Any Goodfellas and Swordfish reviews? Thanks...

saw this posted over at AVS:

Swordfish:
http://hddvd.highdefdigest.com/swordfish.html

Goodfellas:
http://hddvd.highdefdigest.com/goodfellas.html

I've only browsed through both DVDs, but I can tell you that the audio is fixed compared to the last WB titles.

Damn. Goodfellas is the first "must have" HD-DVD title for me.

Wonder if that line present on the previous DVD releases of Goodfellas is still there...

Encoded in 1080p and framed at 1.78:1 widescreen (slightly opened up from the 1.85:1 aspect ratio of the film's theatrical presentation)

uh oh. i hope this is not the norm for this new format.

It's been the norm with WB titles on DVD since the beginning. I'm not surprised it's carried over to HD-DVD.

Same here but I don't have a HD DVD Player but I am thinking of starting buying HD movies and buy the HD DVD Player when the price goes down in a year or so

There are actually many 2.35 films that I would prefer in the 1.78 format. Namely Terminator 3. I got a view of the 1.78 HDTV version of the movie and it is clear the 2.35 DVD version is a hack job. I really hope that the HD-DVD/Blu-Ray version comes in 1.78.

I'm not surprised.

Wow. Just wow.

The OAR is a hack job?

C'mon. The joke has to be on us somewhere, right?

This explains so much.

This stupid argument was had many times over when the DVD came out. T3 was shot in Super35 and was composed for 2.35:1, but some people still don't understand that the Super35 process is intended to be matted on the top and bottom. Apparently the HBO-HD transfer was open-matte and exposed a little extra of the main actress's cleavage in one shot, which got fanboys drooling and complaining that the properly matted version was a "hack job".

It's pure ignorance.

I just wanted to pop in and give a for JoshZ's informative (as usual) post. I also enjoy your posts on AVS, started recently catching those in a few threads that interested me lately.

And at Jimmy

I saw internet shots (that I can't find right now damnit because I would love to back this up) that show several effects shots throughout the movie appear to be composed for a 1.78 ratio. Best example is the DVD special features. The animaters examine a scene of a hunter killer unit floating over water and they discuss how they added ripple effects to the water. Then they show the final shot in 2.35 and the water can't be seen. But yeah more boobies help too. Terminator 3 is the only movie I have ever purchased the fullscreen version over widescreen. Trust me guys I am normally a big widescreen supporter even for most Super35 films but there are exceptions to every rule and Terminator 3 is that exception.

Do you not read what you write?

You prefer many 2.35:1 films cropped to 1.78:1, but then later say that T3 was an exception to your rule of wanting OAR. Interesting.

I guess this is no different that some of your other posts, but you need to think before you post. What you write makes no sense and you often contradict yourself four posts later in the thread (see also: PS3 cost discussion).

If you mean a reddish-brown vertical scratch through De Niro's face in one shot, yes, it's still there.

The movie was composed for theatrical exhibition at 2.40:1. End of story. Whether the CGI effects were rendered into the 16:9 safe zone for open-matte video transfers is irrelevant to how the shots were actually composed.

Good news: UPS just brought me Goodfellas.

Bad news: I'm at work.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't nearly all (if not all) 1.85 films framed to 16:9 in their anamorphic presentations?

You are correct. Not all, but most studios do.

With overscan on most TVs, it makes zero difference anyhow.