Info: James Bond - Laserdisc Preservations: 1962-1971 — Page 30

Why are they only releasing a handful of titles in the new Steel Books? If the discs inside are unchanged and even I could have photoshoped the title sequences to make the packaging artwork, why not release them all in this format?

I didn't buy the big 22/23 disc box sets because I had already picked up all of the individual blu-ray titles released in 2008-2009 (Dr No, From Russia With Love, Goldfinger, Thunderball, Live & Let Die, The Man With the Golden Gun, Moonraker, For Your Eyes Only, Licence To Kill, The World is Not Enough, Die Another Day, Casino Royale and Quantum of Solace.). When they finally released all the individual blu-ray titles (with different packaging to the incomplete 2008 set) I was able to grab all the remaining films at Best Buy on a Black Friday for just $3.99 each and complete my collection.

If these new steel book editions don't sell well, will they still complete the set, or will this become another unfinished set? While I don't intend to buy them, if they end up in a bargain bin somewhere for ~$3.99 each they may yet end up in my collection, sucker that I am.

Nope, they're being branded as the nine films that compromise the SPECTRE story so far. Which of course makes absolutely NO SENSE, as S.P.E.C.T.R.E. was featured or involved in six of the first seven original films...and this makes the Broccoli f-you to McClory of the unofficial Blofeld double cameo in FYEO now official.

The covers are nice until you look closely. FYEO uses the blue bubbles from the titles but with a Moore image closer to the LALD era. If they were proper new discs with adequate transfers for 2015..I'd be fine...but of course MGM/Fox/whoever will simply point to 2006 and call any and all further work unnecessary due to that flawed process..which of course was only done for some titles.

They've already done several 4Ks which have popped up in a few locations. I know Goldfinger was confirmed and perhaps FYEO but as to the other titles I'm unsure. GF was mentioned as a new anniversary restoration, but that moniker has been used several times before without any work done.

Actually they may not be forced to remaster...as there are higher res Lowry materials out there not to mention the 35mm prints they struck. I saw Dr. No this way right down to the UE Lowry credits. Just imagine the BD on the big screen...except now it looks extremely weird being magnified in such a way and looks not at all accurate.

TServo, I've seen DN via the Lowry print, Thunderball from a studio print (not sure the age-it did have the mono), and the Brosnans on their original release. TND may have been DTS, TWINE was thunderous DD EX, and DAD twice-premiere night in DTS ES and a month later in DD EX.

It appears that prints still circulate, though presumably only for those without DCPs readily available or in 4K. In other words the video sourced ones.

AVTAK

LD vs SE vs UE vs BD

The LD is slightly cropped on the left, a bit stretched on top and bottom, a bit contrasty but is otherwise an excellent transfer with only occasional spots of aliasing. The Dolby Stereo PCM is rich, full and has a touch of upper end distortion here and there but nowhere near as much as what plagued FYEO and OP to a lesser extent.

The SE utilizes the same print source from apparently a fresh scan, as has been evidenced by most of the other SEs. Color is generally more refined along with fine detail. The biggest difference is in skin tones which are now reddish, whereas on the LD they were washed out and pale looking. I did notice some shots looking as if they had gone with a pink tint-(iceberg sub for example) but overall this only pops up every once and a while. Great transfer for the SEs to be honest. The 5.1 is a remix of the Dolby stereo and seems virtually identical save for one bit. The distortion is lessened but still present in the helicopter crash during the teaser. High end is better defined along with channel seperation. The LFE is about the same as the matrix track despite being discrete. Overall it is compressed a touch and comes across as louder than the LD PCM.

The UE of course has the cropped opening for no apparent reason and slight cropping for the rest of the feature. It seems to use a scrubbed copy of the SE master being one of the video sourced titles. Bits of the Lowry teal and pink tints that are in OP  and MR start to pop up but they are more subtle than what we usually describe. Skin tones appear a bit less reddish but it does look like the contrast and brightness levels were raised a bit. The BD tames this back a bit and overall looks much healthier without the video nasties of DVD. Both have the original Dolby Stereo track from the LD in DD 2.0.

Mix differences I noticed:

The helicopter hitting the ice and exploding has noticeable distortion on all versions. The title song has some slight distortion on the Dolby Stereo, and this was fixed up for the SE 5.1. Both UE and BD use a new 5.1 remix of the tile song which adds heavy vocal echos in places along with pumping up the rear channels unnecessarily.

The Dolby stereo has the gunbarrel fire go straight to the rear, and the SE pans it hard to the right rear. UE and BD follow suit leading me to believe they simply worked from or ported the 5.1 remix.

Conclusions:

All are good but being the nitpicky person I am I'd have to go with the SE overall for more closely replicating the 1985 release prints. It's not perfect but with a little tweaking could better match the LD and UE/BD in some shots. It seems to strike a balance between them. And of course it's fully uncropped.

The LD may be closest to the 007 Dossier's trailer scan.

But for HD if we worked backwards from the BD it could be slightly tweaked to get rid of the pinks, teals etc. that were added in 2006+reinstate the missing camera shake for the earthquake and add in the LD PCM.

Sorry it’s taken me so long but I got an HDCRT a few months ago and it’s been like starting all over again with calibrations and the like.

TLD

LD P/S vs LD WS vs DVD SE vs UE vs BD

After comparing all of these, I can safely say that the WS LD and SE had color differences unique to them. They have both a slight push to the reds, most notable in skin tones and some yellow-brown overall cast in certain shots. I don’t know if this is from a source element or just how it may have been mastered at the time. The SE additionally has boosted contrast that is wrong. Source appears the same. The UE and BD are identical. Far better blacks, good contrast but rather colorless in comparison to the earlier discs. However, when comparing against the old CBS-Fox P/S disc it shows the exact look and feel of the Lowry transfer.

Checking against the 007 Dossier trailer scan, it appears the image is correct, though that apparently when timed for film there was some of the color I found on the WS LD.

The old discs open with the standard MGM/UA and UA logos. The UE and BD use only a UA logo with the letters being solid dark blue.

Audio boils down to preference. The mix is the same, just the presentation that is changed. The 5.1 early mix done for the THX LD/SE DVD line is really just the Dolby stereo discretely presented. I prefer the original for better bass and midrange. Comparing the the UE/BD tracks reveals the newer one as very clear in the highs and featuring tighter bass response. But that comes at an overall loss of clarity in addition to certain things being slightly less audible, such as Bond’s reverberating gunbarrel shot. Compression seems to be in play here, as the track is far louder, requiring me to lower from reference volume. With the LD I can go up as much as I want with no issues. The P/S disc appears to be the same track just in analog. Both the DD 2.0 tracks on the UE and BD are the original mix, just heavily compressed, lacking in bass and a touch on the tinny side.

Video-BD, though I do prefer what the WS LD was doing and think they missed on some of the color timing for the new release.
Audio-WS LD Dolby Stereo PCM, hands down. No loudness compression, better mixed, better dialogue reproduction, better music mixing.

LTK

CBS-Fox WS LD vs MGM remastered WS LD vs SE vs UE vs BD:

Audio: Two mixes. Original Dolby surround and 5.1 remix done for the SE. The UE and BD variants appear to be the same mix but I will say the version found on the SE has a few deficiencies that were cleaned up. Again, the original mix is far better here. Comparing sequences reveals they got it right in 1989 and everything is mixed much better. The 5.1 mutes parts of the score quite frequently and dials them down in favor of isolated effects. Not good. The older Fox disc sounds a bit lesser and the MGM is perfect.
Winner: MGM LD hands down. The 2.0 mix on UE and BD is the original mix but neither sounds as good as the LD.

Video: Old Fox disc is a bit contrasty and video like. Very 1989-video look to it. Colors are on the drab side and somewhat muted. The MGM is like lifting a veil off. Everything is better and improved. Same transfer. The SE is another leap forward, but there is additional damage here and there. Colors are better, contrast appears mostly healthier. The edges of the frame on the sides though reveal that perhaps too much area was revealed. Also there is very little fine detail and there is an overall look of video processing going on. The UE improves all these again but there may be some Lowry-esque tints poking their head in. Some shots just look quite un-1989. The BD bumps this to 1080p and does a few additional bits of cleaning from what I can tell.
Sooo…BD for detail and overall. MGM LD/SE for more original look, though they’re very very close. I think with a touch here and there it would be fine, or that this may be a print source vs. higher source issue.

Today only on the fox connect website, all titles are 50% off with code PUMPKIN. This includes the new actor sets and the white box complete set which is everything but the new bonus disc from the black set with the EON doc. Thus you can get all 20 (with three coasters) for $65.

Before I do the Brosnan era, I’m hoping to check against the theatrical DTS audio from JetrellFo and for my TND LD to arrive.
Does anybody have or could anyone point me towards the 1080p Goldeneye hdtv capture? I have the 720p one but to view on the xbr960 I have to somehow convert it to be playable on PS3.

SilverWook said:

Too bad TWINE only came out on LD in Japan, and it’s bloody expensive when a copy does turn up.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/The-World-is-not-Enough-LD-LaserDisc-Japan-/181901591075

You said it! I’ve lusted after that since getting into LD years ago. It’s my grail though I know the video will be merely the SE master. The big thing is the audio. The 5.1 may be the theatrical EX on the SE but the LD may be more dynamic. It also has the exclusive Dolby 2.0 matrix PCM mixdown.
I’ve wondered if someone who has one might loan me it to check the audio if I can ever make a capturing setup or at least be able to check against the SE.

From what I understand 6.1 mixes will still decode in 5.1 configurations if you use EX, ES or Neo: 6. Once I get a better receiver and an extra speaker I hope to try that out.

This got really involved, but I think I finally have it.
Note: using the xbr960 is a major challenge, as practically each separate input and format must be re-calibrated from scratch. It also makes even really bad BD transfers shine and SD has all it’s anamolies magnified.

GOLDENEYE
THX LD v SE DVD v UE DVD v Blu-ray v 1080p hdtv capture Lowry master

Video: The BD is indeed an older master, indeed riddled with noise reduction. The Lowry processed transfer is cropped, but it has an intact patina of grain throughout that can be seen in a few select frames/moments of the BD such as fadeouts. The grain is even visible on the UE DVD. However, Lowry introduced some color elements that i don’t think are quite right and I swear there’s perhaps a bit of teal here and there but it may be my eyes tricking me. After going over the same test scenes over and over again between all formats it breaks down like this:
hdtv: Best detail, but loses points to the heavy compression. Noticeably cropped on all four sides. Identical to UE. Color probably not 100% accurate.
BD: No compression issues. DNR and EE present but on a good display it’s still watchable and has better color timing.
For some time I thought the BD was the SE master, but when comparing kept seeing differences. Then it suddenly dawned on me. The SE is contrast boosted and a bit washed of fine detail because they merely ported the LD master for the extremely early snapper case disc. Comparing side by side shows the LD does NOT have the contrast issue and when held up against both my CLD-D702 and DVL-700 (the latter of which has inherent DVNR processing) shows that the DVD image is somewhere in the middle. So despite having the noise and NTSC issues of video, on a good player (with separate comb filtering optional) I actually think the LD is PREFERABLE to the SE. Thus I was able to tell more accurately that the BD is INDEED the SE master after all.

Thus the BD is the best compromise for new fans and BD lovers, because you get the original look of the old transfers without the analog headaches of NTSC formatting. It also has the correct contrast/color balance of the LD unlike the SE DVD. Unfortunately there is the issue of it being far older in transfer date so you have to live with the DNR but at least the full composition is restored.

Until we see evidence of the new 4K master, the result is a draw between the BD and Lowry, with each having their own deficiencies. The LD is one of the best ever produced IMO.

Audio: There are three distinct mixes. DD 5.1 ac-3 on the LD and SE with the heavier hot mastered LFE channel, the 2.0 matrixed PCM downmix, and a remixed cleaned up 5.1 track found on all subsequent copies in DD 5.1 384 kbp/s, DTS @ 755, and DTS-HDMA on the BD.
The audio overall is quite good on all three. The remix merely cleaned things up and did not change anything from what I can tell. The highs come across a touch cleaner and clarity is better but at the cost of a slight bit of the old track’s impact. It was claimed the LFE was mastered about 10 db too high for LD and DVD-corrected only on the DTS LD. I’ve considered if that was the source of the new audio, but without the DTS LD I can’t know for sure. I don’t think it is however, as they did correct the inherent distortion in the title song-which is on all singe/soundtrack releases I know of and the older mixes. The hotter LFE isn’t bad at all, just be ready for it. The PCM 2.0 downmix is quite exceptional for downmixing and at times sounds near identical to the 5.1 counterpart-excepting that is the mono matrix surround instead of the discrete stereo surround. It does sound a tad more like the older films this way though.

The BD presents in 24/48 to boot.

Slight nod to the hot LFE old 5.1 and 2.0. Otherwise a draw.

So there you have it. When I get to try out the theatrical DTS, I’ll certainly add that in too.

I think I may have just watched the entire opening about 60 times. 😉

Got TND finally, so I hope to get the comparison done soon. I did get to check the opening and found the printed titles/subs ARE present, unlike the early DVD.

On BF weekend I also found VHS letterboxed copies of DN and FRWL so the madness continues.

TND

LD WS vs SE vs UE vs BD

PQ: Again like GE, the LD is overall more pleasing ot the eye than the early DVD counterpart. While the DVD is overall sharper and lacks the NTSC inherent problems of the LD format, the LD I think provides the better image again, and here you find yourself marveling at how much they packed onto a LD. This is even with all the wizard circuitry inside my XBR960 having its way. The LD also has the opening caption that is player generated in the SE.
The UE fixes any color and flashtone issues I had with the slightly contrasty at times SE, and beats the LD in every department as well. The filmic look becomes more pronounced here, with no appearance of video or DVD nasties like EE. Compression is also far better but not perfect.
The BD is another leap forward, though obviously the UE master in 1080p. Bitrate more than 6 times the UE means everything is greater.
Winner: BD, but the LD is SHOCKINGLY good.

AQ: Two mixes only from what I can tell, the 5.1 and the 2.0 mixdown for LD. All the 5.1 tracks appear the same, LD and SE seem identical but I might nod to the LD. This may be due to better decoding in my separate ac3 rf-demodulators than onboard stuff. Both are 384 kbp/s. The UE has a 384 kbp/s DD and 755 kbp/s DTS track. They also appear the same but that the level of loudness may have been raised. Both tracks seem louder and are louder than the foreign dubs on disc. The DTS is the usual several dbs louder.
The BD DTS-hdma 5.1 is the same mix but it seems to lack the loudness I felt in the UE mixes. So in summation any version is good, but the nod goes to the BD.
The 2.0 is very nice and more fitting with the older films. Very robust with a nice low end. It lacks the discrete pans sometimes and the extreme aggressive high end of the 5.1 mix but it is a very nice alternate and should be preserved I think.
The isolated score track is at a slightly higher bitrate on the BD too.
Verdict: BD and LD

Overall, BD wins. The LD is gorgeous, The UE is great, and the SE is problematic but serviceable.

TWINE

SE vs UE vs BD

Of course I can’t afford the super rare Japanese LD soooo…

VQ: It may be the same base element being used. The SE is more colorful but has a number of artifacts, EE, and less detail overall. The UE cleans all this up but loses color and overall has a blander appearance. There is still EE and some noise here and there, so I think they just reprocessed the SE master with a higher bitrate. The BD actually goes a long way to fix this and has the SE color back but more properly rendered, thus making it third time right IMO. It is STILL the UE though, so don’t expect perfection. It is by no means as good as a 1999 Panavision release should be on Blu-ray.
To me the SE is probably derived from the LD workflow, as it has all the hallmarks of being mastered for that format then ported to DVD.

AQ: The 5.1 appears the same on all three. Again like TND the track appears slightly louder on the UE in both Dolby and DTS variants. The BD allows for finer presentation from the lossless codec. Without a rear center speaker I can’t really tell if much of the EX encoding comes into play, but once a track is mixed for it, it should also decode out on newer releases that don’t indicate the sound is EX encoded. I thought I noticed some effects come through the rear area, like a EX mix would and like how I remember the theatrical release being. This and TPM really interested me for having sounds come directly from behind so I vividly remember those experiences. But it wasn’t that many on TWINE IIRC unlike TPM.

Thus, for the first time it appears we can say BD on all fronts. That said I do like the color saturation on the SE, and after my GE/TND discovery of the LD being better than the SEs…really want that darned Japanese LD…and for the 2.0 PCM…why in the world is it $500?

Finally got some new news. Since getting used to both new display and receiver in addition to a new job, I haven’t been able to do more comparison work.

I finally got the TSWLM THX LD.

And it seems to confirm my suspicions that the THX process for LD and the other reworkings that appeared on the SEs had the audio retransferred and processed. The AQ of the matrix track cleans up the previous LD matrix audio (dropout in Ride to Atlantis is gone) but it is the same source track. However the matrixing has been redone and seemingly pulled in. Many things are narrowed and at one point a music cue goes from being panned hard right to center locked.(Opening notes of Bond '77 in the PTS) The sound is not as expansive nor does it seem as detailed. I presume this was done because they made a 5.1 mix and needed to do some processing.
On MR the difference between matrixed tracks was much more subtle. Here I think the old disc is better.

PQ: the THX LD is head and shoulders above the old disc which as usual was rather cheaply done by MGM and is filled with noise and lack of detail. The thx color is completely different and is identical to the early DVDs. While the entire transfer is improved I do have to question the color at times as it looks far more “videoish” than it really should. But a worthwhile upgrade sorry needed. Same case as MR on LD.

Btw, I plan to redo many comparisons on my new setup which is insanely revealing in PQ and AQ, and this is why I haven’t done DAD yet since that also has several audio tracks to compare. Hopefully at some point I can get an extra matching speaker to finally try out EX/ES.

Captain Solo, you are going to want to see this… The007Dossier takes a look at a 50 year old 35mm IB Technicolor print of Dr No:

http://www.the007dossier.com/007dossier/post/2016/07/01/James-Bond-in-Glorious-Technicolor