reservoir dogs tin region 4...

romerojpg · Post by **romerojpg** » 01 May 2006, 19:35

You lot have made me want to watch the film again

its worth it thats for sure 8) not sure if I want to suffer my Region 1 eiditon mind you so may have to invest in a region 2 or 4 edition.

bradavon · Post by **bradavon** » 02 May 2006, 00:32

Surely I'm not the only one who can see those R4 caps look just as bad as the R1. They're as dark.

The UK R2 SE isn't quite as sharp as the R4 which I suspect is because of the single layer factor but otherwise it's a joy. For those who're picky like you Romero your best bet is to pick up the UK R2 1 Disc original DVD you already own the extras. Res. Dogs works fine in Stereo (as it was recorded anyway).

romerojpg wrote:If you cannot see the new transfer is far too light and blacks are grey they your eye sight is not very good. ITS TOO LIGHT, BLACKS ARE GREY. see?

I see what you're saying now blacks being grey but how can you say it's to light?

They've freakin' turned the lights off in most of the pictures. Someone back me up please? My eyesight is fine (they've been under thousands of pounds worth of NHS costs thank you, didn't I say?

, seriously) and it's obvious they're to dark but honestly Romero we've been hear before you mean one thing and I mean another but we actually mean the same.

EvaUnit02 wrote:I think he means contrast-boosting.

The end result is still to dark whatever he means. Cheers though.

EvaUnit02 wrote:-Lee Tamahori's classic NZ film Once Were Warriors (with a new transfer sourced from a Hi-def remaster supervised by the director).

I've been meaning to check this out for ages. It looks really good. When I was going to buy it the DVD choices were pants I then forgot all about it. Cheers.

EvaUnit02 wrote:-Phillip Noyce's critically-acclaimed return to Australian cinema, Rabbit Proof Fence.

Great film but I can't justify the price hike for some extra interviews. The meaty extras made there way internationally, plus the R4 wastes space with a 4:3 version. Which I don't made to much difference the film is only 90 something minutes long but still.

The R1 and UK R2 are now cheap as chips.

Markgway · Post by **Markgway** » 02 May 2006, 00:45

Brad, post some caps of the R2 and I'll edit them in next to mine.

The R4 looks quite good to me.

EvaUnit02 · Post by **EvaUnit02** » 02 May 2006, 01:11

Markgway wrote:Brad, post some caps of the R2 and I'll edit them in next to mine.

Aren't you going to provide him with the time references of your caps then?

Markgway · Post by **Markgway** » 02 May 2006, 01:55

No.

All caps taken from the first 20 mins or so.

romerojpg · Post by **romerojpg** » 02 May 2006, 12:37

Brad ITS TOO LIGHT, BLACKS ARE GREY, look about for some pro reviews on the net, they all agree with me, of blacks are grey, its too light. I know exactly what I am talking about

a few quotes from reviews on the net

The entire thing is way too faded. Previously black suits now look almost gray. Overall, all of the colors are very washed out. It's really disappointing since this could have been the definitive release of this flick.

Black levels could have been deeper and are slightly gray.

Black levels could have been much deeper, improving contrast and thus dimensionality of the image. As such the presentation is certainly a disappointment, as you would have expected a remastered video transfer that improves on some of the weaknesses and limitations of the original release, rather than making things worse.

Upon watching this transfer it looks like Artisan threw this in the washer, dumped 4 gallons of cheap detergent on it and left it there. The image is pretty washed.

There are a few scenes which look really good and it gives the transfer a nice clean look. However, a couple of scenes are awful. The cool title shot now looks like somebody blocked all lighting and put a smoke screen over the whole scene. Most exterior scenes, like Mr. Pink running from the cops, look too gray and dull. The suits, once black look lighter. It's watchable but a little dissapointing.

Alas, however great that original master may look, this actual DVD transfer has its share of problems. The most glaring are poor black levels and flat contrast. Blacks are not black at all, but rather dark gray, which does give the transfer a clear, almost antiseptic look, yet it is far too washed out. Sekula states he intended the film to have a bright, stark, contrasty look, which certainly comes across here, but somehow I doubt he intended it to be this bright?

EvaUnit02 · Post by **EvaUnit02** » 02 May 2006, 12:49

bradavon wrote: The R1 and UK R2 are now cheap as chips.

This new R4 is fairly cheap as well. I've seen it going for as little as $17NZD.

EvaUnit02 · Post by **EvaUnit02** » 02 May 2006, 12:58

Give it a rest both of you, it's just a war of symmantics. One man's concept of dark is another's concept of light. Like how for some cultures the colour of death is black and for others it's white.

romerojpg · Post by **romerojpg** » 02 May 2006, 13:24

Not really, I am not alone

I have never seen anyone say it was dark ever

Markgway · Post by **Markgway** » 02 May 2006, 15:21

Can we have some caps please?

bradavon · Post by **bradavon** » 02 May 2006, 15:51

Mark I'll see what I can do.

romerojpg wrote:Brad ITS TOO LIGHT, BLACKS ARE GREY, look about for some pro reviews on the net, they all agree with me, of blacks are grey, its too light. I know exactly what I am talking about

Well of course if black is grey it's to light. Durh that's obvious but it's you who is waffling about blacks being grey I'm saying the picture overall is to dark.

The brightness is to low or is it constrast? Those two always manage to confuse me.

EvaUnit02 wrote:This new R4 is fairly cheap as well. I seen it going for as little as $17NZD.

For me anyway the R1/UK R2 are that price with (free) postage but the R4 I need to add postage.

EvaUnit02 wrote:Give it a rest both of you, it's just a war of symmantics. One man's concept of dark is another's concept of light.

Fair enough I shall do just that. I don't get how some can think dark is light and visa versa but like you I'm bored of it now too.

romerojpg · Post by **romerojpg** » 02 May 2006, 23:06

Some, try most Good reviews.

BiscLimpkit · Post by **BiscLimpkit** » 02 May 2006, 23:32

http://www.dvdbeaver.com/film/DVDCompar ... r-dogs.htm

romerojpg · Post by **romerojpg** » 02 May 2006, 23:36

I dont class that site as a review site, wheres the reviews?

barley says a word about anything really, just fancy graphs and pics.

bradavon · Post by **bradavon** » 03 May 2006, 13:15

From those screen shots the UK R2 clearly looks the best. Both the R1 and UK R2 SE's look a mess BUT like many DVD Beaver comparisons in a real world example they don't look anywhere near the same.

Compare the R1 with the R4 shown above, it looks pretty similar to me.

Me neither but it does clearly show the picture quality difference. Although it the layout really pisses me off as it's really hard to work out from:

"(Momentum - Region 2 - PAL - TOP vs. Seven7 (3 dvd Collector Ed.) - Region 2 - PAL - 2nd vs. Momentum (Special Edition) - Region 2 - PAL - 3rd -vs. Artisan (Special Edition) - Region 1 - NTSC - 4th vs. Universal (Edition Collector Limitée) - Region 2 - PAL - BOTTOM)"

Which bloody DVD is which. Why not put between each picture which DVD it comes from?

I also hate when really duff DVDs (such as the Chinese Hero DVD) are put in with the comparisons. We all those are a disaster so who would buy them, keep those separate.

romerojpg · Post by **romerojpg** » 03 May 2006, 13:47

Its a site which could hold some stunning examples of how to compare dvds

I too can find it confusing the way they list dvds sometimes, I just wish they went into more detail on the picture quality front and sound etc.. they are maybe the only site like that so at least they try hard

Compared to dvdcompare they rule, as dvdcompare suck at doing anything but listing details, ussually they are just wrong anyway. At least dvdbeaver dont say its got DTS so it must be great, or its anamporphic so its best. We need a site which really does everything, sadly I cannot see it coming ever.

bradavon · Post by **bradavon** » 03 May 2006, 14:03

Don't get me started on sound DVD Beaver for so called comparison mention virtually nothing on the Sound front. A DVD could easily have a 5 minute drop out but if the PQ is the best it would win.

Compared to dvdcompare they rule, as dvdcompare suck at doing anything but listing details.

To be fair that is and always has been the entire point of DVD Compare. To compare DVDs based on spec. and that alone. If each DVD is by the same studio and equal a spec. is all you need really.

Sure don't solely use DVD Compare but with it and reading reviews it can be great. I don't rely on the "Cut/Uncut" part of each review though as they assume it's uncut unless they know otherwise.

I'd rather have DVD Compare which lists thousands of more DVDs than DVD Beaver (because they only list the spec.) than not having it at all.

I do agree their decisions are really weird sometimes though. Like when a particular region wins because the DVD has an extra Trailer. Like that counts??? It's a draw.

Their "Rules of Attraction" comparison is utter stupidity. The UK R2 is listed as cut because the BBFC cut it, fine BUT the R1 is listed as Uncut and merely an Alternate Theatrical Cut because the MPAA cut it (the R1 is cut less than the UK R2 but what does that matter?). Both are very much cut when you consider the Scandinavian and R4 are completely uncut.

As far as they're concerned it's okay if the MPAA cut films. I posted on their forums about this once but never got a reply.

Cut can only mean one thing. Musa: International Cut is well cut. Yes it's an International Cut but it's still very much cut. This is listed as Uncut too and again an Alternate Cut.

Markgway · Post by **Markgway** » 03 May 2006, 14:15

Brad, you working on those caps?

If we can get matching caps from the various versions this could be the best visual comparison available.

But so far it's just the R4 caps I posted.

bradavon · Post by **bradavon** » 03 May 2006, 17:36

Not really. I said if I had a chance I would but I don't sorry. The Beaver ones will have to do.

Markgway · Post by **Markgway** » 03 May 2006, 18:21

The idea was to put them alongside each other, but nevermind. I guess some people can't be bothered.

BiscLimpkit · Post by **BiscLimpkit** » 03 May 2006, 22:15

Does anyone want grabs from my single disc R2? That's what I own. 8)

PS: Or was that a pretty stupid question that I just asked?

bradavon · Post by **bradavon** » 04 May 2006, 00:28

Nope and some might.

Markgway · Post by **Markgway** » 04 May 2006, 01:53

BiscLimpkit wrote:Does anyone want grabs from my single disc R2? That's what I own. 8)

Yeah, that would be good.

Can you match mine for the R4?

saltysam · Post by **saltysam** » 13 Jul 2006, 16:12

it's getting another release in region 1 this october....

http://www.davisdvd.com/news/news.html

romerojpg · Post by **romerojpg** » 13 Jul 2006, 17:22

You have to think its a joke sometimes