criterionforum.org

I just got the new Blu-Ray reissue of GoodFellas, mastered from the 4k restoration. It got a glowing review from Robert A. Harris, so I had high expectations.

I watched the old Blu-Ray disc many times - it was the one title my old roommates watched more than anything else, and I was usually around when they did. I gave that disc to a relative months ago, and I just watched this new reissue on the same LCD HDTV that I had when I watched the other one so many times. I have to say, going by memory, this new transfer looks darker (especially in the blacks) and the color are a bit washed out. And the impression isn't just a comparison to memory, having tested a few other Blu-Rays before getting to this one, this is how it looks in general - dark (especially black in the shadows) and the color a bit drained. I'm not sure what to make of it as I've never even seen this in the theater, let alone projected from a good 35mm print.

Any other thoughts? The detail and grain are excellent (I never noticed that the footage of the teenage Henry Hill used grainier film stock - with all the detail in every scene rendered better, the difference between these shots and the others is all the more noticeable). But I'm a little unsure about the timing. (And yes, Scorsese "supervised" it, but as seen in many other threads, having that supervision is far from a reliable…)

It does look quite dark.

It looks like a hair short of crushed blacks, and the overall balance is dark (even the mid-tones) even though Harris does say the black levels are appropriate.

hearthesilence wrote:I just got the new Blu-Ray reissue of GoodFellas, mastered from the 4k restoration. It got a glowing review from Robert A. Harris, so I had high expectations.

I watched the old Blu-Ray disc many times - it was the one title my old roommates watched more than anything else, and I was usually around when they did. I gave that disc to a relative months ago, and I just watched this new reissue on the same LCD HDTV that I had when I watched the other one so many times. I have to say, going by memory, this new transfer looks darker (especially in the blacks) and the color are a bit washed out. And the impression isn't just a comparison to memory, having tested a few other Blu-Rays before getting to this one, this is how it looks in general - dark (especially black in the shadows) and the color a bit drained. I'm not sure what to make of it as I've never even seen this in the theater, let alone projected from a good 35mm print.

Any other thoughts? The detail and grain are excellent (I never noticed that the footage of the teenage Henry Hill used grainier film stock - with all the detail in every scene rendered better, the difference between these shots and the others is all the more noticeable). But I'm a little unsure about the timing. (And yes, Scorsese "supervised" it, but as seen in many other threads, having that supervision is far from a reliable…)

Generally speaking, Scorsese is not as enthusiastic about revisionism as some of his contemporaries (Lucas, Cameron), and is committed to film preservation. Apparently when offered the chance to make a minor change to remove a wire or something in one restoration, he declined, insisting that the film be presented as it originally was. The only previous versions of the movie I've seen are TV airings and the old DVD, so without having seen a 35mm print, they're my only frame of reference. It does seem to look significantly different, however as with all of these things, it comes down to the preference of the viewer. It's screwy to use the DVD as reference, admittedly, but unlike other cases where the changes are pretty clear (the teal fetish, for instance), this difference, while significant, appears to be up for considerable debate.

hearthesilence wrote:I just got the new Blu-Ray reissue of GoodFellas, mastered from the 4k restoration. It got a glowing review from Robert A. Harris, so I had high expectations.

I watched the old Blu-Ray disc many times - it was the one title my old roommates watched more than anything else, and I was usually around when they did. I gave that disc to a relative months ago, and I just watched this new reissue on the same LCD HDTV that I had when I watched the other one so many times. I have to say, going by memory, this new transfer looks darker (especially in the blacks) and the color are a bit washed out. And the impression isn't just a comparison to memory, having tested a few other Blu-Rays before getting to this one, this is how it looks in general - dark (especially black in the shadows) and the color a bit drained. I'm not sure what to make of it as I've never even seen this in the theater, let alone projected from a good 35mm print.

Any other thoughts? The detail and grain are excellent (I never noticed that the footage of the teenage Henry Hill used grainier film stock - with all the detail in every scene rendered better, the difference between these shots and the others is all the more noticeable). But I'm a little unsure about the timing. (And yes, Scorsese "supervised" it, but as seen in many other threads, having that supervision is far from a reliable…)

I saw the film a couple of times on 35mm when it came out, and I don't recall the blacks being this deep based on the Bluray.com screenshots. In fact I remember the blacks being a little light in some shots. That said, Scorsese knows how he wants his own film to look, and my memory could well be faulty. As hanshotfirst1138 points out, he's not prone to revisionism, though I wouldn't even call slight adjustments to the color timing revisionism. Rather, it could just be awareness of the differences between two formats - 35mm vs. digital. I would need to see this new Blu-ray in full before making up my mind.

Those Blu-Ray.com shots are actually spot on in terms of what's on the BD. I don't think Scorsese is into revisionism, but there's plenty of reasons it may have been timed too dark with his knowing but without an attempt at revisionism. Maybe he was going by memory and not comparing it to a reliable print, or maybe he was comparing to a print but one that for whatever reason wasn't the best or most accurate representation of the film. Impossible to say though.

Haven't we also seen examples where the disc doesn't match the restoration? Think about the Lady With Shanghai blu ray debacles...

Or maybe this is how Goodfellas is actually supposed to look... At any rate, I'm tempted to buy it since it's so cheap, and I could compare it at home to the original Blu-ray, which I own but have barely watched.

Does there seem to be any logic to when Warner switches a title over from the "book" packaging to regular Blu-ray packaging? I keep waiting for this to happen with some Warner titles that I want to upgrade to Blu-ray (A Star Is Born in particular) because I really despise the book packaging. I seem to remember they switched North by Northwest from a book to a regular case fairly quickly back in the early 2010s.

Strange Brew coming March 1st!

That's completely washed out !

If I've learned anything on this forum about bringing films to blu ray, that shot of Eugene and Isabel by the tree really looks like it's just straight from a print, without the necessary contrast adjusting that doing so would require. Sound plausible?

Drucker wrote:If I've learned anything on this forum about bringing films to blu ray, that shot of Eugene and Isabel by the tree really looks like it's just straight from a print, without the necessary contrast adjusting that doing so would require. Sound plausible?

Probably from a lo-con or a fine grain than a "print", per se.

The Roots mini-series coming on June 7

True Crime and City Heat May 3rd.

Eastwood seems to continually sell well for WB. Personally, I'm waiting for a White Hunter, Black Heart BD release.

I could've sworn True Crime was one of the titles in one of the Eastwood boxes, but turns out I was thinking of Blood Work. So, so many Eastwood movies!

The Bridges of Madison County still not out. God, that one is sappy as hell, and if any other people were in the leads it wouldn't have been as good. But it is.

Good news: been out on Blu-Ray for a couple years now!

Of course! I completely blanked on that one.

I'm not really a fan of it, but in its defense there are some beautifully directed sequences, the best being Eastwood and Streep's final scene "together" at that intersection.

I got pretty bad food poisoning once while watching it. At the time, I recall blaming the film.

Capitalizing on the Revenant, no doubt, Man in the Wilderness is coming in May to Blu

Chisum and McQ in June