That review above and this one below:romerojpg wrote:Who on earth told you that
http://www.blu-ray.com/movies/The-Last- ... 98/#Review
It does look dark though, agreed.
That review above and this one below:romerojpg wrote:Who on earth told you that
I can't find significant enough difference between the two transfers that we will assume came from the same source (running time is duplicated to the 1/1000th of second). Technically the Paramount is stronger but not enough so that anyone will make issue. Both are dual-layered and utilizing the AVC encode - the only thing I would say is that the UK release may be marginally greener at times (most notable in flesh tones) which may be something as simple as a slightly older telecine. Both look pretty solid in my opinion and you'd have to have a phenomenal eye to catch the discrepancies viewing in motion.
It's better in some regards... but there's something niggling me about the change of appearence.Shingster wrote:I think a trip to the opticians is in order for Mark!![]()
More picture information, richer saturation, more accurate colour balance, more detail, better encoding, and the grain structure is now present. It's a complete overhaul.
theatrical cuts are the directors cuts as far as i know.http://forum.blu-ray.com/3702733-post10.htmlbradavon wrote:How weird to include the Theatrical not Director's Cuts.
As do I, but the DCs for 2 and 3 are obviously bogus.grim_tales wrote:I liked the DC of Lethal Weapon 1
More picture information, richer saturation, more accurate colour balance, more detail, better encoding, yeah it's better in some regards alright!Markgway wrote:It's better in some regards
Yeah it's called accuracy, hard to moan about that!... but there's something niggling me about the change of appearence.
It's not worsened either. It's about the one area that isn't an immediately noticable improvement, but then it didn't need improving on.Shadow detail is one area that's not improved.
Shingster wrote:Yeah it's called accuracy, hard to moan about that!