'The Last Starfighter' - High-Def Digest Review

[Attebery]

David has reviewed 'The Last Starfighter.' He says this 80s favorite rekindles the spirit of the space serials of yore. Fans should be happy with this Blu-ray, which isn't a knockout, but offers a big bump up from the DVD. This is for fans. Enjoy!

Full review here:
http://bluray.highdefdigest.com/2326...arfighter.html

[pkremer]

Ha! I actually discovered this movie on late night TBS. Haven't seen it in a few years, but you used to be able to see it pretty regularly at about 1 am not that long ago. What is it about cheesy 80s movies that I am unable to resist?

[Flex Mentallo]

This is one those reviews where I read it and i think to myself, "what kind of pq/aq was this reviewer expecting?"

I have the HD DVD (which I watched 2 weeks ago) so I haven't watched the BD. I think the HD DVD is darn near perfect and I'm assuming if the BD is indeed a "port" of the HD DVD like the reviewer states then the BD should look great as well. Obviously this isn't going to look like Watchmen much less the uber-restoration effort provided to Blade Runner. However, for a film of this vintage, without a massive restoration effort, the PQ is on point.

I'll assume the DTS HD MA is louder than the True HD of the HD DVD, still, I'd have to give props for the lossless audio track of the HD DVD. Mostly a front heavy experience with a few surround effects thrown into the rears for good measure. I agree with the AQ score given although I'm not as down on it as the reviewer is.

Overall, this is a good flick with some really good PQ and AQ. As long your expectations are put in check, I believe most will see and hear just how good the high def presentation of The Last Starfighter really is.

[Bouncy X]

i thought the picture was pretty damn amazing myself. its so nice you'd think this movie was made this year. this and Big Trouble in Little China are pretty damn impressive for 80s movies.

[The_Doctor]

For what this movie is the HD and Blu look damned good. I don't know what people reviewing it were expecting.
Strange how the size of this disc is relevant for discussing the quality of the PQ "but this BD-25 from Universal certainly won’t be one of your demo discs."

I don't know the the film was ever intended to "pop" as the reviewers want it to. I thought the standard for good PQ was how close it comes to the intended picture the director wanted or how it looked in the theater

[Boston007]

This is a CLASSIC movie. A MUST OWN for me. If you are a Gen Xer you had to have seen this movie

[crazzeto]

so being exactly the same as the HD DVD give the PQ on the bluray a 1 star bump? Oh well

Not that good a film to begin with. You'd have to really be into this one as a kid to still enjoy it. I thought I was, then I saw it recently and it was rather.... meh.

[Gunyaga]

^^^I had the exact same experience when this was released on HD DVD-I was pretty pumped to watch it, and was a bit disappointed. This movie did not age well at all.

[dbacksfan]

Originally Posted by crazzeto

so being exactly the same as the HD DVD give the PQ on the bluray a 1 star bump? Oh well

I thought Peter's PQ score was a little severe. I noticed many of the same issues he did, but they didn't bother me quite as much...hence my slightly higher score.

[Gunyaga]

that makes sense-if Peter had reviewed both discs, or you had, this would be a discrepancy, but two different reviewers+two different opinions makes sense.

[Filmmaker]

Here's the part I don't get, and not to always be on Mr. Krauss' back, but why is the saving grace of this film--it's "golly gee-whiz" mentality--the main drawback in his review of FIELD OF DREAMS? I just can't get a lock on Mr. Krauss' tastes...

[Gunyaga]

Well, for one, you're comparing apples to oranges-the themes explored in those two movies are entirely different, a whimsical sci-fi romp that was a largely a vehivle to showcase cutting edge special effects should have a much different tone than Field of Dreams.

[crazzeto]

Originally Posted by Gunyaga

that makes sense-if Peter had reviewed both discs, or you had, this would be a discrepancy, but two different reviewers+two different opinions makes sense.

yeah, ok that does make sense.

[Filmmaker]

Originally Posted by Gunyaga

Well, for one, you're comparing apples to oranges-the themes explored in those two movies are entirely different, a whimsical sci-fi romp that was a largely a vehivle to showcase cutting edge special effects should have a much different tone than Field of Dreams.

I don't follow you...they may be different genres and stories, but they both are predicated on a "golly gee-whiz" aesthetic that Mr. Krauss is very derisive of in one case and enthusiastically supportive of in the other. That tonal quality is not out of order in either film; we're not talking SILENCE OF THE LAMBS here. He's a frustratingly inconsistent reviewer; I just wish I could get more of a sense, a "through line", of Krauss' sensibilities.

[dbacksfan]

Hey Filmmaker, hope I can help here. My feeling about the "golly-gee-whiz" aesthetic with regard to 'Field of Dreams' and 'The Last Starfighter' -- without getting into a prolonged dialogue -- is simple and totally subjective. I felt it enhanced 'The Last Starfighter' and detracted from 'Field of Dreams.'

I don't have a problem at all with the aesthetic itself. Sometimes it works for me and other times it doesn't; sometimes it suits a film and other times it doesn't. In my opinion, the attitude seemed genuine in 'The Last Starfighter' and suited the characters and storyline. But it felt forced in 'Field of Dreams.' You'll probably disagree with me and I appreciate that. I'm just trying to explain to you my rationale.