'Blood Diamond' - High-Def Digest review

[jed]

Peter's review of the HD DVD edition of 'Blood Diamond' is up, and as a dual-format release from Warner, this one's certainly unusual. Although the Blu-ray edition got a 30-day headstart to store shelves, HD DVD fans are rewarded for their wait with a wealth of exclusive content (including the studio's first web-enabled supplements to appear on a next-gen disc).

Full review here:
http://hddvd.highdefdigest.com/blooddiamond.html

[onavarr8]

man I had already heard PQ was same as blu-ray...im im still glad it did good overall...my copy arrives tomorrow!

[Cochise]

Originally Posted by jed

Peter's review of the HD DVD edition of 'Blood Diamond' is up, and as a dual-format release from Warner, this one's certainly unusual. Although the Blu-ray edition got a 30-day headstart to store shelves, HD DVD fans are rewarded for their wait with a wealth of exclusive content (including the studio's first web-enabled supplements to appear on a next-gen disc).

Full review here:
http://hddvd.highdefdigest.com/blooddiamond.html

Yep. This is why I first invested in in HD DVD over a year ago - the promise of true next gen interactivity.

"While 'Blood Diamond' may only scratch the surface in terms of what's technically possible on a next-gen disc, even as is, it's a real gem."

[flynn]

Anyone know if this will work in a 360 add-on?

[Blurry]

Originally Posted by flynn

Anyone know if this will work in a 360 add-on?

It would be surprising if it didn't.

[Xtreem813]

I'm sure it'll work on the 360 but you won't be able to get the Dolby TrueHD.

Now if only Warner would stop being lazy and do the same for Blu-ray, I would be interested and this format war would be more interesting.

[imdaly]

Originally Posted by Xtreem813

Now if only Warner would stop being lazy and do the same for Blu-ray, I would be interested and this format war would be more interesting.

It's not Warner being lazy. They're working with what both formats have given them.

[casper77]

I am getting this one for sure. I have been holding off watching it in DVD and XBOX360 marketplace.

[califlaman1976]

does anyone know if RCA is planning any sort of firmware update for this, for the hdv5000 or if they will even need to. some of the problems ive read about with some of the other titles recently i havent noticed problems with on my rca. im not sure how many people on here own one of these? i checked there website but theres no mention so hopefully this will play fine come tuesday when i pick it up like i said though i havent had any problems thus far even on titles like the matrix collection or children of men or good shepard or any of the other now 88 titles i have so i hope this will be the same with blood diamond

[HomeTheatreFreak]

Its actually really wierd but I recieved this early from Amazon getting it in the mail on Friday afternoon. Whats wierd is I orderd it with The Untouchables yet they shipped Blood Diamond by itself. I am hoping that doesnt mean some kind of delay for The Untouchables as they should have been packaged together and shipped out on tuesday. Anyways I am not complaining as it allowed me to watch this a couple days early and that I did as I watched it earlier this evening.

My conclusion is that this film simply looks amazing on HD DVD and I was pleasantly surprised that they really kept the gritty theatrical appearance as I thought for sure this would be a title that they tried to remove some grain from as unfortuantely we have been seeing more and more of that these days and I couldnt possibly be more against such actions. Altering a films appearance for home video is altering the DoP's vision for the film and changes the overall feel of the film. Again its a practice that should be abolished as its insulting to the people who made the film and its insulting to people who love watching films the way they were meant to be seen.

As for the review on this film, I dont even know what to say. I have been reading review sites since I first got into DVD like 10 years ago. I actually remember signing up for DVDtalk the first week it went live on the net. All I can say is I never remember anything like the problems were seeing now with reviews happening with SD DVD. For the most part reviewers for SD DVD really did a good job overall and while there were certainly times where I would run across a review or two that I disagreed with it was usually for reasons that I could appreciate thus I never really had a problem with such reviews.

I certainly cannot say the same for HD. These formats have been plauged with terrible reviews IMO. It used to be films were judged by how close they represented thier theatrical presentation. It didnt matter if a film was grainy or stylized, if the home video did a great job of preserving the theatrical presentations look and feel it was awarded a good review and rightfully so as that is really what the home video people should be doing. They should be trying to match the theatrical look and preserve how the director of photography wanted his film to look. Now with HD it seems like the entire system has been turned on its head. Instead of reviewers judging a film by how well it preserves its intended and theatrical look, they know judge each film by comparing them to other HD films. Its like they find the best looking HD film and by best I mean, zero grain and snappy picture, the kind that really show of HD the best and I think everyone here knows what kind of look I am referring to here, the kind that give that really 3d effect. They use such transfer to set the bar and then judge all the other HD films on how well they match up to that particular films image quality.

Its a disgrace to reviewing because what your ultimatly saying is that stylized films and films that have some grain to them will always end up getting a bad picture quality review no matter what the DoP intended and no matter how well the home theatre version lives up to its theatrical version. Its a terrible way of reviewing and I couldnt possible diasgree with it more.

Blood Diamond is a perfect example of such a film. This HD DVD version matches the theatrical version perfectly. I saw this film in the theatre multiple times and absolutly loved the overall look of this film and that isnt surprising really becaus I love gritty, grainly and stylized especially when its effect is subtle as it is in this movie. This picture isnt extremely grainy and its certainly not a heavily stylized film however it has both and IMO it resulted in what was without a doubt one of my favorite looking films of 2006. In fact I loved the overall look of ths film so much tht I actually purchased 2 canisters of Kodak Vision2 500T 5218 & Vision 500T 5279 film and tried to replicate the look this film had so I could use it myself when I shoot people on 35mm.

Giving this film a 3 star rating for PQ is just a crime and it shows without a single doubt that the current system some people are using to review such films is nothing short of a joke. We all know that Universal has released a bunch of catalog titles rescently that have recieved 3 stars and I even disagreed woth some of those ratings however this film is far above the quality of those recent releases and yet somehow recieved the same exact film quality score. Its utterly mind boggling and I for one am done with it. I refuse to spend time reading reviews by people that seem to utterly disregard what the people making the film intented and totally disregard its theatrical look. These reviewers are so obsessed with a perfect 3d picture quality that they have forgetten how to properly review a film's picture quality.

Its almost like the reviewers are reviewing the films based on those threads that were created showing some kind of tier system for how films look compared to one another. This forum has one and so does AVS and while its certainly fine to create such a thread and trying to make a scale that shows just how eye popping one films image quality is towards another, using such a system towards rating films is not fine as a matter of fact its just plain pathetic.

If you want your films reviewed using methods that do nothing short of comparing how close a particular films picture quality is to the Sahara, Aeon Flux or whatever other transfers they are using as thier standard then by all means keep reading. I however strive to actually find quality reviews by people that not only understand how films are made but also understand that photography is a medium that can literally give you thousands of different visual qualities and that is something that should be celebrated, not something that should be looked down upon.

Of course ill still come here and post on these forums but I will be getting my film reviews elsewhere. If Blood Diamond is a 3 star PQ, I am the king of england.

[califlaman1976]

Originally Posted by HomeTheatreFreak

Its actually really wierd but I recieved this early from Amazon getting it in the mail on Friday afternoon. Whats wierd is I orderd it with The Untouchables yet they shipped Blood Diamond by itself. I am hoping that doesnt mean some kind of delay for The Untouchables as they should have been packaged together and shipped out on tuesday. Anyways I am not complaining as it allowed me to watch this a couple days early and that I did as I watched it earlier this evening.

My conclusion is that this film simply looks amazing on HD DVD and I was pleasantly surprised that they really kept the gritty theatrical appearance as I thought for sure this would be a title that they tried to remove some grain from as unfortuantely we have been seeing more and more of that these days and I couldnt possibly be more against such actions. Altering a films appearance for home video is altering the DoP's vision for the film and changes the overall feel of the film. Again its a practice that should be abolished as its insulting to the people who made the film and its insulting to people who love watching films the way they were meant to be seen.

As for the review on this film, I dont even know what to say. I have been reading review sites since I first got into DVD like 10 years ago. I actually remember signing up for DVDtalk the first week it went live on the net. All I can say is I never remember anything like the problems were seeing now with reviews happening with SD DVD. For the most part reviewers for SD DVD really did a good job overall and while there were certainly times where I would run across a review or two that I disagreed with it was usually for reasons that I could appreciate thus I never really had a problem with such reviews.

I certainly cannot say the same for HD. These formats have been plauged with terrible reviews IMO. It used to be films were judged by how close they represented thier theatrical presentation. It didnt matter if a film was grainy or stylized, if the home video did a great job of preserving the theatrical presentations look and feel it was awarded a good review and rightfully so as that is really what the home video people should be doing. They should be trying to match the theatrical look and preserve how the director of photography wanted his film to look. Now with HD it seems like the entire system has been turned on its head. Instead of reviewers judging a film by how well it preserves its intended and theatrical look, they know judge each film by comparing them to other HD films. Its like they find the best looking HD film and by best I mean, zero grain and snappy picture, the kind that really show of HD the best and I think everyone here knows what kind of look I am referring to here, the kind that give that really 3d effect. They use such transfer to set the bar and then judge all the other HD films on how well they match up to that particular films image quality.

Its a disgrace to reviewing because what your ultimatly saying is that stylized films and films that have some grain to them will always end up getting a bad picture quality review no matter what the DoP intended and no matter how well the home theatre version lives up to its theatrical version. Its a terrible way of reviewing and I couldnt possible diasgree with it more.

Blood Diamond is a perfect example of such a film. This HD DVD version matches the theatrical version perfectly. I saw this film in the theatre multiple times and absolutly loved the overall look of this film and that isnt surprising really becaus I love gritty, grainly and stylized especially when its effect is subtle as it is in this movie. This picture isnt extremely grainy and its certainly not a heavily stylized film however it has both and IMO it resulted in what was without a doubt one of my favorite looking films of 2006. In fact I loved the overall look of ths film so much tht I actually purchased 2 canisters of Kodak Vision2 500T 5218 & Vision 500T 5279 film and tried to replicate the look this film had so I could use it myself when I shoot people on 35mm.

Giving this film a 3 star rating for PQ is just a crime and it shows without a single doubt that the current system some people are using to review such films is nothing short of a joke. We all know that Universal has released a bunch of catalog titles rescently that have recieved 3 stars and I even disagreed woth some of those ratings however this film is far above the quality of those recent releases and yet somehow recieved the same exact film quality score. Its utterly mind boggling and I for one am done with it. I refuse to spend time reading reviews by people that seem to utterly disregard what the people making the film intented and totally disregard its theatrical look. These reviewers are so obsessed with a perfect 3d picture quality that they have forgetten how to properly review a film's picture quality.

Its almost like the reviewers are reviewing the films based on those threads that were created showing some kind of tier system for how films look compared to one another. This forum has one and so does AVS and while its certainly fine to create such a thread and trying to make a scale that shows just how eye popping one films image quality is towards another, using such a system towards rating films is not fine as a matter of fact its just plain pathetic.

If you want your films reviewed using methods that do nothing short of comparing how close a particular films picture quality is to the Sahara, Aeon Flux or whatever other transfers they are using as thier standard then by all means keep reading. I however strive to actually find quality reviews by people that not only understand how films are made but also understand that photography is a medium that can literally give you thousands of different visual qualities and that is something that should be celebrated, not something that should be looked down upon.

Of course ill still come here and post on these forums but I will be getting my film reviews elsewhere. If Blood Diamond is a 3 star PQ, I am the king of england.

Great Post, i agree with you 100 percent. if this is the type of review that blood diamond gets, just imagine what grind house will be getting when(if) that comes to hddvd.

[imdaly]

Originally Posted by HomeTheatreFreak

I am hoping that doesnt mean some kind of delay for The Untouchables as they should have been packaged together and shipped out on tuesday.

Just want to assure you that "The Untouchables" is on schedule. The Circuit City where I work has had it's couple of copies sitting in the back for nearly a week now, awaiting Tuesday's release.


And I can't agree more with your little rant there about reviews that knock down the score of a disc because it is true to the intentional grain some films have.

[HomeTheatreFreak]

Originally Posted by califlaman1976

Great Post, i agree with you 100 percent. if this is the type of review that blood diamond gets, just imagine what grind house will be getting when(if) that comes to hddvd.

Grindhouse will have to score a 1 or 2 based on this kind of rediculous scale. The only questio now is wether or not he will actually give it a score like that and at least remain consistant of if he loses that as well in the coming reviews.

I mean I really hate to be so harsh but his reviews lately have SUCKED and I mean that sincerely. Sneakers, Mystery Men, and now Blood Diamond and I am sure there are other I just havent gotten too yet as I havent watched many of the nwere releases lately as I am still in my busy season with work. Its just a shame it really is.

[HomeTheatreFreak]

Originally Posted by imdaly

Just want to assure you that "The Untouchables" is on schedule. The Circuit City where I work has had it's couple of copies sitting in the back for nearly a week now, awaiting Tuesday's release.


And I can't agree more with your little rant there about reviews that knock down the score of a disc because it is true to the intentional grain some films have.

Cool thx, nice to hear. Untouchables was one of my favorite films growing up and was really looking forward to my son seeing it for the first time and me seeing it in HD for the first time. Wierd how Amazon shipped this order but I am sure they had thier reasons. No harm no foul.

[irascian]

This is the first review I really feel quite angry about. Not the review of the film because opinions will always vary, but the picture quality rating. I would have given this a 4.5 and it's certainly a lot better than discs I've seen here given a 4 or even a 5 rating.

As for the guy who asked about XBox 360. The web content sort of works. Every few seconds during the initial (incredibly slow) download it keeps asking you if it can install a cookie - after about 50 times it gets really tired, really quickly. Especially when you see that all you've downloaded is a very basic web page with little to appeal at all. A waste of time in my view.