I read Holly E. Ordway's DVD review of Hero at http://www.dvdtalk.com/reviews/read.php?ID=13424 and...
Didn't really care for this movie. Yes, it's beautifully filmed. Yes, it makes you think. But it's so busy being artsy, that you never really connect with the characters in the movie. I'd much rather see a movie like Last Samuri.

You should also consider the fact that the movie is artsy and its story is not a plot or character driven. It is completely unfair to compare a movie like the Last Samurai with Hero. They are two very different movies...

But I'm with you. I really didn't like Hero... I think it's a great movie that everyone should see at least once...

I'm confused. you didn't like the movie, but you think everyone should see it at least once? do you just not like people? I wouldn't recommend this movie to anyone. I'm probably the only person on the planet who thought the movie was horrible.

I disagree. I think Hero is *very* story-driven, although it does establish its characters quite well. Its not just a series of pretty pictures strung together in the guise of a narrative, but a strong story that also features some of the most resplendent cinematography ever committed to film.

And between all that, the fight scenes kick ass.

I guess worded my original statement poorly. What I mean to say... I do not feel that Hero is an excellent movie that ranks with the best of the best. Hence, I did not really like Hero. However, I do think the movie is good enough to watch at least once. Hence, it is a great movie for a rental.

I just read Holly's review. I have not watched this DVD yet front to back, but I wanted to validate or discount the staggering number of reports of its poor picture quality. After skimming through this, and reading her equipment list (she ahs teh same DVD player I have and a bigger screen - I have a 47" Panasonic RPTV) I have come to the conclusion:

1. Holly is pandering to her sponsor (i.e. Big hero splash ad at the top of the review page)
2. Holly has not seen a reference quality DVD
3. Holly needs her eyes checked.

This DVD transfer is not near the quality I would have prefererred. Admittedly my expectations were high given the visual nature of the film, but this is sub-par DVD quality video - in fact at times it looked more VHS than DVD. Poor detail even in many close up shots, lots of grain (film grain or compression noise I am not sure which).

Make sure Holly's is not the only review you read before deciding to purchase. If you are not eager to owna substandard quality transfer of this movie, you may want to rent vs buy... or chase down the Japanese transfer which is reputed to have a much better PQ.

One more thing - the suggestion that one double dip to replace their foreign transfer with this craptacular one just to get English opening and closing text is just stupid and irresponsible.

Could not agree more.

Whatever the case may be, it's not this. The business end of the site is all handled through an intermediary, and reviewers have no contact with studios or advertisers, and reviewers are under no pressure to pander to any company.

Please provide specific, quantifiable examples of what you think is wrong with the disc. Your assertion that it looks like VHS is laughably absurd.

I think maybe there should be a reviewer FAQ somewhere to dispel the notion that there is ANY interaction between the sponspors and the reviewers. As a longtime reviewer here I can tell you with 100% honesty that there cannot be a writing gig with less editorial or advertorial meddling. We are completely free to express ANY opinion we want. If our opinions are consistently unjustifiable people will complain and there might be some changes made but short that scenario no one - not the advertisers, distributors, or DVDTalk insiders - influences the writers and their opinions. (Standard disclaimer: That said, I can't say for sure whether or not any reviewers other than myself are in cahoots with anyone simply because I don't sit on their laps watching what they do, but that's VERY unlikely.) We have a reviewer forum where we constantly discuss our ideas and opinions and critique each other's work. It's a very positive environment to be a writer and it leads to a good deal of honesty.

I can't account for Holly's review: I haven't been to her house ( ) and I haven't seen Hero on DVD. But I can tell you that her review almost definitely reflected her viewing experience. Speaking as someone who's made unpopular statements before in reviews (and has even made some mistakes) everyone's viewing experience will be different to some extent. Agree to disagree but the body of Holly's work should put her above some of the statements made in these threads.

Thank you, Adam & Gil, for stepping in with a reality check.

I was highly offended by those comments and refrained from replying earlier as I knew I wouldn't be able to be polite.

I take a lot of pride in being a fair, unbiased reviewer who calls it like I see it. If you (or anyone) reads my reviews consistently, you'll know that I am completely willing to be as critical as necessary to ANY release, important or unimportant, from a big studio or from an independent filmmaker. If you were reading the forum last summer when LOTR: TTT EE came out, you might recall the lengthy and energetic discussion that erupted over my "only" 3-star, "recommended" rating for a DVD that everyone expected to get top marks (only everyone was pretty polite and civil in that thread). I've also been outspoken in pointing out the not-always-superior image quality in the Superbit titles I've reviewed, for instance.

Evaluating image and sound quality is ultimately partly subjective. There are many factors that go into making a good or bad transfer, and different people may find certain aspects more noticeable or important than others. I do wish I had a copy of an Asian transfer to do a direct side-by-side comparison of the PQ and compare bit rates, but unfortunately, the copy I originally watched was lent to me by a friend (who now lives 3,000 miles away). (Feel free to send me your copy if it matters enough to you!)

After hearing the concerns of (more civil) posters who disagreed with my evaluation of the PQ of Hero, I did re-visit it and decided to knock down the rating by half a star, to 4 stars instead of 4.5, to reflect the fact that I was a bit overenthusiastic. (So sue me, I'm only human). But I totally stand by the 4-star rating and my positive comments.

Is the transfer less than what fans expected or hoped for? That's possible. But when I know I'm going to review a title, I make a point of NOT reading any other reviews or discussions of the upcoming title. I don't want to be influenced (for good or bad) by others' expectations. When I reviewed Hero, frankly I had no idea it would get so much buzz, and I (deliberately) did not know what the level of expectations for the transfer were. My basis of comparison for the quality was "other DVDs I have reviewed" (which include a lot of ones with fantastic transfers, so I know what "great" looks like). So what you got from me was as un-biased an evaluation as I could possibly make it.

I don't care if I'm the ONLY reviewer in the entire WORLD who thought the image looked great. On my setup (which is pretty damn good) it looks great IN MY OPINION. Feel free to disagree, but please do so in terms that don't call into question my integrity or sanity.

I enjoyed both Hero and the last samurai. However, they're both different movies. Hero in my mind is way more in depth than last samurai. Oh well, each to their own.

Liked "Crouching Tiger/Hidden Dragon" better than "Hero"...girlfriend about slapped me when I said that walking out of the theater......give Hero this, the entire color thing rocked. Can't think of another movie that used it that way.....