Quote:
Originally Posted by brain dead  I'm assuming these are unrelated criticisms on people who criticize certain blu-ray in general? Because they are all unrelated. People are criticizing the latest blu-rays for the one reason. They believe it is not being presented in the way it would have looked originally on 35mm. I haven't seen either of the titles so I can't say if they are right or wrong, but one of the (few) negative comments I've read is that it has suffered from DNR (one of the very things that gives a movie a "polished and fake, like processed video game" look) but also has video noise which makes it appear wonderfully grainy in places.
To them, the DNR is noticeable and distracting, and thus a shoddy transfer.
For the record, I really liked Burial Ground, a blu-ray that these same complainers wrote off for the very same reason they are criticizing the latest Fulci blus, and will probably like the ltest Fulci blus when I get them. |
Yes, I'm not thinking of any single individual or anything like that. I'm just saying that sometimes the critics get so lost in the technicalities of a BD transfer that they're missing out on enjoying the film. I also think, sometimes, they're seeing things that just aren't there or aren't all that noticeable. I think they're missing out on enjoying the films because they're too busy analysing the image for defects. I mean, actively looking for flaws, determined to find some. The flaws may well be there, but I never notice them. I'm too busy enjoying the films. If it was obvious, I'd probably be unhappy, but they're not obvious to me. I don't mean to sound facetious, but I've better things to do with my time than analyse film transfers looking for problems. I tend to just chuck a film on and chill out, and I'm a happy bunny. That's just me, but I understand people are different with varying expectations.
Look, when a studio ****s up a transfer I fully expect people to be up in arms about it. But some of the critcisms being levelled against BU and Arrow etc seem a bit unfounded. If universally people were panning the transfers, they'd have a point, but when it's something a large majority of people aren't even noticing, it gets all a bit silly. That's not to say that studios shouldn't consistently strive to provide the best transfers they can, I'm not saying that. They certainly should.
Reaps mentions
Living Dead at the Manchester Morgue, this is another title some people are saying is a ****ed up transfer with too much DNR and edge enhancement etc. I don't see it myself, does anyone else? The blame, they say, lies with the lab in Rome. Knowing Lustig, he wouldn't stand for anything second rate, if stories are to be believed, so I'm sure if there was a problem at the Rome lab, he would've been there and sorted it out by now.
I don't know, whilst it's good to be critical, I also think there's such a thing as being
overly critical. These people who make these criticisms are rarely happy with anything. They must be really miserable never buying a BD they're happy with.
