Ran: Criterion Collection + NEW Optimum 2 Disc SE News

bradavon · Post by **bradavon** » 02 Jan 2006, 04:03

jimmyscab wrote:It does ? thats the version I have and it looked fantastic to me, perhaps a little soft (intentional?) but the colours looked great.

Going purely buy the DVD Beaver comparison I'd say so, it actually looks a mess.

jimmyscab wrote:The problem with screenshots is comparing jpeg images side by side you can get overly critical.

Exactly, very true. I only try to use them to get an idea and of course they're useful when the difference is huge.

Pinch of salt comes to mind. I'm really not sure now the UK R2/R4 is nice and cheap but the Criterion is a lovely looking set.

I'm starting to think it's one of those cases where in reality there really isn't much in it and we're essentially nitpicking to find problems that aren't a big deal to start with, to me at least anyway. It would be a shame to loose the Criterion extras, oh I can't decide.

I'll sleep on it, time for bed.

If the Criterion was (near) perfect then I wouldn't mind paying extra at all. I own Criterion's Traffic and Last Temptation of Christ as the competition is so much weaker but went for the UK R2 SE of The Rock has the minute PQ improvement doesn't justify the price hike for the Criterion.

bradavon · Post by **bradavon** » 02 Jan 2006, 04:10

Nitin has replied to my questions over at DVD Times, exactly has he's typed it:

On my computer, when I see those shots, it's obvious that the R2 is better. Then again, my monitor isnt calibrated

But I own both versions and on my actual tv system (which is calibrated), the Criterion comes out more vibrant, slightly sharper in long distance shots(althought to be fair, edge enhancement comes through at times), and the R2 looks washed out.

Also, during the battle scenes, with lots of smoke etc, the Criterion is encoded better. On the R2, occasionally all the smoke and activity causes problems, but again to be honest, you have to be really nitpicking to notice it.

Also, the sound is better, both in range and clarity.

Once again, I'm basing this on how both look on my system.

bradavon · Post by **bradavon** » 02 Jan 2006, 22:24

Joe and John at The DVD Forums have posted a solid reason why Ran WB is OOP:

http://www.thedvdforums.com/forums/show ... p?t=402340

Essentially WB no longer own the DVD rights to all Studio Canal owned films which means many WB Studio Canal DVDs have gone OOP or will be soon. The Wicker man SE is still easily available (at the moment).

One forum member has posted a mini list.

bradavon · Post by **bradavon** » 26 Oct 2006, 20:23

New Ran: 2 Disc UK SE confirmed: http://www.dvdtimes.co.uk/content.php?contentid=63122

On 20th November 22006. It's no different from before except:

* We now have DD5.1 so a 2 disc is in order
* This time the making of isn't cropped to 4:3

It's hard to say if the transfer will be new though as Deer Hunter it is but Wickerman it's not.

EvaUnit02 · Post by **EvaUnit02** » 27 Oct 2006, 23:41

As long as it doesn't have the reddened mess from the Criterion, which it shouldn't since they'll high likely be using the Studio Canal master.

Shingster · Post by **Shingster** » 28 Oct 2006, 17:00

romerojpg wrote:The Criterion Ran does look a bloody mess why they added a massive tint of orange and red to the picture is just insane it looks like its set on mars!

EvaUnit02 wrote:As long as it doesn't have the reddened mess from the Criterion, which it shouldn't since they'll high likely be using the Studio Canal master.

Complete and utter exaggerated bollocks, as usual from these two. The Criterion is merely darker and redder than the other remastered releases, it's hardly a mess.

EvaUnit02 · Post by **EvaUnit02** » 28 Oct 2006, 17:24

Shingster wrote:Complete and utter exaggerated bollocks, as usual from these two.

Don't ever lump me in with Romero again. When's your marriage to that retard Gary Tooze? It's clearly a match made in heaven.

bradavon · Post by **bradavon** » 28 Oct 2006, 17:28

He has a point you both use absolutes far to often.

EvaUnit02 · Post by **EvaUnit02** » 28 Oct 2006, 17:36

OHNOES, someone's bagging on my sacred cow Criterion. TIME TO GO INTO DAMAGE CONTROL!!!11!!!!1

bradavon · Post by **bradavon** » 28 Oct 2006, 18:28

OHNOES?

grim_tales · Post by **grim_tales** » 28 Oct 2006, 18:35

OH NO, I think

Shingster · Post by **Shingster** » 28 Oct 2006, 23:57

EvaUnit02 wrote:
Shingster wrote:Complete and utter exaggerated bollocks, as usual from these two.
Don't ever lump me in with Romero again. When's your marriage to that retard Gary Tooze? It's clearly a match made in heaven.

I've never been one to agree with Tooze's comparison conclusions either, and I agree he has shown favouritism towards Criterion too many times in the past, but to call him a retard only emphasises my point about you making moronic sensationalist comments. I am sorry for lumping you in with Romero, that's obviously an insult to him!

Oh and for the record, I own a massive 4 Criterion discs, Royal Tennenbaums, Robocop, Rushmore, and In the Mood For Love: which i'm always happy to inform others is not the best DVD presentation of the film. So no, I am most definitely not a "Criterion fanboy". I'm well aware of their flaws, but I like to talk about them realistcally and not treat common remaster alterations llike slight changes in colour tone as complete ruination of the image.

bradavon · Post by **bradavon** » 29 Oct 2006, 00:24

that's obviously an insult to him!

In the Mood For Love: which i'm always happy to inform others is not the best DVD presentation of the film.

Oh own the TF1 Frenchie but don't you reckon the CC looks the best? Yes it's cropped slightly but otherwise I think it does. Not that I'm interested in changing my TF1.

but I like to talk about them realistcally and not treat common remaster alterations llike slight changes in colour tone as complete ruination of the image.

Here here. Both Eva and Romero like to do that too much.

Shingster · Post by **Shingster** » 29 Oct 2006, 01:45

I prefer the look of the TF1, but I'm happy enough with my Criterion copy.

bradavon · Post by **bradavon** » 29 Oct 2006, 13:47

The colours are stronger on the CC.

Shingster · Post by **Shingster** » 29 Oct 2006, 19:21

Yes they are, a little too strong though IMO and from the opinions of people who remembered watching ITMFL at the cinema, the TF1 is the most faithful to the original look of the film. I mentioned ITMFL in this read for a specific reason, as it represents an example where Criterion has remastered an image and resulted in a different colour tone to previous DVD releases - but with this not necessarily proving to be a bad thing.

Almost every film that recieves a full image remaster has its colour scheme adjusted in some way. If we were to scream out "arrgh the image is redder, the transfer's a mess" no one would learn anything about the remastering process and whether it accurately reflects the intended look of the film, or the original look (which of course are not necessarily one and the same).

bradavon · Post by **bradavon** » 08 Nov 2006, 20:58

Cover art is up: http://www.dvdactive.com/news/releases/ran.html

bradavon · Post by **bradavon** » 20 Nov 2006, 18:54

Comparison review is up: http://www.dvdtimes.co.uk/content.php?contentid=63330

Optimum wins over the Warner for:

Optional DD5.1
Removable subs
Original aspect ratio 1.66:1 documentary

Picture quality is the same (little reason to upgrade if you have the Warner), personally I'm happy with my Criterion however.