Orson Welles's The Stranger which is better the MGM DVD or the Film Chest Blu-ray

Reviews seem to indicate that the Blu-ray isn't the best sourced from a 35mm print and uses DNR excessively. Which version do you guys think is the best?
 

mikeyhitchfan

Supporting Actor
Joined
Jan 6, 2012
Messages
530
Location
Costa Mesa CA
Real Name
Mike
Rob Kilbride said:
Reviews seem to indicate that the Blu-ray isn't the best sourced from a 35mm print and uses DNR excessively. Which version do you guys think is the best?
http://www.dvdbeaver.com/film/DVDCompare2/stranger5.htm
Personally, I prefer the blu-ray. It's a bit soft, yes, but you get used to it. Unless Criterion or someone does a better job with a better print this is not that bad for now. The price is good, too. I also have Citizen Kane, Macbeth and the region B Touch of Evil and The Trial, and they all look better then this one, but it's Welles in HD.
 

Robin9

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2006
Messages
5,628
Real Name
Robin
I haven't seen the Blu-ray but I do have the MGM DVD. It's pretty good and holds up well when projected onto a big screen.
 

Thanks for the input everyone. I swore I'd never buy a DVD while a Blu-ray was available but the quality seems close enough where DVD Beaver prefers the MGM DVD over the Blu-ray. I got the DVD for $3 at Big Lots but haven't opened it yet. $12 shipped isn't a lot for a Blu-ray but $9 difference is a lot to pay for something that is either worse or not much of an improvement. Also, did MGM have better sources than a 35mm print?
 

David_B_K

Advanced Member
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jun 13, 2006
Messages
2,068
Location
Houston, TX
Real Name
David
I held onto the MGM DVD as well. I was looking forward to the BD, as I'd seen The Stranger when it was shown on one of the VOOM channels several years ago (back when there were VOOM channels). I recall the HD version on VOOM looking pretty good, much better than the BD. Maybe HD TV version was just an upconvert of the MGM DVD?
 

Robert Crawford

Crawdaddy
Moderator
Patron
Joined
Dec 9, 1998
Messages
49,823
Location
Michigan
Real Name
Robert
Originally Posted by Rob Kilbride /t/323996/orson-welless-the-stranger-which-is-better-the-mgm-dvd-or-the-film-chest-blu-ray#post_3979889
Thanks for the input everyone. I swore I'd never buy a DVD while a Blu-ray was available but the quality seems close enough where DVD Beaver prefers the MGM DVD over the Blu-ray. I got the DVD for $3 at Big Lots but haven't opened it yet. $12 shipped isn't a lot for a Blu-ray but $9 difference is a lot to pay for something that is either worse or not much of an improvement. Also, did MGM have better sources than a 35mm print?
Good choice, the same issue came up with other titles like The Strange Love of Martha Ivers.





Crawdaddy
 

Any other thoughts before I open the MGM disk? It seems like the DVD probably is the way to go. Again does anyone know if MGM had access to negatives or anything better than 35mm prints?
 

Robert Crawford

Crawdaddy
Moderator
Patron
Joined
Dec 9, 1998
Messages
49,823
Location
Michigan
Real Name
Robert
Originally Posted by Rob Kilbride /t/323996/orson-welless-the-stranger-which-is-better-the-mgm-dvd-or-the-film-chest-blu-ray#post_3980023
Any other thoughts before I open the MGM disk? It seems like the DVD probably is the way to go. Again does anyone know if MGM had access to negatives or anything better than 35mm prints?
It's the best video presentation of this film I've seen and I bought it back in 2007, when it was a lot more than $3. It was much improved over the Roan release from 1999.







Crawdaddy
 

It's official, I opened it. Thanks for all the help guys. Knowing my luck, a Criterion will probably be forthcoming.:)
 

Forum Sponsors

Forum statistics

Threads
345,196
Messages
4,733,641
Members
141,404
Latest member
l3randon39