Finally got The Searchers today and just finished watching it. Movie experiences like this make every penny I have spent on HD DVD well worth it. This is easily my favorite HD DVD and has proved that movies of any age can look breathtaking in HD. This transfer stands up to anything I have seen so far and the mono soundtrack was also very full and clear. I want to sell all of my film based DVDs after watching this movie.

I'm ordering Dirty Dozen and Robin Hood tonight. Keep the classic films on HD DVD coming Warner.

Can you imagine Citizen Kane on HD DVD?

Citizen Kane should look great, but those Technicolor films are where the format will really shine. So Robin Hood should be the best looking of the next batch of films.

I have to admit that I was a little disappointed with Troy. Let me rephrase that, not disappointed but underwhelmed. I was really hoping for a transfer that was similar in quality to the Aeon Flux transfer. There is absolutly no reason why it couldnt have been but in the end it just falls short. They are both very similar in terms of film. Not styilized and very little use of filtration. Just a clean crisp image. While Troy looks great and there is nothing in particular that I would complain about, it just falls a little short of what I was expecting. They could have done better considering its such a new film with such little filtration.

PS...

I watched Space Cowboys and Red Dragon last night.

Space Cowboys is, like many Eastwood films, a generally low-key affair, but the space sequences are fantastic. Sure, the HD shows the seams in many of the special effects, but some of the shots are breathtaking. Also, there's a sequence right at the beginning where a V2 flies at high speed through clouds, and there is not one artifact to be found. Chalk another winner up to VC-1.

Red Dragon looked great. The scenes in Florida look amazing. There's a sequence where Ed Norton and Harvey Keitel are sitting by the beach, and you can see the water rushing over the small rocks in the sand, the level of detail was incredible.

I'd recommend both to anyone who likes the films.

I agree Red Dragon looks great, was generally very impressed with that transfer. Also watched Spy Game tonite and was very happy with that transfer as well especially the really contrasty beginning shots in Vietnam when Pitts character was recruited to do that assassination. Some beautiful stuff.

Popped back in Troy or a 2nd look and was still disappointed with that disc. One of the things that bothers me with that transfer is there seems to be a serious lack of detail in the scenes that should have looked the best such as the boats travelling to Troy and battle scenes with large amounts of people in them. Those scenes just do not contain the detail that we are seeing in other titles. I for one dont understand it as its a very clean image with very little filtration plus its a newer film. Wierd, very wierd.

PS....

What you're describing sounds more like a byproduct of the fuzzy CGI used in all of the "epic" scenes.

I wasnt aware there were CGI problems associated with Troy as I didnt really pay that much attention to it in SD. That would however be a very reasonable explaination with the problems I am seeing with the HD transfer. Why did they have such problems? Who did they use for thier special effects studio? Very weird again that a high budget big hollywood title such as this would have poor CGI sequences. Either way the scenes that should have stood out as the most impressive are simply just ok and again I was expecting so much more from this one. Guess you cant win em all :-)

PS...

Here are my thoughts on the latest three from Universal:

Seabiscuit:

Video - Seabiscuit arrives on HD-DVD courtesy of Universal Pictures in a 1080p Widescreen 2:35:1 Aspect Ratio. Chalk another great transfer from the folks at Universal. Sometimes people wonder why Universal decides to release films like this when they have such larger titles in their catalog (some are coming). Seabiscuit is clearly another example of a title not many think would look as good as it does.

Colors race to your eyes at such a fast rate that clarity is never an issue. In fact, the level of color is so detailed. Take any scene you wish (one particular scene of my choice was the initial race sequence). Pause the film, walk up to your screen and look for a second. Like some other HD transfers, try to find an error. I must have starred at my sceen for a few minutes attempting to find an error. No edge enhancement, grain, washed out colors, or pixilation. In fact, there’s a few scenes where one can see the little fibers on the hat’s of the gentlemen watching the races.

Due to the SD-DVD release boasting quite the fine visuals, Universal didn’t really have to do much to impress us on this HD release. I was quite surprised that Universal improved the image on the level they did. Images look more realistic, defining, and moving. The logo of HD-DVD is truly becoming, well, true. ‘The Look And Sound Of Perfect’ rings extremely correct in this case.

Audio - Presented in the standard Dolby Digital Plus 5.1 with either English, Francais, or Espanol, Seabiscuit sounds amazing. A film of this nature, due to the constant pounding on the horses racing up and down the tracks, cried out for a Dolby TrueHD audio track. However, like a majority of Universal releases, Universal opted out on this release. Trust me here, this is the only possibly shame here.

First up, the dialogue is quite clear especially in some of the powerful scenes (try any of the racing sequences). One could figure that the dialogue may become muddled or hard to hear, but such is not the case, as I never detected a problem. The best part of this track is that the surrounds are so well placed. Little items like the screams of cheering fans and the stamping of the horses’ hooves race past our in ears in quite the delightful manner. Dialogue arrives from the standard front, sometimes a bit too quite, but such is usually the case in a film like this.

The biggest item here is that the pounding sound of your sub. Granted the sub doesn’t allow boom and pound, but when it needs to, you’ll hear it coming from a mile away (well, tis what my neighbors said). Like I mentioned above, the only possible error even the most die-hard audiophile could find here is the exclusion of a Dolby TrueHD audio track. Nothing else is wrong on another great release from Universal.

Red Dragon:

Video - Red Dragon arrives in our arms in a 1080p Widescreen 2:35:1 Aspect Ratio. Compared to the SD-DVD release, Red Dragon boasted quite the impressive transfer. Colors were fine, grain was present but not completely an eyesore, and pixilation was nowhere to be found.

For this HD-DVD release, Universal has cleaned up any real errors that plagued the SD-DVD release. Colors are deeper, richer, and more profound than ever. Due to this being a type of horror film, the blacks really stood out to me giving the film an even creepier feeling while watching it. I had feared that some of the film’s dark settings would look washed out and poor, but that’s the exact opposite here. Grain somewhat plagued the SD-DVD release. The grain has been touched up giving a majority of the sequences a more professional look.

The only possible error that’s present here is some of the sequences, particularly the outdoor sequences, looked overly sharp creating the type of effect that looked like the sequences were overly compressed. This is more a slight problem that something to mark in the severe column. In the end, Red Dragon is a fine transfer, but isn’t as bright and powerful as HD should be.

Audio - Presented in the standard Dolby Digital Plus 5.1, Red Dragonsounds a lot better than it looked. The biggest pro here is the effective use of the surrounds which create an enveloping effect literally grabbing you in some scenes and bringing you into the film.

Dialogue is clean and clear which is a big plus since I had figured that a surround heavy film like this would result in, at least, a few sequences of muddled dialogue. Such wasn’t the case though as the film’s haunting, creepy score by legend Danny Elfman and dialogue compensated each other. This was quite the pleasure for me as too many films can’t get this correct resulting in the viewer constantly having to adjust the film’s volume.

The Dolby Digital 5.1 Audio Track that was found on the impressive Director’s Cut Edition of this film created quite the nice range of dynamics. The newer Dolby Digital Plus 5.1 improves on this 5.1 Audio Track in a few ways. Dynamics, especially the aforementioned surrounds, have been improved. Little things like cars screeching, footsteps in the background, and dialogue in the rear, sound better giving the full home theater experience. Another solid effort on Universal’s part.

Traffic:

Video - Traffic arrives courtesy of Universal onto the HD-DVD format in a 1080p Widescreen 1:85:1 Aspect Ratio. Considering the interesting direction by Steven Soderbergh (in relevance to his shooting style), Traffic probably looks as good as it ever will on any HD format.

The biggest issue some may have with this transfer is the amount of grain. Personally, the grain is probably intentional due to Soderbergh’s visual style of direction. I suppose the message the film conveys allows the grain to showcase the type of world these people are involved in. Colors, on the other hand, seem out of place. Blacks seem overly black creating a few scenes that require one to squint. Whites are too white resulting in scenery that is overly bright and blurred.

Traffic is a mixed bag. Some will hate the transfer due to the expected improvement HD is suppose to have over SD. I found the presented transfer, despite some issues, to be quite fine. This was mainly because I realized that this film is probably the best it will ever look. Very similar to the audio below, the video is nothing demo worthy, but does its job.

Audio - Presented with the standard Dolby Digital Plus 5.1, Traffic isn’t the type of movie that you throw in to demo. With that said, the provided audio track does its’ job, but seemed a bit underwhelming.

Dialogue arrives to our ears in a usually clean, but sometimes muddled manner. This is probably due to the mid’s being so high. When you have higher mid’s in a dialogue heavy film, the dialogue tends to come off somewhat muddled, which is the case here. The bass on the other hand, is low and relatively unheard of for a majority of the film. The overall surrounds are presented in a fine manner that is when they can be actually heard without blasting your setup.

The only real scene you may find yourself playing a few times through is the attack on the drug lord’s home. This is where the aforementioned weak surrounds, are presented in a situation that can truly give them breathing room. Guns boom and bullets zoom creating a nice atmosphere. Bass is relatively low in this scene though. One should expect a huge rocking soundtrack for Traffic. I didn’t and I came off pleasantly surprised with the end result.

I am not sure why you would say that about Seabiscuit. Why or what would make people think that this print would not look good in HD? If anything the opposite is true. I fully expect this to be one of the better transfers givin its a very clean film with very little filtration except of course the tungstun to daylight conversion filter present in much of the film. That combined with the fact that it used the very sharp Vision2 family of films would suggest that this would be a very pleasing HD transfer with very accurate flesh tones with very high image quality.

I am also surprised you found the outdoors scenes in Red Dragon problematic. I found them to be some of the best stuff in the film especially the Florida scenes. Ill have to give it another look as I just didnt see what your describing.

As for Traffic, everything you descibe including the grain to the blacks and whites to the contrast level was not only intentional but overtly so. This film was cross processed or properly called Ektachrome Reversal Processing as they call it in hollywood. I dont know if your farmiliar with these processes but they are done to give more grain and to throw the contrast and colors out of whack. Other movies that used this or a similar process are Pitch Black & Sleepy Hollow.

The HD transfer of Traffic is another good example of a HD transfer that is not trying to be like Aeon Flux. Its not trying to be the sharpest print with no grain and accurate colors with average contrast. It is a highly stylized film and people need to understand what to expect out of a transfer before critiquing it. Given that everything you mentioned was done on purpose, that needs to be taken into account before comparing it to other transfers, especially HD transfers, where the characteristics that most people expect from HD are going to be drastically effected.

Its this sentence by you that is really problematic

"Some will hate the transfer due to the expected improvement HD is suppose to have over SD"


Wether or not you end up liking the final product is another topic all together and you may very well hate it. The fact is these aspects of the film that you have mentioned were in fact done on purpose & that changes everything when your actually critiquing it.

PS...

That would be why I mentioned some may have a problem with the grain. I personally didn't find anything wrong with this as I mentioned above. It felt helped the film's theme. I'm aware that Soderbergh decided to film in this manner. Again the Traffic comment is coming off a conversation I had with a guy at work. He declared that the HD transfer of Traffic was only 10% better (I feel that it's much better than that).

The comment on improving HD would be that the average person would expect HD to be an amazing improvement based on how it's being advertised.

As for the Seabiscuit comment, I meant that not many would think of a film like Seabiscuit in relevance to a demo title. Probably titles like Troy or something would pop up (big titles). Granted Seabiscuit was a great film and was kind of popular, but not many would think the title would look good (I based this comment on a conversation I had with a friend at work). He was very surprised that Seabiscuit looked as good as it did. Possibly this comment was based on him never seeing the film?

The Red Dragon comment, I feel, is kind of true. Keep in mind that not everyone will find the comments to be true. This problem doesn't overly affect the film though, which is what I mentioned. It depends on a lot of factors.

The problem is that not liking the grain, at least when talking about this film, has nothing to do with the HD transfer (Unless of course there is a dramatic change in grain from the SD tranfer to HD transfer, which there isnt). In fact it has nothing to do with the transfer at all. That grain is a part of the film itself and regardless of what medium you watch it on or wether it is in HD or SD, that film grain will always be there. The same goes for everything else you described including the contrast, color saturation and black levels. None of these things are a product of the transfer but a product of the development of the actual film and was present before the first transfer even existed. Again they are signature characteristics of cross processing.

Thats what I was trying to get across with my first post. When your going to critique a film transfer you have to make sure that what it is your actually critiquing is in fact a product of the transfer or a product of the film itself or even something else like what kind of equipment your watching it on. If you go back and reread your original critique youll see that all of the things you were discussing in terms of picture quality were in fact consequences of film choice and film development chosen on purpose by the director. you would then realize that these things have absolutly nothing to do with the HD transfer and has everything to do creative choices made by the director.

Dont get me wrong your critiquing of the contrast and of the colors and grain and of everything else you mentioned is all very valid, its just not valid in terms of it or they being a product of the transfer itself. The fact that you dont like these characteristics would suggest that you dont like the cross processing process and it is within this process where your critique of the quality of the film actually lies.

Its all about understanding just what to expect from each transfer and the only way to do this is to have knowledge on the original film source. If you dont know the main technical details about a particular film, such as it was cross processed, you have no way of determining just what a transfer should and could look like.


I guess I can see what your saying. However I hope that everyone on these boards ,who I assume are a little more educated and open minded than most in terms of film, realize that subject matter really has nothing to do with how nice of a trasnfer a film will end up having.

By the way I hope you dont take my critiquing your critiques in the wrong way. I absolutly love it when people critique and have nothing but 100% respect for anyone attempting to do so. I feel critiquing is by far the most important thing a viewer can do to help further his education, appreciation and understanding of art in general. I have my Bachelor degree in Fine Arts with a Master in Photography and I had numerous classes on critiquing and it really is a field of study all by itself. So please dont take these posts the wrong way. I appreciate anyone who takes the time to write his opinions down for others to read.

PS...

Oh heck no.. I've always felt that the best critics are those who can critique in a fine manner but also take other's compliments/insults/suggestions. No one is perfect in anything they do. We're always learning.

Remember all the times people would post messages about the only movies looking any different in HD would be movies made recently? The Searchers is not only amazing for a 50 year old movie, it's better than a lot of whats being made today!

I would also add that the cinematography in this movie is fantastic and the dvd just doesn't do it justice.

Wizard of Oz my friend .... Wizard of Oz. -wink-

not only Wizard of Oz, but both 'Singin' In the Rain' and 'Willy Wonka' should look stunning in their garish colour schemes..

Hey, I forgot about Wonka! Seeing how WB is throwing both Wonka movies out on one day, classic and remake, you have to wonder if their Nov 14th slate will contain King Kong(33) to go along with Universal's release.

I mentioned Oz because it was on the leaked list and the last dvd release was great .

Singin' In The Rain is probably going to be my demo disc when they decide to release it. The colors pop in that film like nowhere else.

Agree. Can you imagine what Black Narcissus would look like? Drool.

Oh man, and The Red Shoes. Hell, even Peeping Tom would be fantastic.

Excuse me, I have some Criterions to rewatch... :D

Has anyone viewed Backdraft yet? I should be getting it from Amazon in a day or two, but I'd like to get a preview on how the transfer is.

I had talked about it in the main release thread last week.

The transfer of Backdraft is good, but not fantastic...there's still some dirt every now and then in the print, and some visible grain in many shots. For a 15-year-old movie though, it's not bad. I'd put it on par with the recent release of Lethal Weapon 2 in terms of A/V quality.

On the other hand, I had a chance to watch Terminator 3 on HD-DVD last night, and the A/V quality is stunning. This is a reference-quality disc from Warners, so fans of this movie are going to be quite pleased with the HD-DVD.

Adventures of Robin Hood + Rabbit Hood + Robin Hood Daffy. -wink-

I can't wait for those Looney Tunes cartoons on Robin Hood. I am drooling at the thought.

Word. Two of my all-time favorite Looney Tunes at that.