Die Hard 1-4 Blu-Ray release details...

saltysam · Post by **saltysam** » 30 Aug 2007, 19:34

Here http://www.highdefdigest.com/news/show/ ... vember/914

It's pricey,and it's shitty of Fox not to release all 4 seperately nor put all 4 in one box. no mention of the latest one being an r rated version. These will certainly be hard coded Region A.

captainjoe · Post by **captainjoe** » 30 Aug 2007, 20:05

They better release the R-Rated version of part 4! I hope to God the Trilogy transfers are *new* and not the ones used back in 2003,especially Vengeance.

romerojpg · Post by **romerojpg** » 30 Aug 2007, 20:45

captainjoe wrote:They better release the R-Rated version of part 4! I hope to God the Trilogy transfers are *new* and not the ones used back in 2003,especially Vengeance.

I am glad I am not the only one who thinks Vengence looks like shit, the edge enhancement makes everyone look like they died and someone drew a thick white chalk line round them!

I tried to convince another forum that them old dvd was shit, I lost as they proved I was wrong becuse they found lots of posative reviews on the net

Try saying some reviewers have no clue and they just think your crazy, as surley all reviewers know everything

Markgway · Post by **Markgway** » 30 Aug 2007, 23:23

Die Hard 3 looks poor on the R1.

Lourdes · Post by **Lourdes** » 31 Aug 2007, 00:23

Well they lose out. If I can't buy just 1 and perhaps 3 then I'll just get them for free...

captainjoe · Post by **captainjoe** » 31 Aug 2007, 05:49

DVD active has some tiny art samples from FOX.com and LFODH has an UNRATED logo on the cover!

captainjoe · Post by **captainjoe** » 31 Aug 2007, 05:51

romerojpg wrote:
captainjoe wrote:They better release the R-Rated version of part 4! I hope to God the Trilogy transfers are *new* and not the ones used back in 2003,especially Vengeance.
I am glad I am not the only one who thinks Vengence looks like shit, the edge enhancement makes everyone look like they died and someone drew a thick white chalk line round them!

I tried to convince another forum that them old dvd was shit, I lost as they proved I was wrong becuse they found lots of posative reviews on the net Try saying some reviewers have no clue and they just think your crazy, as surley all reviewers know everything

That's too bad you lost. Anyone who can't see it's a bad transfer doesn't know anything about what good picture quality is. Vengeance, IMO, is one of the worst transfers I've ever seen and it will be strange to see it look better if they do restore it.

dvdvision · Post by **dvdvision** » 31 Aug 2007, 06:52

You should have seen the LD... the DVD is of course only DVD quality, but when it came out, it was miles ahead the laserdisc.

romerojpg · Post by **romerojpg** » 31 Aug 2007, 16:17

Yup its amazing people just dont see bad problems with dvds, just becuase its is indeed as dvdvision says the current best version, means little if that best version isnt very good

I acctually thought my dvd player was broke when I rewatched Vengence a while back, the first 2 minutes look like stock footage!

Roll on HD, with a wonderful transfer

and get rid of the FUGL;Y Unrated on Die Hard 4, its awful!

saltysam · Post by **saltysam** » 04 Sep 2007, 21:01

Incredibly Fox are releasing the pg-13 cut of Live Free & Die Hard on blu-ray while standard dvd gets a 2-disc unrated release :shock:

captainjoe · Post by **captainjoe** » 04 Sep 2007, 21:04

saltysam wrote:Incredibly Fox are releasing the pg-13 cut of Live Free & Die Hard on blu-ray while standard dvd gets a 2-disc unrated release :shock:

:x

Does Fox not want Blu-ray to succeed? Maybe it's just an error and it also includes the unrated cut.

dvdvision · Post by **dvdvision** » 05 Sep 2007, 07:45

Well, Casino Royale wasn't the unrated cut on Blue Ray USA (it was in France, australia).

bradavon · Post by **bradavon** » 05 Sep 2007, 11:38

That was slightly different as so was the DVD, plus America wasn't the only country to get it cut.

This isn't the first time they've done it though, outside of the USA Miami Vice is only the Theatrical Cut. There are other examples to but I forget.

I suspect it's more that they have to have a PG-13 cut on Blu-ray for the rental stores and do not consider Blu-ray popular enough to release two versions. I know it won't matter to some but isn't the Unrated cut just a bit of extra violence and swearing?

EvaUnit02 · Post by **EvaUnit02** » 05 Sep 2007, 13:32

bradavon wrote: I know it won't matter to some but isn't the Unrated cut just a bit of extra violence and swearing?

The last part of John McClane's catchphrase "Yippie kiyay..." was covered by a gunshot, I hope that they "fix" that in the unrated cut. I thought that they allowed at least one "fuck" in PG-13 films? Oh well.

dvdvision · Post by **dvdvision** » 05 Sep 2007, 20:14

Bah, I don't care, I buy all the Blue Ray exclusive on standart DVD (or keep the one in my collection) and watch them via upconverting to 1080p. It's not HD, but it's way better than 480p, and I don't have to give more cash to Sony and their money grubbing war of formats. Plus the HD-DVDs are not region coded, and the BR of T2 sucks compared to the HD one, enough for me to say BR have lost ! :shock:

bradavon · Post by **bradavon** » 05 Sep 2007, 21:05

You can blame Toshiba and Microsoft just as much as Sony for creating two formats, just pointing it out.

As good as DVD to 1080i is (I've not seen 1080p) it's nowhere near as good as HD, no way.

saltysam · Post by **saltysam** » 05 Sep 2007, 21:22

fox not releasing the unrated on blu-ray is a disgrace and absolutely ridiculous.their blu-rays are overpriced,region coded. fox you suck ass.

bradavon · Post by **bradavon** » 05 Sep 2007, 22:16

Cheers for the heads up on Fox using BD regional coding. I'll have to remember that one.

gasteropod · Post by **gasteropod** » 05 Sep 2007, 23:13

Fox don't suck ass that much - their UK BD of 'The Fountain' has a DTS HD track and is in 1.85:1 (the Warner US doesn't and is 1.78:1).

bradavon · Post by **bradavon** » 05 Sep 2007, 23:17

And not just DTS-HD but DTS-HD MA, DTS-HD alone doesn't tell you much. DTS-HD HR is just as lossless as Dolby Digital Plus (although I believe DTS-HD HR is a higher bitrate). Add to that Warner only using half-rate DD Plus for The Fountain, the Fox effort should sound miles better.

It is weird how Fox are almost exclusively favouring DTS over Dolby's efforts. 1.78:1 vs. 1.85:1 meh it's the same to me.

gasteropod · Post by **gasteropod** » 05 Sep 2007, 23:24

bradavon wrote:1.78:1 vs. 1.85:1 meh it's the same to me.

OAR, though. I was just pointing out the positives of the Fox over the Warner

EvaUnit02 · Post by **EvaUnit02** » 06 Sep 2007, 00:34

Opening up the matting a tiny bit on a soft-matted 1.85:1 film to fill a 1.78:1 frame makes no real difference. Cropping a hard-matted 1.85:1 film to fill a 1.78:1 frame is not on though.

bradavon · Post by **bradavon** » 06 Sep 2007, 01:41

The difference being so minute would be bloody hard to spot though, side by side comparisons aside.

gasteropod · Post by **gasteropod** » 06 Sep 2007, 01:45

Err, not really considering 1.85 has black borders and 1.78 doesn't...

EvaUnit02 · Post by **EvaUnit02** » 06 Sep 2007, 01:57

gasteropod wrote:Err, not really considering 1.85 has black borders and 1.78 doesn't...

...and those horizontal black borders are normally cut off by overscan.