Received:
    0
    You'd think after the whole A.I. thing that people would know the difference between grain and artifacts.

    Sometimes, film looks grainy. Such is the nature of film. When that film is transferred to DVD, the DVD will have grain.

    If you didn't see the grain, then that would be a truly bad transfer.

    I think people have gotten used to the soft presentation offered by TV and early DVDs, and now see film grain as some type of flaw.
     
  13. Patrick McCart

    Patrick McCart Lead Actor

    Joined:
    May 16, 2001
    Messages:
    7,555
    Likes Received:
    186
    Location:
    Georgia (the state)
    Real Name:
    Patrick McCart
    Another thing to add...

    To see what bad grain looks like, check out Westworld. The movie should look pretty smooth, but has an overwhelming amount of grain at some times. This is mostly a fault of using just a regular theatrical print instead of going towards an archival print, or interpositive.
     
  14. Colin Jacobson

    Colin Jacobson Producer

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2000
    Messages:
    6,079
    Likes Received:
    619
     
  15. Julian Lalor

    Julian Lalor Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 1999
    Messages:
    975
    Likes Received:
    0
    Perhaps it was your statement "NO proclivity whatsoever" that led me to the conclusion you were saying Paramount never re-issued titles.
     
  16. Declan

    Declan Second Unit

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2002
    Messages:
    410
    Likes Received:
    0
    cant wait to get this one now when it comes out here in the UK on the 2nd September.

    Loved it at the flicks (calling the sound dynamic is an understatement).

    But yeah it was grainy at the cinema as well. I used to be the projectionist there and it was shown in studio 1............so it was on the best screen.

    So it definitley is a stylistic choice.

    But if the grain it that much part of the look of the film, you think that they would have put a disclaimer before the start like Three Kings.

    my 2c
     
  17. Mike Graham

    Mike Graham Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2001
    Messages:
    766
    Likes Received:
    0
    Just to add my 2 cents, but I remember there being a fair amount of grain in the theatrical presentation last spring, so much so that as I was watching I remember thinkning, "This is gonna cause some trouble on DVD..."

    However, it doesn't hurt the movie at all, but simply adds to it. Fabulous sound by the way.
     
  18. Colin Jacobson

    Colin Jacobson Producer

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2000
    Messages:
    6,079
    Likes Received:
    619
     
  19. Mike Graham

    Mike Graham Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2001
    Messages:
    766
    Likes Received:
    0
    This is a bit off topic, but when will you be updating your DVD site's Top 10, Colin, to reflect the summer's releases? I'm just curious to see if Wrath Of Khan:SE will make it onto "Best of" list this year. Keep up the good work [​IMG]
     
  20. YANG

    YANG Second Unit

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 1999
    Messages:
    471
    Likes Received:
    2
    Will PARAMOUNT ever re-release their back catalogue titles,it is very hard to determine.
    For WE WERE SOLDIERS case,there maybe a chance of re-release or maybe no...simply because that it is too "costly" for them.
    If PARAMOUNT really goes for re-release,their big time titles like BRAVEHEART or TITANIC will now be available in the R1 street as a S.E dual disc sets,just like R2 or R4.
     

Share This Page