|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
24.91.201.174
A limited number of the Bond films have been yet again remastered and released on standard DVD with a DTS option. I have A/B'd "Goldfinger (arguably the best Bond film ever) and found a very slight improvement in picture quality (watching this through a progressive scan Panasonic DVD player on a SONY RPTV calibrtated by ISF guru Jim Doolittle). The improvement in sound is marked, however, and the DTS track is sweeter and more intelligable when compared to the Dolby Digital sound on the most recent DVD prior to this. Plus there are two comentaries, one of which is a rehash of a mid-ninties laserdisc track.
Follow Ups:
(nt)
Glad we agree on the sound (DTS rules!). Just curious, can you point out a scene or a still in which this "marked" improvement in color correction is manifest?
The orangy-red palate of the earlier Special Edition never quite looked right to me; I just assumed that the color dyes had changed over the years. Well, to my eyes the remaster looks dead-on from start to finish.DVDBeaver Reviewer comments:
> > > "The new remastered MGM is superior in just about every area - from the important original aspect ratio of 1.66:1 (SE was in 1.78 - slightly cropped) to the color scheme which appears more correct to my eye (although I am unsure of its theatrical correctness). The new remastered release is smoother (cleaner), less artifacts, has more information in the frame - the image quality towers above the old Special Edition. Audio - the new remastered gives a DTS, 5.1 or original mono track as options. The bumps sounded quite buoyant. Even the subs are more complete. Note two errors in the SE - it IS 'FIns' Brandy (not 'fine') and in the second example the famous line DOES include Mr. Bond's name. The new subtitles are extremely bulky though." < < <
MY Impressions:
There are vivid differences and subtle differences, including the film looking much cleaner, more natural and less grainy; when I say "less grainy" I don't mean without enough film grain to have an appropriate film-like appearance. The amount of grain in the earlier MGM Special Edition actually gave the film the look of generational loss, as if a 16mm print had been blown up to 35mm or a worn inter-positive print rather than a pristine negative had been accessed.You and I may still have a differing perspective, but one thing I suggest looking for in the DVD Beaver frame grabs I've linked below is how a initially sharper or brighter looking frame in the SE release given more than a cursory A/B comparison with the exact same frame from the remaster displays noticeable ringing and flatness, not to mention the aspect ratio cropping and orangy-reddish appearance mentioned before.
I've seen other frame grabs elsewhere that demonstrate these differences even more accutely; granted it isn't night and day, but as I see it the older transfer has a dusk-ier feel (as inexpensively as these remastered editions can be picked up individually it seems like a no-brainer to me, anyway)! :o)
Cheers,
AuPh
Thanks very much. Most informative and helpful. rico
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: