Bullets 'n' Babes

Posted: **28 Mar 2008, 22:07**

Posted: **28 Mar 2008, 22:10**

The HD-DVD is disappointing, not as good as it should be.

Posted: **28 Mar 2008, 22:52**

Yeah the HD-DVD is pretty poor. I skipped it so it looks like I made a good decision. Great film by the way.

Posted: **28 Mar 2008, 23:10**

It uses the same master as the HDTV cap which is a good few years old and rather shabby for a modern film (dirt and scratches).

Posted: **29 Mar 2008, 03:29**

The massive lack of definition is shocking. Universal really dropped the ball on some of their catalogue releases, hopefully they'll rectify their mistakes when it comes to the BD re-releases.

Posted: **29 Mar 2008, 05:12**

While I agree it doesn't exactly look HD it looks fine to me, the best of the three. The HD Broadcast captures gave muted colours and the SD DVD isn't as sharp as other too.

While it should've been better and they should fixed that line in the the third capture it looks fine to me. The Universal cropping is also very minor and again doesn't bother me. This isn't a big blockbuster, so I don't expect a perfect picture. It's a very muted if you will type of film and it suits it well.

I await the Brad-Boiling for having a differing opinion.

Posted: **29 Mar 2008, 05:26**

bradavon wrote:While I agree it doesn't exactly look HD it looks fine to me, the best of the three. The HD Broadcast captures gave muted colours and the SD DVD isn't as sharp as other too.

While it should've been better and they should fixed that line in the the third capture it looks fine to me. The Universal cropping is also very minor and again doesn't bother me. This isn't a big blockbuster, so I don't expect a perfect picture. It's a very muted if you will type of film and it suits it well.

I await the Brad-Boiling for having a differing opinion.

But if one already had the DVD, it wouldn't be worth upgrading. Unless you could get the HD-DVD for like 5 pounds, which you probably can by now. The significantly higher bitrate audio track be good enough justification, at that price.

Posted: **29 Mar 2008, 05:51**

As I got it cheap I'm happy to own the HD-DVD and sell the DVD. Agreed about the audio, even the DVDs DTS will likely only be half-rate.

Posted: **29 Mar 2008, 14:49**

Thre thing is a people still upgrade their dvds for less of an improvement than that, Superbits anyone?

For me its the clear winner and worth geting if you need it, its cheap as chips so I would upgrade myself, but I suspect a few of these may get more treatment on Blu Ray

may not as well knowing the cheap way they make these HD discs.

Posted: **29 Mar 2008, 15:12**

romerojpg wrote: but I suspect a few of these may get more treatment on Blu Ray may not as well knowing the cheap way they make these HD discs.

Are you saying that every Universal HD-DVD isn't guaranteed to get a double-dip on BD? If so, then I agree. Stuff like the Bourne trilogy are guaranteed to get re-released, but the future is definitely uncertain for cult titles such as Dune and The War.

I own this HD-DVD myself. One of those titles that I always meant to buy on DVD but never got around to doing so.

Posted: **29 Mar 2008, 15:27**

I assume most will come to Blu Ray, but it could be a long time (many years) until all them come go over, but knowing rights issues some will change company hands in that times and may never come out on Blu Ray.

In the mean time I will keep getting the cheapo HD DVD versions and save cash while I am at it, as it will take some time before these titles are as cheap as they are now when they do come to Blu.

Posted: **29 Mar 2008, 20:48**

Personally I suspect Universal will just make their HD-DVDs BD compatible and that's it, i.e - no new transfers period. All just IMO though.

Posted: **30 Mar 2008, 04:27**

bradavon wrote:Personally I suspect Universal will just make their HD-DVDs BD compatible and that's it, i.e - no new transfers period. All just IMO though.

Make the HD-DVDs BD compatible, heh. It's clear to me what you're trying to say, but it's so badly conveyed.

They wouldn't use the same transfers, the BDs would have new encodes. But likely they won't do anything with the source masters.

We might see more catalogue titles with lossless audio though. Universal had only fairly recently started adding TrueHD tracks to their catalogue releases, eg Carlito's Way, Darkman, Elizabeth, The Pianist.

Posted: **30 Mar 2008, 10:20**

If it's clear to you then does it really matter? I'd wager anyone on this forum would know what I meant.

They wouldn't use the same transfers, the BDs would have new encodes. But likely they won't do anything with the source masters.

Maybe, Warner never bother. A new encode would just mean minute differences, not enough to really care about, unless your name is Romero

Agreed on the Audio front. Sony now almost exclusively uses TrueHD for new releases and PCM no more, or no secondary DD5.1 track (except dubs).

Something up until recently meant TrueHD only BDs could only get 2.0 out of the LG Combo Player, the Samsung still has this problem. As do other BD Players I think, thankfully not many. Thankfully Warner always also include DD5.1/DD Plus when they include TrueHD.

You just cannot guarantee the hidden DD5.1 track can be picked up by the Player (few can) or the Player re-encodes the TrueHD to DTS/DD5.1 (most do). Unlike DTS-HD TrueHD has problems being backwards compatible.

Posted: **30 Mar 2008, 19:21**

I'd expect them to use the same encodes, unfortunately.

Posted: **31 Mar 2008, 02:09**

bradavon wrote:If it's clear to you then does it really matter? I'd wager anyone on this forum would know what I meant.

People need to be told of their mistakes, otherwise they'll never learn.

Bullets 'n' Babes

Lost in Translation - HD-DVD vs. HDTV vs. R2UK

Lost in Translation - HD-DVD vs. HDTV vs. R2UK