Well, you sure schooled me with your detailed technical analysis right there.

Yeah, and William Friedkin says that The French Connection was always intended to be tinted purple...

I've seen Ghostbusters in every format it has ever been in and the Blu-ray looks the best of them all. It was very noticeable when I put the disc in for the first time.

Mr. Friedkin is an authority on the subject, you are not. Just like you are not an authority on The Godfather, yet you proceeded to dismiss the restored print that was released on Blu-ray. (Your posts are still on this forum). With other words, your newest dismissal is not surprising.

Pro-B

Once again, your newest exaggerations and distortions of fact are not surprising.

I never dismissed the restored Godfather print. I merely pointed out that, in one specific screen cap that was distributed prior to the disc's release, the contrast levels appeared too hot. I made no judgements on the transfer as a whole. I was even very clear that I was commenting only on that still, which may or may not represent what the disc actually looked like during playback.

Of course, you, as always, misinterpreted what was written.

Mr. Friedkin may be an authority on The French Connection. Wouldn't you also consider his cinematographer, Owen Roizman, the man who actually photographed the movie, to be an authority on how The French Connection should look? Mr. Roizman has stated that Mr. Friedkin is full of crap. Of the French Connection Blu-ray, and I will directly quote him here: "It's not the film that I shot, and I certainly want to wash my hands of having had anything to do with this transfer, which I feel is atrocious."

But you go right ahead believing that The French Connection was always supposed to be tinted purple if you want. Because that's just so much more likely a scenario than that William Friedkin (who supervised the new transfer based on viewing it on a 20-inch CRT monitor, by the way) could be trying to impose revisionist ideas on the movie 30 years later.

I'm done. He's not worth responding to any further.

I've actually seen Ghostbusters in 35mm and the film was very grainy, especially the SFX shots. The only way the film would look better is if Sony invested the time and money and went back to restore the original print of the film. Since I don't think that will ever happen, I'll take what I can get.

I think Ghostbusters looks great on BD and looks almost to that of the actual film print.

On another note, Ivan Reitman's special effects laden comedies have been pretty grainy. Can't say much for Ghostbusters II (as I haven't seen it in 35mm), but Evolution was another film that was very grainy (especially the SFX shots) that got a lot of complaints when it hit DVD for that specific reason (whereas the ten of us who saw it in theaters could prove otherwise).

Good evening to you.

You may feel that what I have written is an exaggeration, but Mr. Harris participated in a well known thread, right here at DVDTALK, for a reason.

Mr. Friedkin is an authority on the issue you brought up. With other words, your analogy was poor.

Mr. Reitman's approval of Sony's Blu-ray treatment is on record.

Pro-B

I'm pretty sure William Friedkin also approved the transfer on the DVD, which is a sign that he's just gone crazy when it comes to the Blu-Ray.

But Friedikin comes out on the Blu-ray and talks about how he changed it and why...unlike, say, Coppola's "Bram Stoker's Dracula" Blu-ray, which they're still trying to tell us was the way the movie appeared in theaters.

As for Ghostbusters, it's an okay Blu-ray transfer. Nothing great, but nothing to get too disappointed about, either. In other words, it looks fine - but it's not exactly a demo disc for the format.