Blu-ray Review The Blob Blu-ray Review (1 Viewer)

[ahollis]

I can assure you that DVD Beaver's screen caps often suggest that the DVD is better than the BRD. This has been going on for a long, long time. I recommend that you cross DVD Beaver off your list of reliable sources of advice about picture quality.

And another reason I don't trust screen caps.

 

The problem is the way DVDBeaver tries to compare DVD and Blu images by having each image in its native resolution. By showing the DVD image smaller, it hides the differences but when displayed on your TV/projector, both images will be the same size regardless of the source. When I first looked at them I didn't see any significant difference with the Blu only being slightly better. So to make a fair comparison (within the limits of JPG compression) I copied both images into Photoshop and scaled the DVD to 1920x1080 to match the Blu. There is a significant jump in quality because the flaws and resolution limitation of the DVD become very apparent but The Blob Blu-ray is no reference image. I have never understood comparison websites not showing two images at the same size/resolution that will be viewed at the same size/resolution.

I agree 100% with your comments.

 

[RolandL]

Caps-a-holic does it correctly.

 

[ahollis]

Caps-a-holic does it correctly.

I don't see THE BLOB listed yet?

 

[RolandL]

I don't see THE BLOB listed yet?

I meant they do DVD to Blu-ray comparisons correctly. They do not have the large volume of titles DVDBEAVER has though.

 

[ahollis]

I meant they do DVD to Blu-ray comparisons correctly. They do not have the large volume of titles DVDBEAVER has though.

Sorry, I miss-understood. Thanks.

 

[MichaelEl]

What annoys me is that reviewers almost never say "stick with the DVD" in cases where it's clear that the Blu-Ray offers little or no improvement over the DVD. The statement this makes is that a Blu-Ray is always superior to a DVD, which is just patently false. There are many Blu-Rays - especially catalog titles - that aren't much sharper than a DVD due to the quality of the source (dupey film elements or older HD transfers) and/or have serious image problems (DNR, black crush, bad color). My opinion is that it's more of a disservice to the Blu-Ray format to encourage people to upgrade a good quality DVD to a Blu-Ray that is bound to disappoint than it is to tell people not to buy certain Blu-Rays.

 

[TravisR]

The statement this makes is that a Blu-Ray is always superior to a DVD, which is just patently false.

I see people make this kind of statement somewhat frequently and I generally challenge it by asking for an example. I have yet to get ONE example of a DVD being better than the Blu-ray*. Even if there was one extraordinarily bad Blu-ray you could point to, it's literally a fraction of a percent of all of the Blu-rays made. None of that is to say that all Blu-rays are good or that they're all big upgrades from the DVD but it's very accurate to say that the Blu-ray is nearly always better than the DVD. * Notorious titles like the original releases of Patton and Gangs Of New York are lousy Blu-rays but even they still look better than the DVDs.

 

[Derrick King]

Anchor Bay's 2nd EVIL DEAD 2 DVD was better than their EVIL DEAD 2 Blu-ray.

 

[TravisR]

Anchor Bay's 2nd EVIL DEAD 2 DVD was better than their EVIL DEAD 2 Blu-ray.

:tu: You've named the one example that I'm aware of (and even then, it was kind of a toss up which one was 'better' to my eyes). So that's at least one out of how many thousands of titles available? I still feel quite confident in saying that Blu-rays are nearly always better than the DVD.

 

[MichaelEl]

I see people make this kind of statement somewhat frequently and I generally challenge it by asking for an example. I have yet to get ONE example of a DVD being better than the Blu-ray*. Even if there was one extraordinarily bad Blu-ray you could point to, it's literally a fraction of a percent of all of the Blu-rays made. None of that is to say that all Blu-rays are good or that they're all big upgrades from the DVD but it's very accurate to say that the Blu-ray is nearly always better than the DVD. * Notorious titles like the original releases of Patton and Gangs Of New York are lousy Blu-rays but even they still look better than the DVDs.

What you're saying might be true if resolution were the only measure of image quality. The fact is, however, that color and contrast are equally, if not more, important than resolution, and I can name any number of Blu-Rays that have - I would argue - poor color and/or contrast in comparison to a previous DVD release of the same title. For example, PINOCCHIO and several other Disney Blu-Rays have a color palette that is radically altered from previous DVD releases. While Disney says these newer, lighter color schemes - which tend to have an overall blue or green tint - are a direct transfer of the actual animation cels, many people argue they aren't representative of the way these films looked in a theater. No doubt these Blu-Rays are much sharper than the equivalent DVDs, but are they really worth watching if the color is all wrong? (I'm not even going to attempt to get into the HORROR OF DRACULA controversy here.) Now, with respect to contrast, there any of number of Warner Blu-Rays that are clearly too dark ; e.g., NORTH BY NORTHWEST, THE WILD BUNCH, COOL HAND LUKE, JEREMIAH JOHNSON, WESTWORLD, etc. Again, there's no question these Blu-Rays resolve some details better than the DVD, but they suffer from black crush and aren't all that pleasant to watch. It seems likely that Warner will release a better Blu-Ray of some of these titles in the future, just as Fox did with Patton. Finally, I could also list a number of Blu-Rays that look o.k., but simply aren't worth the upgrade for someone who already owns a prior DVD release. For example, the Twilight Time Blu-Ray of JOURNEY TO THE CENTER OF THE EARTH looks acceptable, but underwhelming. It would've been a fine $15 purchase from Amazon; it was a ripoff at $35. The contrast was very light, and the improvement in detail in comparison to the DVD was marginal. Only a few long shots here and there offered the kind of WOW! factor that one would expect of a Blu-Ray. If I had reviewed this title for HTF or some other website, I would've advised people to stick with the DVD, given the pricetag. Of course most reviewers point out these kinds of shortcomings, but they almost never recommend against a purchase. They usually say something like "better than the DVD at least" or "fans should enjoy it." While I'm sure they have an incentive not to be too harsh on the products they're reviewing, I don't see why they can't just be honest and say "not really an upgrade over the DVD."

 

[TravisR]

What you're saying might be true if resolution were the only measure of image quality.

But resolution is enough of a factor that it will virtually always result in something that looks better than a DVD.

The fact is, however, that color and contrast are equally, if not more, important than resolution, and I can name any number of Blu-Rays that have - I would argue - poor color and/or contrast in comparison to a previous DVD release of the same title. For example, PINOCCHIO and several other Disney Blu-Rays have a color palette that is radically altered from previous DVD releases. While Disney says these newer, lighter color schemes - which tend to have an overall blue or green tint - are a direct transfer of the actual animation cels, many people argue they aren't representative of the way these films looked in a theater. No doubt these Blu-Rays are much sharper than the equivalent DVDs, but are they really worth watching if the color is all wrong? (I'm not even going to attempt to get into the HORROR OF DRACULA controversy here.) Now, with respect to contrast, there any of number of Warner Blu-Rays that are clearly too dark ; e.g., NORTH BY NORTHWEST, THE WILD BUNCH, COOL HAND LUKE, JEREMIAH JOHNSON, WESTWORLD, etc. Again, there's no question these Blu-Rays resolve some details better than the DVD, but they suffer from black crush and aren't all that pleasant to watch. It seems likely that Warner will release a better Blu-Ray of some of these titles in the future, just as Fox did with Patton. Finally, I could also list a number of Blu-Rays that look o.k., but simply aren't worth the upgrade for someone who already owns a prior DVD release. For example, the Twilight Time Blu-Ray of JOURNEY TO THE CENTER OF THE EARTH looks acceptable, but underwhelming. It would've been a fine $15 purchase from Amazon; it was a ripoff at $35. The contrast was very light, and the improvement in detail in comparison to the DVD was marginal. Only a few long shots here and there offered the kind of WOW! factor that one would expect of a Blu-Ray. If I had reviewed this title for HTF or some other website, I would've advised people to stick with the DVD, given the pricetag.

All of your examples- while maybe not a huge upgrade or even if they have flaws- still look better than their DVD counterparts when you consider all the factors. I just watched The Terminator Blu-ray last night and while the disc looks fantastic, the added sound effects are awful. The DVD has, by far, the preferable sound mix but when all things are considered, the Blu-ray still trumps the DVD simply because of the positives of the video.

 

[Bob Cashill]

"It seems likely that Warner will release a better Blu-Ray of some of these titles in the future..." I wouldn't hold my breath; WESTWORLD isn't even released until Tuesday. "WOW! factor" isn't high on my list for repurchasing favorites on Blu. There may not be that much on 50+ year movies. THE BLOB may be one of those. Ultimately it's up to you as the viewer to decide if it's worth it to rebuy, not the reviewer.

 

[Johnny Angell]

But resolution is enough of a factor that it will virtually always result in something that looks better than a DVD. All of your examples- while maybe not a huge upgrade or even if they have flaws- still look better than their DVD counterparts when you consider all the factors. I just watched The Terminator Blu-ray last night and while the disc looks fantastic, the added sound effects are awful. The DVD has, by far, the preferable sound mix but when all things are considered, the Blu-ray still trumps the DVD simply because of the positives of the video.

I think the new transfer is better too. However I give this disc an F for its menu authoring or lack thereof. At least on my Oppo 93, the movie auto plays and when the movie ends, it auto plays again. Apparently it will play in an endless loop. The only menu I could activate was the pop-up menu. Hiss...Boo. I'm too lazy to check, did the previous blu have a commentary? This one doesn't. At least I didn't find it.

 

[Bob Cashill]

No TERMINATOR (84) disc has had a commentary track.

 

[TravisR]

However I give this disc an F for its menu authoring or lack thereof. At least on my Oppo 93, the movie auto plays and when the movie ends, it auto plays again. Apparently it will play in an endless loop. The only menu I could activate was the pop-up menu. Hiss...Boo.

Yeah, I can't imagine why but that is apparently the norm for MGM discs now.

 

[Derrick King]

:tu: You've named the one example that I'm aware of (and even then, it was kind of a toss up which one was 'better' to my eyes). So that's at least one out of how many thousands of titles available? I still feel quite confident in saying that Blu-rays are nearly always better than the DVD.

Fortunately, Lionsgate's EVIL DEAD 2 Blu-ray ends any debate about if one should upgrade from their Anchor Bay EVIL DEAD 2 DVD. But you are right, I can't think of any other case in which a Blu-ray failed to offer an upgrade to the DVD. This is not to say that said upgrade is necessarily worth it, or that the Blu-ray can't have other issues (different color timing, edited version of the film, missing dialogue, music or sound fx, etc) that make it not worth upgrading.

 

[ahollis]

Fortunately, Lionsgate's EVIL DEAD 2 Blu-ray ends any debate about if one should upgrade from their Anchor Bay EVIL DEAD 2 DVD. But you are right, I can't think of any other case in which a Blu-ray failed to offer an upgrade to the DVD. This is not to say that said upgrade is necessarily worth it, or that the Blu-ray can't have other issues (different color timing, edited version of the film, missing dialogue, music or sound fx, etc) that make it not worth upgrading.

And also if the purchaser has the love for the film to upgrade. A lot is in the mind of the title lover.

 

[RolandL]

Caps-a-holic has screen shot comparisons of the Blu-ray and DVD. Definitely an improvement