What's new

PHE Press Release: Braveheart * Gladiator * Forrest Gump (Sapphire Series Blu-ray) (1 Viewer)

Michael Reuben

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Feb 12, 1998
Messages
21,763
Real Name
Michael Reuben
It's not an unusual reaction with a 5.1 mix that's front-anchored with relatively light use of the surrounds. In comparison, a 2.0 track decoded through ProLogic sends a lot more sound to the rear channels simply because of the "bleed" phenomenon. Switch to the discrete mix, and suddenly the surrounds go quiet in scenes where you're used to hearing something from them.

As for the other issues, I'm not even going there. ;)
 

Brandon Conway

captveg
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Sep 30, 2002
Messages
9,623
Location
North Hollywood, CA
Real Name
Brandon Conway
Wrong year. It was Gump that took 6 oscars while Shawshank went home empty handed. Braveheart beat out the following for Best Picture: Il Postino, Apollo 13, Babe, and Sense & Sensibility. Now I love Braveheart (one of my favorite films), so I'm a bit biased, but I think for almost everyone looking at the nominees that year it's easy to see how it won. (Full list of Oscar noms for films of 1995 (1996 awards) here: IMDb: Academy Awards, USA: 1996 )
 

Craig S

Premium
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Mar 4, 2000
Messages
5,884
Location
League City, Texas
Real Name
Craig Seanor
I'm a little surprised at the number of negative comments here. I think these are all solid commercial films, and I have enjoyed rewatching each over the years. I personally wouldn't have named any of them Best Picture (For me, it would have been Pulp Fiction over Gump, Apollo 13 over Braveheart, and Almost Famous over Gladiator, and yes I know Almost Famous wasn't nominated but it should have been), but I think in general they were all worthy of the accolades they received.

These look like quality SEs, and they should draw a lot of attention to the format this holiday season, along with other high-profile titles like the LotR trilogy. Blu NEEDS releases like these if the format is to continue to grow.
 

Ronald Epstein

Founder
Owner
Moderator
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jul 3, 1997
Messages
66,553
Real Name
Ronald Epstein

Whenever asked, I alway put Braveheart in the #1 position
as being my all-time favorite movie (also coming in behind on that list: Glory, 1776,
Dog Day Afternoon, Forrest Gump, Willy Wonka, The Professional, It’s a Mad Mad...World)

However, I haven't seen that film in at least 10 years. I wonder what
I will think of it when I watch it again in the late fall?
 

frankie108

Stunt Coordinator
Joined
Jul 31, 2008
Messages
82
Real Name
Frank P
I'm sure your technical explanation is quite correct. However, I never once felt that the sound field on the Laserdisc was compromised by 'inappropriate' sound effects emanating from the rear channels. Indeed, during the battle sequence and particularly the church choir scene, it was like you were in the middle of the scene.
In any event, I'm looking forward to the "Forrest Gump" release as well as the release of another Zemeckis favorite of mine, "Contact."
 

David_B_K

Advanced Member
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jun 13, 2006
Messages
2,589
Location
Houston, TX
Real Name
David

Do you mean Braveheart? Actually, "tortured main character" films had been Gibson's stock in trade for years before Braveheart. Prior to Braveheart, he had played "tortured" characters such as his suicidal Lethal Weapon character, Zefferelli's Hamlet and Fletcher Christian ("I am in HELL!!!") in The Bounty.

I almost skipped Braveheart in 1995 because I was so tired of the Gibson neurotic/intense/tortured thing. I'm glad I did see it because I still admire the film.

______________________________________

Saw Forrest Gump once. Found it pointless. Well acted, but I do not need to see it again.
 

Michael Reuben

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Feb 12, 1998
Messages
21,763
Real Name
Michael Reuben
Note that I did not use the terms "inappropriate", "compromised" or similar language. Nor would I, since Gump was also released to theaters in Dolby Surround (1994 being relatively early in the deployment of discrete digital systems).

I was simply trying to explain why your comparison of the LD PCM 2.0 track to the DVD's 5.1 track is apples-to-oranges. Don't overlook that I also suggested how you could recreate the LD's sound from the DVD.
 

Cees Alons

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jul 31, 1997
Messages
19,789
Real Name
Cees Alons
Agreed.
htf_images_smilies_smile.gif


But in fact, I was referring to characters physically being tortured. Heavily and shortly before their execution as well. (Like hanged, drawn and quartered. Or flogged.)


Cees
 

frankie108

Stunt Coordinator
Joined
Jul 31, 2008
Messages
82
Real Name
Frank P
Maybe you haven't watched the HD broadcast of "Forrest Gump" - it's impressive; much better than the DVD IMO. It's doubtful that any difference in PQ would be enough for me to triple dip this title, but the audio track ...yeah....maybe. Anyway, it's a rental for sure.
 

drn211

Auditioning
Joined
May 12, 2009
Messages
8
Real Name
Daniel Negin

Heck no! I'll take five hours over four any day of the week. Hopefully the stuff on the previous DVD edition of Braveheart will be included on the Blu-ray release which would put it around 5 hours too.
 

Jeff Ulmer

Senior HTF Member
Deceased Member
Joined
Aug 23, 1998
Messages
5,582
Yes, there was not nearly as much sword play in Sense & Sensibility, which is why critics were claymoring for Braveheart.
htf_images_smilies_smile.gif


Really looking forward to S & S on Blu sooner than later.
 

ajabrams

Second Unit
Joined
Mar 15, 2009
Messages
455
Location
NYC
Real Name
Alan Abrams
No offense to Ron Epstein or any of the other BRAVEHEART admirers but I really dislike the film -- primarily for its offensive homophobia.

I used to like Mel Gibson but this film and the anti-semitic content in PASSION OF THE CHRIST have really turned me off. Despite all his apologists, the man is a hateful bigot and I feel no need to support his work.

And quite frankly, I think BABE should have won best picture that year!!!
 

Brandon Conway

captveg
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Sep 30, 2002
Messages
9,623
Location
North Hollywood, CA
Real Name
Brandon Conway
I've never understood the homophobia claims.

Edward the Longhshanks despises his son for a multitude of reasons. As murderous and racist endorsers of rape go, he's pretty much painted as villainy incarnate. Certainly Gibson endorses none of his actions.

His son is weak but I do not feel Gibson is saying it is because he is gay. He's weak because he's grown up spoiled by royalty, and his sin is vanity.

His lover is actually somewhat respectable, as jerkish royalty types go. He's killed because he's a threat to the King's power structure.

However, I agree that Babe is a great film, too.
 

urbo73

Stunt Coordinator
Joined
May 12, 2009
Messages
126
Real Name
Ryan Campo
Casino, Dead Man Walking, and Leaving Las Vegas were all better films and more deserving of an Oscar than Braveheart IMO that year. That being said, Braveheart is entertaining to me, like Gladiator (which I personally find a LOT better). But Forrest Gump is on another level in terms of filmmaking and story/character development.
 

David_B_K

Advanced Member
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jun 13, 2006
Messages
2,589
Location
Houston, TX
Real Name
David

I agree that Babe was a fine film. Actually, in 1995, all of the nominated films were of a high caliber. Some fine films were not even nominated.

I cannot agree with any of your other comments, though you are free to regard anyone as a hateful bigot if you wish.

As to Edward II in Braveheart-it is well known that he was a homosexual in a time when that lifestyle was considered taboo. It would be absurd to have Edward I say "my son is homosexual, not that there's anything wrong with it". Edward II was openly homosexual in a time when such a lifestyle would have appeared odious to others. Just because something is acceptable now does not mean it was in medieval Europe. It is really absurd to expect as much. If you have ever read about how Edward II was murdered, you will see just how "homophobic" medieval England could be. It would do Edward II a disservice to show him as accepted for his lifestyle when one considers his particularly nasty fate.

As to the anti-semitic accusations against The Passion of the Christ-Gibson drew most of his script from the Bible. The dialog that was suppressed in the trial scene was a direct quote from the Gospel of John. Your comments should probably be directed to the apostle John instead of Gibson. There was time when "Life of Christ" movies were cranked out with regularity. Now, doing a film about Jesus is considered controversial. I guess times change. The Greatest Story Ever Told would probably be protested if it were released today.
 

ajabrams

Second Unit
Joined
Mar 15, 2009
Messages
455
Location
NYC
Real Name
Alan Abrams
My objections to BRAVEHEART and PASSION have less to do with historical accuracy than the manner in which Mr. Gibson chose to portray the "facts."
He uses stereotypical portrayals of Edward II and his lover, turning them into preening villanous peacocks when historical research actually portrays the prince as rather ordinary and likens him to "a ditchdigger." The murder of the his consort by being comically pushed out a window is pure fiction. And lest you think all this is innocent humor and has no effect on the audience, I vividly recall the reaction of a an audience member when i saw the film theatrically, who yelled out, "Yeah -- kill the faggots!! I'm sure Mr. Gibson would have smiled.

As for PASSION, may I quote a statement from "Concerned Christians" from the website of the International Council of Christians and Jews--"It encourages misunderstanding of the role of Jews and their leaders in Jerusalem at the time of Jesus' death; it includes gratuitous anti-Jewish protrayals...." And as for blaming the apostle John, Mr. Gibson chose to use this version of the story, it wasn't forced upon him.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Latest Articles

Forum statistics

Threads
356,810
Messages
5,123,551
Members
144,184
Latest member
H-508
Recent bookmarks
0
Top