bunkaroo

For some reason DVDBeaver doesn't bother me, but damn it I hate the text at DigitalBits - I always have to copy the long articles into Notepad.

wd65733

Whatever...it's personal preference

wd65733

just got the bluray set...and I'm a little disappointed.

Picture is a tad sharper and colors are improved over the 2001 dvd...but I was expecting more. Even these improvements aren't obvious unless you compare them side by side.

I bet the new DVD restoration looks almost as good as this...because I wouldn't say that this is a huge leap from the 2001 DVDs(a nice improvement, but not the leap I was expecting).

I understand that they didn't want to lose it's "film" look...but I wish some work was done to make the picture at least a little bit more pristine.

Most other old movies I've seen on bluray look great. Picture is sharp, but doesn't lose the "film" look.

Drexl

Xylon's comparisons are always great, but this one's a bit of a cheat because he's using the old DVDs. Still, it gives those of us who have them a sense of what kind of improvement to expect.

mzupeman2

Either way, the grabs of the blu ray alone without anything to compare to, still looks really damn good.

I wonder how many people say that films like 'Halloween' or 'Dawn of the Dead' (original) look like crap on Blu-Ray, when they actually look pretty damn good.

I'm sure these are going to look great for their age.

wd65733

One thing to keep in mind -

The bluray version of this may have been rushed.

Bringing this Coppola restoration to bluray was a pretty recent decision, as this coppola restoration project was almost complete by the time the HD format war was over....it wasn't until 2 or 3 months ago that it was announced that this collection would be coming to bluray as well.

I wish they had delayed the bluray version so that they could spend more time to make sure to take full advantage of blurays capabilities.

tylergfoster

I don't think it would make a difference, and I also think you're probably going to find yourself in the minority when it comes to your feelings on the quality of the BDs.

wd65733

when the hype is gone...I see many agreeing with my assessment.

wd65733

I'm not taking anything away from RH and Coppola with regards to this restoration.

Fact is...the goal of this restoration was to recreate the true original presentation of these films...and the fact is that HD wasn't necessary to fulfill this goal.

Had there not been a BD version of this restoration....I'm sure the dvd version would have gotten many reviews filled with quotes such as "this was how the GF was meant to be seen".

DVD Polizei

Well, I don't have a Blu-ray player yet, but this latest rendition of The Godfather Trilogy looks pretty darn good. Count me in when I get a player in the near future.

Mr. Cinema

The restoration was approved by the film's cinematographer, Gordon Willis and director, Francis Ford Coppola. I will most definitely take their word as this being the way The Godfather was meant to be seen over member wd65733.

wd65733

That's exactly what I was saying. The goal of this restoration had nothing to do with taking advantage of HD.

It had everything to do w/ the STYLE of the film...not with the clarity/sharpness of the picture. And they succeeded in that respect.

They created a restoration for DVD, they worked on it for ages...then a few months before the release date, they say "Hey...bluray just won the format war....lets slap this transfer onto bluray real quick"

the result is that the bluray version is probably similar to the new DVD transfer with improved colors.

bluetoast

No. The restoration was to fix the damaged original prints, for preservation, all that stuff, not simply to come out with a new home video release.

Putting them out on DVD and Blu-ray is just the next logical step, since the studio can showcase the new transfers, and of course, make money, plus people want to see them without necessarily going to a screening.

wd65733

Fact is, it was planned for a dvd only release for a long time, and it wasn't until very recently they decided to release it on bluray as well.

wd65733

The Kubrick classics are a good example of how old films can still wow you on bluray while maintaining a film look.

Supermallet

How much do you know about film restoration? Any film restorationist worth his salt (and Robert Harris is definitely worth his salt) will restore a film to look good on film. Film has a higher resolution than DVD or Blu-ray. These restorations work by going back to the best possible elements, including the original negative, if possible. All of these elements, being shot on film, have a higher resolution than DVD or Blu-ray. The better they make it look for film, the better it will look on any home video format.


At least one theater in Los Angeles has received a print of the restored Godfather I and II. So you are incorrect in saying that this restoration was only done for DVD. It was done for a limited theatrical release as well, which means Harris and Coppola had to worry about how this would look on a 60 foot screen, not a 60 inch screen. Blu-ray is in a perfect position to benefit from this, as its increased resolution and color output allows it to better recreate the film as the director intended it to be seen. It should not be about smoothing away grain or artificially sharpening the image. The Godfather films look fantastic on Blu-ray. I say this as someone who has seen hundreds of Blu-ray discs, and the Godfather films multiple times on multiple formats (VHS, cable, laserdisc, DVD, film). Your suggestion that they only planned for it to look good on DVD and therefore couldn't take advantage of Blu-ray is a fallacy that, to me, suggests an ignorance of how film restoration works.

wd65733

Well then...let's just wait for some comparisons between the bd and dvd versions(not the 2001 dvds).

dsa_shea

I can't wait for my Godfather BD set.

wd65733

Don't expect too much. This isn't a "wow! only on bluray" type of picture quality.

Rizor

I really don't understand the point you're trying to drive at. Even if HD was a last minute decision, which I doubt, it wouldn't have made any difference. As others have mentioned, the goal wasn't to double dip fans on DVD, but rather to save the films (or at least the first two) from complete deterioration by restoring them to their original conditions for archival purposes. A new home video release is just the natural conclusion to any film restoration effort - a way of showing off the work they've done and a way of recouping the millions of dollars they put into the project.

The films were restored to the best of their abilities at 4k, a resolution greater than that of Blu-Ray. From these files, new masters were created for DVD and Blu-Ray. As has been indicated, the BDs have been maxed out, taking up nearly the 50 GBs afforded by the format. So how could they have done any better for the format?

Even if the SD-DVD and Blu-Ray look similar, what does that prove? They were created from the same files. So they should look pretty similar, detail and compression aside.

wd65733

It proves that perhaps some could save some $$ and purchase the dvd version of this restoration.

Supermallet

You could make the claim for any movie that has a day and date release on both formats. Oh, Casino Royale? Well, the Blu-ray and the DVD came from the same source files, so you can save some cash and buy the DVD. Transformers? Same source files, buy the DVD. Do you see the flaw in that logic? The source file is of a greater resolution than either format. The Blu-ray is capable of greater transperancy to the source than DVD ever can. Thus, any movie, no matter how old or new, shot on 16mm or above (or, in digital, 720p or above), should look better on Blu-ray.

wd65733

You forget the fact that the Transformers and Casino Royale blurays are leaps and bounds better than the DVDs in terms of pq.

Thne same cannot be said of The Godfather.

mdc3000

^I don't think he's forgetting that fact, I believe THAT IS HIS POINT.

Supermallet

Have you seen the Coppola restoration DVDs? Do you know for a fact that the PQ isn't "leaps and bounds" better?

I don't even know why we're arguing this. It's clear that to you, a clear picture is what's important, regardless of whether or not the movie is actually meant to look this way. According to Coppola, this is the way these movies are meant to look. We should be praising them for keeping the look of the films as intended on the Blu-ray, and not ruining the movies by modifying them to look clearer and sharper because they're in HD.