criterionforum.org

Echo Bridge will release Steven Soderbergh's Full Frontal and Kevin Smith's Jersey Girl on Blu-Ray on May 5. Of course, Full Frontal will most likely be missing all the features from the DVD, and since about 80% of it looks ugly as hell, the HD upgrade should be minimal. And then are concerns about Jersey Girl getting cropped from its 2.35:1 OAR, which could result in Craig J. Clark's appearance being lost forever (although I couldn't even see it on the DVD, and yes, I'm a weirdo who watches movies to find cameos by people he knows online).

Ah, every time there's a crossover between the AV Club comments and here it weirds me out

So Full Frontal gets a Blu release while we continue to wait for King of the Hill, The Limey and Solaris, among others. What a strange world we live in.

Well, an Echo Bridge Blu release. Waiting, with the chance of a better company releasing the Blus is a better situation than that.

But still ... the point is that someone thought it was financially worthwhile, based on marketplace demand, to release a Blu of Full Frontal over those other titles. And the hell of it is, for all I know, they might actually be right.

No technical deficiencies in the disc itself can mask that essential bottom line. I'm just saying.

Though you have to consider that different companies have different bottom lines. If Mill Creek had the rights to King of the Hill also and was not releasing it then you may have a point, but a company that releases dozens of titles each month versus a company the barely releases anything over ten years old are two very different bottom lines. You are essentially comparing apples and oranges. It has nothing to do with the actual films.

Brian C wrote:So Full Frontal gets a Blu release while we continue to wait for King of the Hill, The Limey and Solaris, among others. What a strange world we live in.

I've been buying up a lot of Soderbergh DVDs cheap lately (received Full Frontal in the mail today, The Limey last week), so I'd expect his whole filmography to get the HD treatment any day now just to spoil everything. You're welcome, everybody.

knives wrote:Though you have to consider that different companies have different bottom lines. If Mill Creek had the rights to King of the Hill also and was not releasing it then you may have a point, but a company that releases dozens of titles each month versus a company the barely releases anything over ten years old are two very different bottom lines. You are essentially comparing apples and oranges. It has nothing to do with the actual films.

Well ... yes. Different companies have different release philosophies, of course. But it's not that I'm comparing apples to oranges, it's that a bunch of companies have different approaches on how to sell apples. And what we end up with is that a bunch of shiny, delicious apples get left off the market while a bunch of rotten apples are dumped cheap. And that doesn't really make much sense to me.

Or something.

Jeff Lieberman has self-released his goofy, fun 1988 sci-fi opus Remote Control on BD and DVD, limited to 1000 copies for each format. He commissioned a new 2k transfer, and the results look pretty good. Its a bit pricey at $35 shipped, but you do get a Lieberman commentary track (and still gallery), and each copy is numbered and signed. You can purchase it on Lieberman's website here.

Gary reports recently released blu-ray of The Nameless from Echo Bridge is dubbed into English. WTF?

In other Echo Bridge news, I was wondering why my copy of Heaven looked so weird til I looked closer and saw that the printing of the back cover was covered with bad JPG aliasing and pixelation (look at the smeary text if you hold it in your hands/order it). Yes, that's right, Echo Bridge used an undersized image file to create the packaging for their high definition release!

Thanks (Minkin) for pointing me toward the IGN Top 25 Worst Blu Rays. Many of these titles are ones I'm not interested in, but here are a few on the list I would consider. Unfortunately, I bought the Predator 'Ultimate Warrior Edition' (#6 on the list) within the last month. That's why these lists are useful! I haven't watched the disc yet, but now I will, because my curiosity is aroused.

I'm thankful that there's somewhere people can go to get this information, since Amazon's habit of lumping reviews together (BR, DVD, and VHS customer reviews of the same title all listed together) makes it very difficult to get good information.

Does anyone have a review site they go to? I like The Digital Bits, but their index of new reviews since their site change is... non-existent? Also, their search function returns fairly random results.

I don't "trust" any single review site. I like to browse multiple sites, especially sites that have screenshot comparisons, (DVDBeaver, Bluraydefinition, Blu-ray.com, Highdefdiscnews etc) I often check http://www.dvd-basen.dk" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; which collects multiple review site links.

I was looking at my Melancholia AE BD yesterday, and I have to say it is really a let down. I only mention because this is a disc that got very high marks from review sites. I have a tiny screen (37"), but the amount of visible compression, especially ringing, is really obvious. I have to assume this is because it is an all digital production, and the lack of grain makes it hard to hide these kind of flaws. If what I'm seeing is not an anomoly, I can really accept the benefit of 4k or whatever new technology might come along, where I previously didn't.

PicturePlatter wrote:Does anyone have a review site they go to? I like The Digital Bits, but their index of new reviews since their site change is... non-existent? Also, their search function returns fairly random results.

CinemaSquid collates various Blu-ray reviews from around the web and is a handy resource. By way of an example, here's the entry for the MoC edition of Touch of Evil.

Zot! wrote:I was looking at my Melancholia AE BD yesterday, and I have to say it is really a let down. I only mention because this is a disc that got very high marks from review sites. I have a tiny screen (37"), but the amount of visible compression, especially ringing, is really obvious. I have to assume this is because it is an all digital production, and the lack of grain makes it hard to hide these kind of flaws. If what I'm seeing is not an anomoly, I can really accept the benefit of 4k or whatever new technology might come along, where I previously didn't.

Actually, I believe it's easier to successfully compress an all digital production since you're not dealing with the subtle gradations (and grain) of film. Potentially, MELANCHOLIA may have been a problem since almost the entire film was shot with a hand-held camera; my understanding is that constant slight movements require more data than footage that is more-or-less stable. Then again, the two-and-a-half hour MARKETA LAZAROVÁ is comprised of a lot of hand-held shots and the Criterion Blu-ray looks practically flawless on a 65" screen.

Roger Ryan wrote:

Zot! wrote:

Then again, the two-and-a-half hour MARKETA LAZAROVÁ is comprised of a lot of hand-held shots and the Criterion Blu-ray looks practically flawless on a 65" screen.

For all those with blu-ray, what's the minimum screen size to see a substantial difference in blu vs. sdvd? I have a 46" LCD and can tell, but my wife and kids cannot. I know we all see the difference in 1080i and 1080p, but my family is not that attuned to that level of detail either.

I buy all current CC releases on blu-ray with the intention of buying a bigger TV in the future. I makes me so happy to hear you say a CC blu-ray looks this amazing even on a 65" screen. How would the DVD look in comparison, in terms of how close it would be to the original?

Also, this has been discussed ad naseum in the past (from memory) but does the grainy-ness of skin tone (in any CC) bother anyone? I'm getting very used to it, but I still "think" about it and want to get past it. Am I correct in assuming that the original films weren't presented this way?

Roger Ryan wrote:Actually, I believe it's easier to successfully compress an all digital production since you're not dealing with the subtle gradations (and grain) of film.

No, It's definately the fine gradiation in digital productions that causes the issue. I took a look at Antichrist as well, and found similar artifacting. Even light on dark animated logos like Sony Pictures suffer from it. I think the relatively high brightness of my old LCD acerbates the issue. It's not always noticible in motion, but the ringing around the planets is really really obvious. I'm pretty sure that the the fine texture of 70mm also leads to similar issues on the 2001 BD. When I compare, natural 35mm grain actually hides the issue, or leads to more amporphous gradiation. For me it does call into question the finality of BD as a format for reasons OTHER than sheer resolution. The fine object detail is near perfect, it rather falls apart on these sheer surfaces.

cpetrizzi wrote: I know we all see the difference in 1080i and 1080p?

Not me. Typically it is interpolated and impossible to spot.

cpetrizzi wrote: Also, this has been discussed ad naseum in the past (from memory) but does the grainy-ness of skin tone (in any CC) bother anyone? I'm getting very used to it, but I still "think" about it and want to get past it. Am I correct in assuming that the original films weren't presented this way?

I don't know what you mean by this. If you see grain, yes, it was on the film.

Wait till you experience 3D. It is even more.

Well, never reading this thread again!

Your loss. I'm looking forward to AnamorphicWidescreen's breathless comparison between the relative merits of Blu-ray and HD-DVD.

I have a crazy friend who says that Blu-ray can't possibly have six times the resolution of DVD. Is he crazy?

No, swo17, just ignorant. You see, your crazy friend never heard of high definition. Just ask this scientician!

Roger Ryan wrote:

cpetrizzi wrote: I know we all see the difference in 1080i and 1080p?

Not me. Typically it is interpolated and impossible to spot.

For example, look at a movie streamed from cable that's in 1080i, then switch to the blu-ray of it in 1080p. I think you'd see a difference, right?