Quake3World

I bought a player a couple weeks ago (Black Friday weekend). I've rented a couple movies since then, specifically The Dark Knight last night. Most of the movie is in 2.4:1 aspect ratio and of decent picture quality. Not zOMG-there's-6-times-the-pixels better, but definitely better than DVD. Certain scenes however are 16:9 (1.78:1) IMAX and they look out-fucking-standing. The difference between the two was quite drastic. Has anyone else watched a significant number of movies on blu-ray and only been moderately impressed with the picture quality? I would think that a major release like The Dark Knight would have the best production from beginning to end, not just on the IMAX sequences. I can understand if an older movie re-released on blu-ray might not look quite as good as the format can support, but a major title like this should be a jaw-dropping exhibition of the format's capabilities.

/rant

Yea, I've heard about this too. I'm just waiting till the studio's start using digital camera's that compare to the regular film cam's. Then we won't see anymore grain, and things should look fantastic. I'm pretty sure Jumper was filmed using Red digital cam's, I'll have to look into it.

It's not so much the age of the movie (2001 blu ray looks fantastic) but often how early a movie was put on blu ray... (many of the movies in the early wave of blu ray releases were underwhelming or just plain shit). Still a lot of growing pains with the format. Eastern Promises looks ace. T2 is dogshit souffle yet Blade Runner looks unbelievable. It just depends on how much care went into preparing and encoding the flick for the format.

depends on your tv

Hannibal wrote:It's not so much the age of the movie (2001 blu ray looks fantastic) but often how early a movie was put on blu ray... (many of the movies in the early wave of blu ray releases were underwhelming or just plain shit). Still a lot of growing pains with the format. Eastern Promises looks ace. T2 is dogshit souffle yet Blade Runner looks unbelievable. It just depends on how much care went into preparing and encoding the flick for the format.

This is very true. I remember watching Firefly on DVD and thinking that it looked like it was encoded to an avi format. Then I watch a DVD like T2, and everything looked very sharp.

depends on the transfer. i've yet to see a br that's 6x better. some are marginal at best and not worth re-buying.

+JuggerNaut+ wrote:depends on the transfer. i've yet to see a br that's 6x better. some are marginal at best and not worth re-buying.

Honestly, some movies look worse because the grain of the film that is exposed by the increased resolution can become very distracting.

i have always wondered about the grain and etc, there was movies and etc that i've seen that where just terrible for them, and it was getting on my Nerves..

The last TV we had ( Early Plasma ) it Was Grainy and pixelated, Now that we have this new Set, i was expecting all of those issues to be a thing of the past.

Its not something that a new piece of home equipment can fix. It's all about what the movie is filmed on, and how it is mastered.

I remember watching the movie Scanners on some HD channel and the grain from the film transfer was awful.

Wall-E looked good.

ign dvd reviews said that the blu-ray version of dark knight looked amazing. i dont know as i havent seen it myself and i dont have an eye for these things.

Deathshroud wrote:Its not something that a new piece of home equipment can fix. It's all about what the movie is filmed on, and how it is mastered.

I remember watching the movie Scanners on some HD channel and the grain from the film transfer was awful.

the TV was known for it, as will as the Pixelation... i figured it would basically be GONE ( with a slight amount still staying ) with the new LCD...

again, i didn't think of it as Film Transferring, and it makes sense now.

Chupacabra wrote:ign dvd reviews said that the blu-ray version of dark knight looked amazing. i dont know as i havent seen it myself and i dont have an eye for these things.

http://bluray.ign.com/articles/934/934585p1.html

I find it just very much depends on the movie. A film you expect to look realy good often ends up looking shit.

The best looking (non-animated) film I have seen so far was Zulu, the old Michael Caine film. Looked incredible, and that film is older than DRuM's testicles.

Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix looked ace on Blu-ray.
I also spent some time with The Presteige on DVD and HD DVD. I paused the film in exactly same and switched from the DVD to the HD DVD and the difference was quite impressive to be honest

I haven't seen dark night yet, it's coming today. it depends on a few things first of which is the settings. sounds stupid but make sure the player is set to 720/1080p as Samsung players default to SD res.
next is the TV settings, having a good TV not some cheap shit 1080p, which stands to reason and the last is the HD conversion. Some of which suck ass, like Oceans 13.

Having said that almost all of the HD/BR films I’ve seen have been ten times sharper then SD films and Batman Begins, for me, represented the shift in better quality.

I am getting Iron Man on Blu-ray for Christmas and I have high hopes for that conversion. I am gussing all the new Star Wars films should look amazing on Blu-ray as they were filmed with digital cameras.

Batman Begins is also making its way to me at Christmas so I will let you know what I think of that once I have watched it, as I know you care!

i've noticed that some movies have incredible details in HD/BR formats compared to SD while others look just as good with upconverting on a standard DVD as the the "HD" format. it all comes down to the production of each film. superbad looks the same in dvd and blu-ray to me. top gun, however, wow. that's a world of difference. you can see the man-stache on that blonde bimbo and the scene where they french kiss in the dark is just fucking nasty; it's like two slugs fighting for control of france.

Don Carlos wrote:I am getting Iron Man on Blu-ray for Christmas and I have high hopes for that conversion. I am gussing all the new Star Wars films should look amazing on Blu-ray as they were filmed with digital cameras.

Batman Begins is also making its way to me at Christmas so I will let you know what I think of that once I have watched it, as I know you care!

who cares what the new star wars films look like

Grandpa Stu wrote:i've noticed that some movies have incredible details in HD/BR formats compared to SD while others look just as good with upconverting on a standard DVD as the the "HD" format. it all comes down to the production of each film. superbad looks the same in dvd and blu-ray to me. top gun, however, wow. that's a world of difference. you can see the man-stache on that blonde bimbo and the scene where they french kiss in the dark is just fucking nasty; it's like two slugs fighting for control of france.

Chupacabra wrote:

Don Carlos wrote:I am getting Iron Man on Blu-ray for Christmas and I have high hopes for that conversion. I am gussing all the new Star Wars films should look amazing on Blu-ray as they were filmed with digital cameras.

Batman Begins is also making its way to me at Christmas so I will let you know what I think of that once I have watched it, as I know you care!

who cares what the new star wars films look like

Star Wars fans?

i thought most star wars fans hated the new ones

I thought Apocalypto and Pan's Labyrinth both looked absolutely outstanding on Blu Ray. Damn good movies too.

Edit: Cheers for the tip on Zulu Pauly, I'll look at picking that up.

+JuggerNaut+ wrote:depends on the transfer. i've yet to see a br that's 6x better. some are marginal at best and not worth re-buying.

I guess that's my gripe. Why does part of this movie have an amazing transfer and part only marginal? It is almost like they didn't film the "regular" parts of the movie in high-def. Then they switch to the IMAX sequences and BAM! the quality is just amazing.

I guess I'll just have to wait for x-mas to open BoB and Planet Earth. Those should look incredible.

edit: and Gyllenhaal is a troll compared to Katie Holmes, at least from the neck up.

w3rd on Maggie. Rubbish