Blu-Ray Best Of The Best - for discussing releases only

[Bydo]

Good question. I guess they'd assume that was a "classic" and allow it to slip. Although the likes of The Iron Giant isn't a very cartoon-y film (there's no eyes jumping out of heads and the like), so I'd have thought people more used to live action wouldn't have a hard time watching it.

Lyris, that's a sensible, rational point you've made there, however, you didn't account for my mothers way of thinking. I once asked if she enjoyed 'Pirates of the Caribbean' after having lent it to her, and she said, "it' was a bit too piratey for me"! Presumably a little less yo-ho-hoing and a lot less parrots may have helped?

By-the-way, has your Disney contact come back from holiday yet? (in reference to the PoTC UK Blu-ray replacement program).

[Lyris]

I'm expecting a reply on that soon

"Too piratey" she says! Some people I know have the opinion that people are just attracted to "safe" things they've seen before...

[dc-arena]

Does anyone know what the region coding deal is with Pixar BD movies? I have a US PS3 and would like to get both Cars and Ratatouille. I looked on the back of a UK version of Cars and it said it was region A,B,C - great, thats good news. However, I looked on the back of a friends UK version of Ratatouille and it said B only.

So have Pixar/Disney suddenly clamped down on coding, or is a lie/mistake etc on the back of the box?

Many thanks

[RLench]

Old films like Cars are region-free; new films like Ratatouille are locked. It's so much easier when studios have a 100% definite viewpoint on region-locking - Warner never do it, and Fox always do it. Disney have to ruin that by changing their mind with every release

[dc-arena]

Cheers mate

[Bydo]

I'm expecting a reply on that soon

Don't suppose you could ask him if Disney are planning a 30th anniversary DVD/Blu-ray of 'The Black Hole' next year - could you?

[Number45]

Holy ****! 30 years? *feels old*

Love that film. Especially Bob.

[Bydo]

Holy ****! 30 years? *feels old*

Love that film. Especially Bob.

That's because we're getting old Number45!

Just hope they do a cleaned up wire removal version as old Bob and Vincent look really shoddy suspended from strings!

[Lyris]

Watched Gone Baby Gone tonight. Video transfer's really good.

The film though is Garbage Baby, Garbage. It soon descends into Ben Affleck's annoying sounding brother swaggering around picking fights and talking in an annoyingly hard to understand voice. The scenes with Morgan Freeman (I can't believe they managed to get him on board) are the only ones that I didn't feel like lampooning. Yikes.

[TonyDA]

It's pretty bad, isn't it? Casey Affleck really got on my nerves throughout, with that stumbling drawl of his. Surprised by the stellar reviews it's had - but then I wasn't keen on Mystic River either, which is also based on a Dennis Lehane novel.

[Strider]

Hmmm I'm reviewing this for HD Review, was quite looking forward to it

Glad to hear the transfers solid. That's something I guess.

[andy572]

Just hope they do a cleaned up wire removal version as old Bob and Vincent look really shoddy suspended from strings!

Before I continue, Bydo, this isn't aimed at you. You've merely prompted me to ask a question that I've considered posing for a long time. As it's a tricky subject in which the answers aren't easily found (it's down to taste, after all), I figured it could make for an interesting discussion. I wasn't sure it warranted a place of its own, so I hope that it's okay within the thread!

Doesn't anyone want to look back and see the progression of techniques and special effects or the quirks and qualities of various film stock in their movies? I'm sometimes a little lost when I see the result of an edit or 'cleaned-up' transfer, as they can be good; but I also like the look of film through different periods, whether that be differences in colour, grain, the soft 'n' glowing look apparent in some films of the late Sixties through to the early Eighties or, er, strings. There's a double-irony in that I'm not a fan of the digital noise that is a praised 'feature' of certain films and television series of recent years. Oh, the second part of the irony being that these films appear to receive less criticism about *sigh* grain. Hmm, I'm getting on in years - perhaps people of this century really do have that Photoshop-processed look!

Regarding occasional indecision about edited effects, perhaps it sometimes feels okay to them having the appearance of our memories (optimistic though they may have been!)? I'm sure that quite a few of us have said "I didn't remember it looking that bad" at some point in our lives! The Vaseline lens of the Landspeeder shots in Star Wars would be an example for me - an example that though I know it well, I really didn't (and don't!) see it like that in my mind's eye and one that seems nicely tidied in the new print (even if it can also seem too clean). Thankfully, despite the possible suggestion of this text, this stuff is largely peripheral for me. It's the content that I am interested in.

So, in conclusion, as I believe those young 'uns would say...

Standard Definition for the win!

Or...

Do most of you want - and expect - clean, 'perfect' prints from HD discs? Is a sharp, stable image that maintains the qualities of its source acceptable or should releases bow to modern tastes and production techniques? Is 'noise' off-putting and a deciding factor in enjoyment of the film? Whether for the special effects or entire scenes, is editing the film going too far? If it's not, I'd like to have the original version among any 'extras' discs (in a transfer that hasn't been processed to demonstrate how much worse it is than the revised edition, please!).

Back to watching the film...

[Lyris]

Yes Andy, like you, you can probably imagine that, well, I just want a true version of the film. That's it.

[PrayforMojo]

Finally got round to watching Paul Verhoeven's Zwartboek
(aka Black Book) last night.

Wow, this film is seriously entertaining. I was expecting something bleak and depressing but it's really just a great big daft WW II adventure film. It reminded me of good old fashioned romps like Where Eagles Dare or Kelly's Heroes, except Clint Eastwood

->Open Spoiler<-

never had to dye his pubes or endure having a barrel of poo poured over him.

Btw, anyone know if No Country for Old Men is region free?

[Bydo]

I know where you're coming from there Andy, but I personally believe that a film should be 'lovingly restored'.

A good example being the recent 'Blade Runner - Final Cut', where they cleaned everything up and removed wires and 'fixed' continuity errors like Zoras face.

A bad example (quite obviously) is the original Star Wars trilogy where they cleaned it up and fixed errors (good), but at the same time added loads of other stuff that sticks out like a sore thumb! (I'll not get started on the whole Greedo thing).

Got to be honest about 'strings' specifically. They get rid of them now (imagine The Matrix with the wires left in, it would be like an episode of the Thunderbirds!), so I'm sure if they had the technology then they would have removed them then also.

Bottom line - I expect cleaned up restored stuff when I throw my hard earned down for a Blu-ray.

But, this is just, like, my opinion man.