WHV Press Release: Dial M For Murder (3D Blu-ray) and Strangers On A Train (Blu-ray) (1 Viewer)

[Ejanss]

What an appalling awful cover for Strangers on a Train.
Whoever came up with that could be fired.

Yeah, they should have something that more understandinglyi conjured up the suspenseful stylized Hitchcock tone, like the DVD cover:
http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51SRDD63BGL._SL500_AA300_.jpg

I'm amazed at the amount of people who actually hate the new SoaT cover over the previous "Punk-Rock Movie From the 80's" cover...
Yes, the new one's wrong in terms of accuracy, but it's not...like...WRONG-wrong, if you get my drift.

 

[Douglas R]

Yeah, they should have something that more understandinglyi conjured up the suspenseful stylized Hitchcock tone, like the DVD cover:
http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51SRDD63BGL._SL500_AA300_.jpg

I'm amazed at the amount of people who actually hate the new SoaT cover over the previous "Punk-Rock Movie From the 80's" cover...
Yes, the new one's wrong in terms of accuracy, but it's not...like...WRONG-wrong, if you get my drift.

But that DVD cover was the original 1951 poster artwork - nothing to do with the '80s.

 

[JohnMor]

Originally Posted by Ejanss /t/321724/whv-press-release-dial-m-for-murder-3d-blu-ray-and-strangers-on-a-train-blu-ray/120#post_3943319
Yeah, they should have something that more understandinglyi conjured up the suspenseful stylized Hitchcock tone, like the DVD cover:
http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51SRDD63BGL._SL500_AA300_.jpg
I'm amazed at the amount of people who actually hate the new SoaT cover over the previous "Punk-Rock Movie From the 80's" cover...
Yes, the new one's wrong in terms of accuracy, but it's not...like...WRONG-wrong, if you get my drift.

That was no 80's art... that was the original poster art. And, yeah, they SHOULD have done something more along these lines.

 

[Craig Beam]

That Strangers on a Train blu-ray cover is fucking hideous. I love the special edition DVD cover. Looks like I'll be making my own custom cover.
I really don't like the Dial M blu-ray cover either. It evokes Hitchcock's late period (Frenzy, etc) to me, nothing that would've come out of 1954. Oh well, custom job #2!

 

[Persianimmortal]

Well this is the title that finally has me truly interested in 3D!
By way of background, for the past year I've had a Panasonic GT30 3D capable TV, a BDT300 3D blu-ray player, all connected up with proper high speed HDMI cables. The 3D has been tested and confirmed as working at full HD resolution using the Avatar 3D blu-ray that came with my TV. However I've just never bothered to go out and buy the glasses, so up till now 3D has been largely irrelevant to me.
That is until I saw the announcement of Dial M for Murder in 3D. I really like this movie (indeed any film with Grace Kelly in it is a joy), but I've never seen it in 3D before. With my new Panasonic 3D glasses on the way, I'm now looking forward to experiencing the movie in a new light. Creature from the Black Lagoon 3D is also calling out to me.
I believe there are others out there like me, who've just not had the motivation to get on the 3D train despite already having, or being able to afford the upgrade to, 3D hardware. This will be a good wake-up call to the studios and TV manufacturers to get cracking on putting out more classic 3D movies if they want 3D to really prosper in the home environment. Modern CGI-laden 3D releases leave me cold, but the thought of a great classic movie with added immersion from 3D is so much more tempting!

 

[Todd J Moore]

I would like to offer a slight defense of the modern 3D movie and technology. While it is true that my primary interest is in the 50s films--and I will buy every one that gets released in 3D--the new ones aren't that bad. I had heard a rumor last year of DIAL M FOR MURDER and thought about getting a 3D TV then. But it was seeing HUGO and THE ADVENTURES OF TINTIN in the movies that pushed me over the edge. Both are treats in 3D as well as fantastic movies on their own. Ditto for UP which is coming this December. The Marvel superhero movies, despite being conversions, don't look that bad and again are really good movies. DOLPHIN TAIL has some excellent depth, good performances, and an interesting story. JOURNEY TO THE CENTER OF THE EARTH is goofy fun and THE POLAR EXPRESS has it's moments. I've also seen a few Imax films in 3D that were really good, including two African safari ones. I'm also looking forward to GHOSTS OF THE ABYSS, another extremely well done Imax film.
The best thing about the modern 3D technology and movies is that, unlike their predecessor the Fiedl Sequential system, the primary choices for viewing aren't porn and bootlegs. So don't short change yourself. If you have the technology, there's some really good stuff out there to see.
All that said, I am delighted that there are two classic 3D movies coming out on Blu Ray a week apart. May there be many more.

 

[Matt Hough]

Thanks for your post, Todd, and I agree with you completely. No one could want classic 3D films on Blu-ray more than I do, and yet I have been greatly enjoying many entertaining 3D experiences for the past year and a half with my 3D rig and the currently available movies. There is quality out there to be found now.

 

[Persianimmortal]

No one could want classic 3D films on Blu-ray more than I do, and yet I have been greatly enjoying many entertaining 3D experiences for the past year and a half with my 3D rig and the currently available movies. There is quality out there to be found now.

Well I'm happy to report that having finally experienced 3D at home on a superb setup watching Avatar, I'm convinced that it's worth it. Of course it helps that Avatar 3D is meant to be one of the best 3D titles, but I was still surprised at just how convincing the effect can look, the lack of crosstalk, the color accuracy and how well these 3rd gen Panasonic glasses work (and how light they are). I'm going to order at least a couple more 3D blu-rays shortly.
But I still maintain that it was only the promise of the upcoming 3D classics which really gave me a shove to put it all together. And for me it was a relatively short journey - I just needed the glasses. For those without the major hardware, I imagine all the usual justifications about 3D being a useless gimmick will continue. It's only when people are truly tempted by a great story in 3D that they'll get off their backsides and do something about it. So far I would contend that such 3D content is still relatively scarce.
I guess what I'm saying is that 3D on its own is certainly a welcome novelty, but the combination of 3D and a classic movie goes beyond that, and will actually help convert a lot of people who are sitting on the fence. Bring on Dial M for Murder 3D!

 

[Dick]

This is all promising, and I am tentatively planning to go 3-D when prices drop on current sets as the next year's models arrive. I am leaning toward passive 3-D as opposed to active, having read a slew of reviews and comparisons.

 

[Nelson Au]

I got an email from Amazon with new pre-orders to look for Including Dial M. It's $25, and The cover art shows it is 3D and 2D as it has 2 discs. So I am assuming only one blu ray set is available that has both 3 and 2D versions.
Strangers on a Train is considerably less at $15.00.
Regarding upgrading to 3D, last year I had no choice, my display died and when I went shopping for a new plasma, all the displays today are 3D. At the time, I didn't care to see 3D, but with the advent of this film, I will have to get an Oppo player now! I'm excited to try 3D, despite the 3D effect not working for me when I saw Promethius in the theater. I'm sure it will be a better experience with a home theater. And I also have the Panasonic plasma which is well rated.

 

[Persianimmortal]

This is all promising, and I am tentatively planning to go 3-D when prices drop on current sets as the next year's models arrive. I am leaning toward passive 3-D as opposed to active, having read a slew of reviews and comparisons.

From all that I've read and seen, the main issue with passive is a potentially visible interlace effect and (some say invisible) loss of resolution; the main issues with active are the more expensive glasses, potential loss of sync at times, and the way some people feel dizzy or annoyed by its 3D effect. Since the merits and drawbacks of each has a lot to do with individual eyesight, in-store demo is the best way to determine which suits you. Also in terms of active, plasma is generally superior to LCD in motion handling, so be sure to demo active on both LCD and plasma.

Regarding upgrading to 3D, last year I had no choice, my display died and when I went shopping for a new plasma, all the displays today are 3D. At the time, I didn't care to see 3D, but with the advent of this film, I will have to get an Oppo player now! I'm excited to try 3D, despite the 3D effect not working for me when I saw Promethius in the theater. I'm sure it will be a better experience with a home theater. And I also have the Panasonic plasma which is well rated.

Not all the latest plasmas are 3D capable (e.g. the Panasonic 2012 U series is 2D only), but all the decent ones are. Certainly helps get people into 3D, as it did me. However I still see some people struggling with false economy to find a 2D-only set, when the 3D-capable sets are better performers in both 2D and 3D. I suspect the bigger hurdle for some people has been getting a decent 3D blu-ray player. If you already have a working 2D blu-ray player it may be hard to justify dispensing with it just to get a 3D capable one, and of course even more confusion ensues when people think they have to buy ultra-expensive special "HDMI 1.4" cables and even a new AVR to make it all work. In reality a decent 3D blu-ray player with twin HDMI output combined with relatively cheap ($10) High Speed HDMI cables allows you to use your existing AVR for 3D at a reasonable cost, even less if twin HDMI is not necessary. I was lucky enough to get my BDT300 with twin HDMI outputs free with my TV as part of a generous Panasonic promotion, and hence jumped that hurdle easily.

I got an email from Amazon with new pre-orders to look for Including Dial M. It's $25, and The cover art shows it is 3D and 2D as it has 2 discs. So I am assuming only one blu ray set is available that has both 3 and 2D versions.

Yes this seems to be the case - the only 3D version currently available is a 2 blu-ray disc set with 2D and 3D on each disc respectively. There is another (region free) version to be found on Amazon UK here which may or may not be a single disc 3D. There's no detail provided though.

 

[Ronald Epstein]

Active shutter is the superior 3D technology. I prefer it over
passive as there is no loss of resolution.

However, as stated above, it does come with tradeoffs that
include more expensive, heavier glasses and loss of synch
on occasion.

Still, today, if I had my choice, I would stay with active synch
and a plasma display.

 

[Persianimmortal]

Still, today, if I had my choice, I would stay with active synch and a plasma display.  

That's my setup and my preference as well. The lack of passive plasmas certainly makes the choice easier in my opinion; for a plasma aficionado like me, active is the only viable option anyway.
I should note that the cost of the active glasses is also falling, especially if you shop around. Here in Australia the TY-EW3D3MU 3rd gen Panasonic active glasses are a ridiculous $140.00+ a pair. Certainly one more impediment to taking up 3d - that is until I found the same (genuine) glasses for $60.00 on eBay from Hong Kong, and they came brand new in the box and work perfectly. At 26 grams weight is also a non-issue.
Small price to pay to experience Grace Kelly in 3d

 

[RolandL]

That's my setup and my preference as well. The lack of passive plasmas certainly makes the choice easier in my opinion; for a plasma aficionado like me, active is the only viable option anyway.
I should note that the cost of the active glasses is also falling, especially if you shop around. Here in Australia the TY-EW3D3MU 3rd gen Panasonic active glasses are a ridiculous $140.00+ a pair. Certainly one more impediment to taking up 3d - that is until I found the same (genuine) glasses for $60.00 on eBay from Hong Kong, and they came brand new in the box and work perfectly. At 26 grams weight is also a non-issue.
Small price to pay to experience Grace Kelly in 3d

I bought mine when I working for an electronics store. With tax I paid less than $60 for three rechargeable Sony glasses.

 

[Dick]

Active shutter is the superior 3D technology.  I prefer it over
passive as there is no loss of resolution.
However, as stated above, it does come with tradeoffs that
include more expensive, heavier glasses and loss of synch
on occasion.
Still, today, if I had my choice, I would stay with active synch
and a plasma display.  

Ron -- I am frustrated in my decision-making process here, as I want a 3-D display in January, but have heard all kinds of conflicting opinions. There appears to be no concensus (in terms of 3-D quality) about whether active is better than passive, or about whether plasma is better than LCD or DLP. The local Best Buy is little help here -- the displays they have for their four 3-D monitors (2 active, 2 passive) do not work properly, and the personnel simply haven't been trained well enough in the technology to answer all my many questions. Plus, the stores are just about daylight bright, so one can get no good demo of color and contrast, and -- a decent black level, which is a major concern of mine, having lived with a Sony 42" LCD for almost four years with very poor black levels).
But there are certain people I trust, and most of them are on this forum. You have a plasma. May I inquire as to why you consider that the best choice over DLP? Mitsu has some nice very large-screen DLP sets right now at incredible low prices that are bundled with a player and glasses. I have always thought Mitsu was pretty reliable. Any opinion there?
Now that Circuit City and Tweeter are gone, there just isn't anyone here in Maine aside from the increasingly unreliable Best Buy who has displays on display that can allow me a reasonable comparison of systems. So, I have to go by reviews, and the ones outside of this forum are pretty shallow.
Anyway, thanks in advance for any tidbits you might offer...

 

[Nelson Au]

I Won't be much help in terms of 3D, but I have two plasma TV sets. The first from 2006 is a Pioneer 50" and I just replaced it last year with a Panasonic 65" VT30.
Pioneer made the best plasmas and are known for inky black levels. Something LCD cannot match. They are getting really close though. I went with a Panasonic last year because Pioneer no longer make plasmas and with a new set, I could go bigger and as a side benefit, get 3D.
The thing that I feel plasmas are best at are color accuracy once properly calibrated and a more life like rich image. LCD have a limited viewing angle and once off axis, the image degrades.
65" is very immersive too! Sharp bought the Pioneer branded Elite name recently and use it on their flagship LCD panel that I came very close to buying. The image is very nice and bright! But in the end, I prefer film like images, and plasma is the closet you can get. The advantage of LCD is a brighter image so daytime viewing is better, but I found once my plasma was calibrated and I calibrated it with setting I found on another website, it looks great in the bright light of day. But of course, you get the best image at night. The disadvantage to plasma is you have to be careful the first 200 hours and avoid static images and 4:3 material. At least mix it up with full screen stuff to ease the break in period. Panasonic has anti-image retention technology, but to be safe, I used the set at lower brightness levels the first 200 hours. Even after that I'm careful that I mix it up.
Now I plan to get a new player to see how the 3D looks on the Panasonic. It's been well regarded as the better 3D performers. Samsung plasmas get good reviews too. My plan is to get an Oppo player that can do 3D as I'm really curious to see how it works for me and on this set! I'm not a big fan of the recent trend of 3D films. But I'm not opposed to seeing how they look! I'm looking forward to trying it out!

 

[Ronald Epstein]

Dick,

I was actually comparing Plasma vs. LCD. In that regard
Plasma is superior, in my opinion. Better viewing angles,
blacks and refresh rates.

Plasma vs. DLP? DLP may be the better choice. It's kind
of a toss-up as far as I am concerned.

Great article here comparing both

My recommendations when it comes to 3D is to go active
shutter. That definitely provides a better HD experience than
passive. I believe the Mitsubishi displays have active shutter.

However, if weight of the glasses, recharging, and possible
occasional sync issues are a concern then go passive.

You can get a great deal on Mitsubishi DLP sets. Have seen
like an 80" for about $1300, if I remember correctly. The best
3D displays are made by Panasonic, in my opinion.

 

[Matt Hough]

The trade-off with DLPs is, of course, replacing the lamp. When I had a lamp-based JVC DLP, the lamps would burn out at the most inconvenient times (and watching a great deal of TV for reviewing and for fun, I had more frequent than most burn-outs). I always kept a back-up, and it was nice getting a "brand new" TV every time a lamp was replaced, but that got old. I replaced that with a Samsung DLP that used LCD lights instead of a lamp, and I loved that TV, its lighter black levels being its only weakness.

I have a plasma now and admit it's the best TV picture I've ever had in my home, very warm and rich color and wonderful 3D with the active glasses.

 

[JamesNelson]

The trade-off with DLPs is, of course, replacing the lamp. When I had a lamp-based JVC DLP, the lamps would burn out at the most inconvenient times (and watching a great deal of TV for reviewing and for fun, I had more frequent than most burn-outs). I always kept a back-up, and it was nice getting a "brand new" TV every time a lamp was replaced, but that got old. I replaced that with a Samsung DLP that used LCD lights instead of a lamp, and I loved that TV, its lighter black levels being its only weakness.
I have a plasma now and admit it's the best TV picture I've ever had in my home, very warm and rich color and wonderful 3D with the active glasses.

Assuming we're talking about RPTV DLPs (and not front projectors), the other trade-off in terms of 3-D is the effective 1/2 resolution you get. RPTV DLPs exploit "wobulation" in their 3-D implementation, and require a "checkerboard" input in which the pixel pattern for each frame alternates between the source left and right images. Older DLPs (like mine) require an external converter to turn frame-packed, side-by-side, etc. signals into checkerboard format. Newer models have the converter integrated in to the set.
How noticeable the resolution hit is in real-world viewing is of course debatable, but there is no getting around the fact that 1/2 of the source pixels are being discarded.
What you lose in resolution, however, you make up for in overall 3-D experience, as there is effectively ZERO ghosting. Any perceived crosstalk is introduced by the eyewear and not the display. In my personal experience, even the cheapest, crummiest active glasses perform remarkably well (in terms of crosstalk) on RPTV DLP.

 

[fxrh]

What you lose in resolution, however, you make up for in overall 3-D experience, as there is effectively ZERO ghosting. Any perceived crosstalk is introduced by the eyewear and not the display. In my personal experience, even the cheapest, crummiest active glasses perform remarkably well (in terms of crosstalk) on RPTV DLP.

I am in complete agreement. I've been incredibly happy with my Mitsubishi 73* set with respect to 3D and have managed to talk five households into picking up a Mitsubishi DLP. I have never had a problem with ghosting; I've noticed ghosting for a combined