Go Back  DVD Talk Forum > DVD Discussions > HD Talk
Reload this Page >

Interview with the Vampire - Soft Picture & Lossy DD Only

HD Talk The place to discuss Blu-ray, 4K and all other forms and formats of HD and HDTV.

Interview with the Vampire - Soft Picture & Lossy DD Only

Old 09-19-08, 03:12 PM
  #1  
DVD Talk Limited Edition
Thread Starter
 
BuckNaked2k's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Hartford, CT
Posts: 6,145
Received 33 Likes on 26 Posts
Interview with the Vampire - Soft Picture & Lossy DD Only

"The audio is lossy DD only and the video is so excessively soft, it hardly qualifies high definition."

Hmmm....this was on my "immediate upgrade" list. Guess I'm sticking with my DVD snapper w/DTS.

http://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread.php?t=63813
Old 09-19-08, 04:25 PM
  #2  
DVD Talk Special Edition
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,055
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Over the course of just the past few months, Warner Bros. has fallen behind even Fox to become the most inconsistent and disappointing studio currently releasing on the format. It's inexcusable, and quite frankly amounts to nothing less than passive/aggressive hostility and thinly-veiled disregard for their customers and the Blu-ray format itself.
Old 09-19-08, 05:07 PM
  #3  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 975
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
You do relaize that the film has always been rather soft image wise right? That's how Neil Jordan filmed it.

fitprod
Old 09-19-08, 05:10 PM
  #4  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Formerly known as "GizmoDVD"/Southern CA
Posts: 31,779
Received 101 Likes on 87 Posts
Sad that a decade old DVD has better sound than a brand new Blu-ray. My copy is on its way from Warner otherwise I would have canceled it. Complete BS on Warners part. I'm sure this will continue on as well with other titles.
Old 09-19-08, 05:58 PM
  #5  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Relocated to Bot-Hell
Posts: 11,819
Received 239 Likes on 175 Posts
I sold off my standard def version in anticipation of this title. Not even DD+? Warner, please utilize the potential to the fullest!
Old 09-19-08, 08:56 PM
  #6  
DVD Talk Hero
 
PopcornTreeCt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 25,913
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Originally Posted by applesandrice
Over the course of just the past few months, Warner Bros. has fallen behind even Fox to become the most inconsistent and disappointing studio currently releasing on the format. It's inexcusable, and quite frankly amounts to nothing less than passive/aggressive hostility and thinly-veiled disregard for their customers and the Blu-ray format itself.
But it's MSRP is not $39.95 and it's actually a good movie. I haven't bought a Fox Blu-ray since Juno.
Old 09-19-08, 09:39 PM
  #7  
DVD Talk Special Edition
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,055
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by PopcornTreeCt
But it's MSRP is not $39.95 and it's actually a good movie. I haven't bought a Fox Blu-ray since Juno.
To their credit, given the recent news concerning the first X-Files film and Day the Earth Stood Still, Fox does seem to be turning around a bit with their high MSRPs. Let's hope they continue.

In addition, my gripe isn't with the quality of the movie itself; what I have a problem with is the presentation. The film, the customers, and the format all deserve better. Whether the title they're releasing is Citizen Kane or Weekend at Bernie's II (which, admittedly, they would not be releasing as WB doesn't own the rights), they -- and every other studio, for that matter -- should be putting forth their best effort -- at least if they want to win my business.

Back in January Warner Bros. informed us all that their decision to exclusively back Blu-ray over HD DVD was because they believed it was the best product -- that it had the most to offer to consumers. Are they offering their best to consumers? Nine months after essentially killing the competition (the HDM competition, that is) and winning the format war for Blu-ray, Warner Bros. has gotten exceedingly fat and lazy about the quality of their releases, and they're dragging New Line down with them.

They're a bit like the drunk in the bar who used to be captain of his state-championship-winning high school football team. It's time for the BDA to buy them a cup of coffee and call them a cab.
Old 09-19-08, 09:50 PM
  #8  
DVD Talk Hero
 
PopcornTreeCt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 25,913
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
That seems to be happening with every studio. To think if HD-DVD had stuck around longer, they would have The Godfather Trilogy and Iron Man (though if that happened, maybe Fox and Sony would get off their asses and release some good movies). Paramount and Disney are the only studios have impressed me.
Old 09-19-08, 10:30 PM
  #9  
DVD Talk Godfather
 
DVD Polizei's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 54,508
Received 289 Likes on 214 Posts
Originally Posted by applesandrice
Back in January Warner Bros. informed us all that their decision to exclusively back Blu-ray over HD DVD was because they believed it was the best product -- that it had the most to offer to consumers. Are they offering their best to consumers? Nine months after essentially killing the competition (the HDM competition, that is) and winning the format war for Blu-ray, Warner Bros. has gotten exceedingly fat and lazy about the quality of their releases, and they're dragging New Line down with them.

They're a bit like the drunk in the bar who used to be captain of his state-championship-winning high school football team. It's time for the BDA to buy them a cup of coffee and call them a cab.
This is going to happen with Blu-ray altogether in terms of quality. Some of you thought with HD DVD being gone, the quality was going to remain high or even get better. Yeah, right.

Just the opposite my friends. As I said 9 months ago--and many other HD DVD supporters who said as much as well, when you have NO COMPETITION, you don't have to worry about quality standards.

What's the incentive for WB to start making quality releases and HD audio?

Nothing. Add to this, Sony's cash incentives which swayed WB earlier this year--now we finally know WB was lying out their ass regarding higher quality promises, so WB could literally sit back and do nothing, only to stamp upconverted DVDs with the Blu-ray logo and in a blue case, and they'd be meeting their contractual obligations.

And Sony could probably care less. Because that's all they want as well. Mass distribution of blue cases so everyone thinks it's the best quality around and so it's the only choice around.

Now, I'm not saying all Blu titles are inferior, so the usual trolls can go somewhere else. But a single title which has an inferior transfer, can be really disappointing for us movie fans. I plan on going Blu but I have to say I'm going to be really picky with my titles.
Old 09-19-08, 11:32 PM
  #10  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Drexl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 16,077
Likes: 0
Received 15 Likes on 13 Posts
Since the DVD came out back in 2000 or 2001, I wonder if this is another title with a 1080i source. Since there's no new DVD, I doubt they did a new master. There is speculation that The Perfect Storm had its master filtered to remove the appearance of the jagged edges that plagued other 1080i-sourced titles. Maybe this is what happens when you apply such filtering to a film that was already soft.

I already pre-ordered this, but at least it was with a coupon so it only came to around $16.
Old 09-20-08, 06:40 AM
  #11  
DVD Talk Hero
 
Josh-da-man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: The Bible Belt
Posts: 43,744
Received 2,677 Likes on 1,847 Posts
Originally Posted by fitprod
You do relaize that the film has always been rather soft image wise right? That's how Neil Jordan filmed it.
Yeah, I remember seeing it in the theater back in '94, and it was very soft and grainy back then. I remember this because, at the time, I thought the projector was out of focus. I think that was the first time I noticed that film had grain.

I haven't seen the Blu-ray, and I'm satisfied enough with the DVD SE that I won't bother getting it, but I can see this being a tough movie to transfer to a digital format.

The first DVD release (before the SE) was awful. Lots of video noise and compression blocks visible in dark scenes; it was like watching an old QT video on a Pentium 60.

I can understand people being disappointed with a BR transfer -- I don't think this movie is ever going to look crisp and sharp -- though there's no excuse for the audio.

Last edited by Josh-da-man; 09-20-08 at 06:49 AM.
Old 09-20-08, 06:52 AM
  #12  
DVD Talk Godfather
 
DVD Polizei's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 54,508
Received 289 Likes on 214 Posts
Well, I guess I'm gonna have to watch this again on DVD, because I thought it looked pretty good and could benefit from an HD upgrade transfer.
Old 09-20-08, 08:49 AM
  #13  
DVD Talk Legend
 
bunkaroo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Chicago West Suburbs
Posts: 16,391
Received 201 Likes on 134 Posts
Originally Posted by DVD Polizei
This is going to happen with Blu-ray altogether in terms of quality. Some of you thought with HD DVD being gone, the quality was going to remain high or even get better. Yeah, right.

Just the opposite my friends. As I said 9 months ago--and many other HD DVD supporters who said as much as well, when you have NO COMPETITION, you don't have to worry about quality standards.

What's the incentive for WB to start making quality releases and HD audio?

Nothing. Add to this, Sony's cash incentives which swayed WB earlier this year--now we finally know WB was lying out their ass regarding higher quality promises, so WB could literally sit back and do nothing, only to stamp upconverted DVDs with the Blu-ray logo and in a blue case, and they'd be meeting their contractual obligations.

And Sony could probably care less. Because that's all they want as well. Mass distribution of blue cases so everyone thinks it's the best quality around and so it's the only choice around.

Now, I'm not saying all Blu titles are inferior, so the usual trolls can go somewhere else. But a single title which has an inferior transfer, can be really disappointing for us movie fans. I plan on going Blu but I have to say I'm going to be really picky with my titles.
The lack of competition has obviously affected the number of sales, but in terms of quality of releases, it's actually the ex-HD DVD supporting studios that have been the worst on Blu-Ray this year. I'm not sure why studios who had to compete with Blu-Ray would suddenly drop standards now that they are on the format exclusively, but to me it is certainly telling of how their HD DVD release might have been if things went the other way.

With Uni, they are dropping extras and using too much DNR on some of the HD DVD ports. On the plus side they are using lossless.

With WB, it's certainly not a lock that these movies would have had TrueHD on HD DVD. They seem to be trying to release quantity over quality. Not sure if that would be different with competition.

Fox is not doing much different now since the HD DVD demise. Neither is LG. Sony has stepped up their releases but it makes sense since it's primarily their baby.

Paramount is still dragging ass on catalogs just like they always did. At least they are using lossless now.

Disney has upped their catalog prices, but the relative quality of their releases has held IMO.

Again, title pricing and sales have certainly suffered in absence of direct competition from another HDM format, but the Blu-Ray only studios are still on the whole releasing good quality releases as they were in 2007. The choice of titles might be suspect (I'm looking at you Sony), but the quality has still been there.

Last edited by bunkaroo; 09-20-08 at 08:52 AM.
Old 09-20-08, 11:07 AM
  #14  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Formerly known as "GizmoDVD"/Southern CA
Posts: 31,779
Received 101 Likes on 87 Posts
In Universals case, they are being forced to use 25GB discs for most of their releases, meaning they now have 5GB less of space to not only force a lossless track on to (if the previous HD DVD was DD+), but re-encode their films to fit on a smaller disc size. Every other studio seems to be getting 50GB discs for worthless throwaway films (The Love Guru) so it sucks to see Universal has to put out some great films on crappy discs.

You can pinpoint Warner dropping lossless right after they stopped supporting HD DVD - How is it that Justice League New Frontier has lossless (releases on both BD and HD) but Batman Gotham Knight and Justice League Season one don't? August Rush, Twister, No Reservations have a TrueHD track on HD DVD and BD, but Fools Gold and The Bucket List on BD don't? The sad thing is, with the decent sales of Speed Racer on BD will only help signify to Warner that people don't care about lossless. I'm already pissed Interview with a Vampire is in the mail to me with a freaking DD5.1 track.

Every other studio is doing their typical dance and spin moves. Fox is atleast pumping out catalog titles with extras (though bringing back barebone titles they announced and canceled 2 years ago is BS), Disney upped prices, Sony, well, they just seem to throw 80's and 90's film titles into a hat and whatever one they pick, they produce.
Old 09-20-08, 12:42 PM
  #15  
DVD Talk Legend
 
bunkaroo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Chicago West Suburbs
Posts: 16,391
Received 201 Likes on 134 Posts
I agree that the woes of both Uni and WB seem to be related to BD-50 availability. I can't imagine why else WB would drop lossless after moving to a format with more potential capacity.

If BD-50 is in fact the issue, I'd rather they just wait on releasing stuff like IWTV until they can give it the proper kind of release it deserves.
Old 09-20-08, 12:44 PM
  #16  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 10,859
Received 216 Likes on 155 Posts
Robert Harris on Home Theater Forum disagrees:

"The Blu-ray disc itself is gorgeous, needle sharp, with full grain and a lush color scale. While the audio is rich and full, it appears that this may have been a master prepared before the changeover to full lossless. Will 99% of the viewing audience be able to hear a difference? Extremely doubtful."

Lets wait for some reviews to come in, I suspect the end result will be somewhere in the middle - good but not great transfer.
Old 09-20-08, 12:47 PM
  #17  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Formerly known as "GizmoDVD"/Southern CA
Posts: 31,779
Received 101 Likes on 87 Posts
Originally Posted by bunkaroo
If BD-50 is in fact the issue, I'd rather they just wait on releasing stuff like IWTV until they can give it the proper kind of release it deserves.
Exactly.
Old 09-20-08, 02:08 PM
  #18  
DVD Talk Special Edition
 
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 1,529
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Artman
Robert Harris on Home Theater Forum disagrees:

"The Blu-ray disc itself is gorgeous, needle sharp, with full grain and a lush color scale. While the audio is rich and full, it appears that this may have been a master prepared before the changeover to full lossless. Will 99% of the viewing audience be able to hear a difference? Extremely doubtful."

Lets wait for some reviews to come in, I suspect the end result will be somewhere in the middle - good but not great transfer.
The reviewer for Blu-ray.com also disagrees, rating the picture 4 out of 5 and stating that "Warner has given Interview with the Vampire a thorough and well rendered transfer that highlights the movie’s dark and foreboding tone."
Old 09-20-08, 04:14 PM
  #19  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Docking Bay 94
Posts: 14,259
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Originally Posted by bunkaroo
I agree that the woes of both Uni and WB seem to be related to BD-50 availability. I can't imagine why else WB would drop lossless after moving to a format with more potential capacity.

If BD-50 is in fact the issue, I'd rather they just wait on releasing stuff like IWTV until they can give it the proper kind of release it deserves.
Exactly. It's shit like this (and the fact that BD sales haven't really taken off, even though it is now the "winner") that are keeping me on the sidelines.
Old 09-20-08, 04:50 PM
  #20  
DVD Talk Hero
 
PopcornTreeCt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 25,913
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Originally Posted by Artman
Robert Harris on Home Theater Forum disagrees:

"The Blu-ray disc itself is gorgeous, needle sharp, with full grain and a lush color scale. While the audio is rich and full, it appears that this may have been a master prepared before the changeover to full lossless. Will 99% of the viewing audience be able to hear a difference? Extremely doubtful."

Lets wait for some reviews to come in, I suspect the end result will be somewhere in the middle - good but not great transfer.
Isn't Robert Harris' opinion usually the opposite of the majority?
Old 09-22-08, 07:46 AM
  #21  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 305
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by DVD Polizei
This is going to happen with Blu-ray altogether in terms of quality. Some of you thought with HD DVD being gone, the quality was going to remain high or even get better. Yeah, right.

Just the opposite my friends. As I said 9 months ago--and many other HD DVD supporters who said as much as well, when you have NO COMPETITION, you don't have to worry about quality standards.

What's the incentive for WB to start making quality releases and HD audio?

Nothing. .
Their incentive is making money. It's silly to say "you don't have to worry about quality standards" when there is "NO COMPETITION". There is plenty of competition. It's called "other titles" and "other studios". It's like saying there are no quality standards when it comes to CDs because there is no competition.

And you're talking about an ex-dual format supporter here. This title would have been exactly the same on both formats. It's WB.

I suspect the real issue here is that since the death of HD-DVD, Blu-Ray production has ramped up and it's tougher to get something in the pipeline. Specifically, the BD-50 pipeline. So, we're getting stuff on BD-25 discs that probably should not be and sacrifices are being made. Personally, I'd rather they just wait and do it right rather than rush to flood the market with titles. That's the only logical reason I can think of for stuff like "Speed Racer" to be thrown out on a BD-25.

But, make no mistake - were HD-DVD still around, WB would continue to encode to the lowest common denominator. If they are gonna try to squeeze something onto a BD-25, the HD-DVD would be getting the same encode.
Old 09-22-08, 09:32 AM
  #22  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Formerly known as "GizmoDVD"/Southern CA
Posts: 31,779
Received 101 Likes on 87 Posts
Originally Posted by BrandonJF
I suspect the real issue here is that since the death of HD-DVD, Blu-Ray production has ramped up and it's tougher to get something in the pipeline. Specifically, the BD-50 pipeline. So, we're getting stuff on BD-25 discs that probably should not be and sacrifices are being made. Personally, I'd rather they just wait and do it right rather than rush to flood the market with titles. That's the only logical reason I can think of for stuff like "Speed Racer" to be thrown out on a BD-25.
But they have to flood the market with titles. If not, and there is not a huge selection of Blu-rays available in Q4, it may make the format look weak and people will not buy. Kinda like what Universal did for HD DVD, except instead we have Sony pumping out some crap Steven Segal titles.
Old 09-22-08, 09:33 AM
  #23  
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 238
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by fitprod
You do relaize that the film has always been rather soft image wise right? That's how Neil Jordan filmed it.
fitprod
One of my favorite movies, and a VERY accurate statement.

Just because a movie is in HD doesn't mean it's gonna be crystal clear and pop out, smacking you in the face. Some movies are going to be soft. As for the audio, it's nothing to write home about anyway, so just keep your SD DVD.

Last edited by Concorde; 09-22-08 at 09:37 AM. Reason: Spelling.
Old 09-22-08, 10:08 AM
  #24  
DVD Talk Legend
 
bunkaroo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Chicago West Suburbs
Posts: 16,391
Received 201 Likes on 134 Posts
The Showtime HD viewing I saw succeeded in making the film look "not digital". It didn't look razor sharp and modern, but it looked more like film than the DVD. That's all I can hope for in terms of PQ on the Blu-Ray.
Old 09-22-08, 03:49 PM
  #25  
DVD Talk Limited Edition
 
GreenMonkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 5,578
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by Artman
Robert Harris on Home Theater Forum disagrees:

"The Blu-ray disc itself is gorgeous, needle sharp, with full grain and a lush color scale. While the audio is rich and full, it appears that this may have been a master prepared before the changeover to full lossless. Will 99% of the viewing audience be able to hear a difference? Extremely doubtful."

Lets wait for some reviews to come in, I suspect the end result will be somewhere in the middle - good but not great transfer.
I'm going to get some heat for this.

To be honest, I tend to agree with this which gets me in very hot water with the audiophiles. I really don't think most people can tell the difference and most of the hype over it is really more placebo effect than real difference.

If you have done a double blind test and successfully picked out the lossless track over the "lossy" one, then, OK, maybe I'd buy it. If you're one of those people that can tell a 256kbps mp3 or a 320kbsp over a 192kbps one in a double-blind test, then, maybe I'd buy that you're one of those 1% golden ear people.

Me, I top out at about 192kbps on mp3s. I don't really care, and I'll pick this up when it gets cheaper like I always do.

That all said, I think if there is space, there's no good reason not to drop in at least a higher bitrate DD5.1 track or lossless. Porting the DVD track is just laziness and being cheap. If nothing else including a lossless track makes it so I don't have to listen to the audiophile folks whine

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.