captainsolo

It must be character driven and able to go dark. Obi-Wan would be at or near a personal crisis point and over the course of the film must deal with his demons in order to become the wiser Ben we all adore.
Whether or not the entire film would take place on Tatooine is debatable. There could be an excursion to find other Jedi survivors and/or reveal some nefarious Imperial plot that Obi-wan could secretly smash without revealing his identity. Preferably on some totally dark world like Nar Shaddaa which would contrast perfectly.

It should be very reminiscent of the better stories such as the Kenobi novel, and would completely rely on the lead actor to sink into the role.

Will Disney really go for it? Heck no. They’re too busy making another film yet again about the Death Star.

I strongly prefer the chimp/elder female Palpy in every way.
What is so bad about “Bring my shuttle” being replaced is that the line put on clearly does not fit in tone, speaking level, pacing or in any conceivable way to the scene.

The really bad vcange is the inserted shot of Vader boarding and the recycled landing from ROTJ. Sheer stupidity that ruins the flow of the climax just for a prequel-esque traveling shot of a ship.

But thank goodness for thre one positive change: the revised victory celebration score in ROTJ. That is more along the lines of what JW would have come up with had the production not rushed it and forced Yub Nub as the concluding score.

What’s the best advice for someone considering jumping into Trek? And I mean this as a lifelong SW fan who has no knowledge outside the general stuff. I’ve see a few minutes of TNG reruns and about five minutes of the first film.

I figure starting out with TOS and the theatrical features. On the movies though is there a suggestion as to preferred format? I’m thinking LD to be honest since the BDs look like they have horrid DNR and color manipulation save for the Khan remaster. I’ve heard some in the LD realm say the sound is better as well.

I held off for so long because when growing up it was always such a division amongst fans: you could only like one or the other. That always seemed silly to me but I had no idea where to start with Star Trek.

I did really enjoy Galaxy Quest though. I may not have gotten the Trek references but I did realize what they were.

The above post is my two cents as well. The other ideas just sound silly to me but I guess they would tie into the whole notion of dark side users becoming physically scarred via its use.

I’ve been tempted so many times…but just for that damn bonus disc…but I don’t want to shell out a bunch of cash all over again just for the few extras…that is I guess not until the forthcoming repackage that is rumored to include TFA.

I would’ve bought it already if it had proper transfers for the prequels, but of course they had to muck up TPM and AOTC.

Just got an email saying this has been canceled for unstated reasons.

Best overall: Fox special widescreen edition laserdisc releases. Dirt cheap, better transfers than the DE with relatively authentic audio. Ports of the far more expensive JSC releases and best of all is the Technidisc copy of SW.

Best overall: Warner standalone 2 disc release. WB remastered from highest generation available and includes extras. Sadly there are some audio glitches that were still not addressed for this second release.
Bosko Diamond collection: second best for PQ, generated from 35mm prints. Great overall with no errors but each feature has the release date stupidly superimposed on its opening.
Image DVD: early release that merely reissues their laserdisc transfer. The good news is that the mono is in PCM.

Currently there’s an old tread about working with these in the other preservations forum.

Best advice is go for the WB set which is dirt cheap on eBay. Then if so inclined get the Bosko. Also the WB transfer is on all the Superman film sets from 2006 onwards but lack the handful of fixes hey applied for the standalone reissue.

There is no word yet of an official HD release, and the folks at Warner Archive confirmed this for me.

FanFiltration said:

Marnie (1964) 6/10
Not the best of Alfred Hitchcock’s work, but the acting was solid. The safe heist was interesting, the rest was meh. I did enjoy seeing Connery in something other then a Bond film from that era. In fact he played Bond rather well in this. This is definitely how I think the character of Bond should have been played if Eon Productions would have been allowed to film “The Spy Who Loved Me” novel as written, or even if Connery played 007 in “On Her Majesty’s Secret Service”.

Recently upon revisiting the film, I was struck at just how much Connery carries the whole damn picture. It’s really a testament to his acting strengths (something that is largely ignored) and how his range is much larger than people realize. It also helps that Hitchcock was a closet Bond fan or at least he liked to screen the competition pictures on the Universal lot despite always deriding them in print. The idea of getting Connery for himself must have appealed to him. Connery’s presence is sorely missed in the studio imposed TORN CURTAIN and TOPAZ. (Both of which have their moments. TC has two great moments and is otherwise nearly unbearable. The latter is actually quite good if you can get past the downsides and the lack of major screen charisma from any of the leads…and the fact that the ending was hastily cut out.)

I have no desire to see the new studio version of GHOSTBUSTERS. I know it will be bad and a mindless brand entry to build a new plaything for the studio. What I dislike is how the intensive online and fan backlash was immediately heralded as against the all-female main cast. I think that was just silly as the primary issue was actually one of quality control and the lack of original intent going on.

I hope it bombs because it and the vast majority of these overbloated tentpoles have no human content to them like the original film did. And I’m not even a major fan of the original.

LMS: Revisiting the Bourne series. Still a mess.
Identity: simply put the best of the series. The most original, playful and story driven. The studio should have bit the bullet and not fired Liman despite the massive production difficulties. But the big problem is how writer Gilroy apparently hated the novel (IDIOT!) and preceded to completely discard what is the author’s most famous work, one of the titans of spy fiction and one of the great fiction works of the 20th century.
But the film works due to the chemistry, casting, and Liman’s particular oddball style.
3 out of 4 balls.

Supremacy: Hiring Greengrass was a bold move, and the shaky near-docudrama style does work in that sense. But the story is practically non-existent except in bare fragments, only the barest trace of Ludlum’s gripping and truly dark plot are rpesent, they kill off a hugely important character for no reason other than to change the entire story into a simplified and rather dull generic actioner, the ending act has no driving motive…and I could keep going on and on. Suffice to say, I’ve finally made some peace with this one. It shouldn’t have made the whole world go shakycam but what it does do right it does well. I just hate that they have such little story driving it and waste characters for little to no reason.
2 balls out of 4.

Ultimatum: A mess. A mess that tries to distract from its problems by hurtling the audience into an endless chase culminating in a “resolution” that simply isn’t one. What makes it all sensical is that Gilroy didn’t even do a complete script and they started shooting without one and had to make it up on a day to day basis. I don’t blame the crew, I blame (as with the entire series) the incredibly stupid writing. The worst is making it a direct and interwoven sequel. Grrr. An overall duller and less ingenious sequel that should have been better.
2 balls out of 4. Overgenerous.

Legacy: I finally saw this one. All I can say is; they made it to maintain the rights that were about to lapse. The best bits are the non-plot ones-all kinds of little throwaways like the two on the run having to forge passports etc. which is finally SOMETHING FROM THE METICULOUSLY PLOTTED AND DESCRIBED NOVELS AND SOMETHING ACTUALLY OF THIS EARTH AND NOT SUPERMEN/SPIES DOING IMPOSSIBLE FEATS 24/7. And then you go right back to incredibly stupid stuff with some laughably bad CG in places. It would be fine to have a satellite program and agents. But they make it so damn dull that you simply don’t care. There is a minimum of story and the plot device of making the agents rely on pills to gain superior abilities is just really stupid. Rachel Weisz is the best part of the film, and really the only one that doesn’t appear to be on sleeping pills half of the time. The opening act is really poorly done and drags on interminably. The end is horribly rushed and then suddenly ends without any proper staging.
A really poor attempt overall. There is nothing to enjoy, nothing to recommend, nothing new developed, nothing said, nothing really even attempted.
Oh and look Tony Gilroy wrote and directed it. Go figure.
It really burns when you’re watching the end credits and realizing you just wasted your time completely.
1 ball out of four-only for the bits of reality, and the admittedly very few sparks of life from the two leads.

I really hope the new film is good. I know it will never be Ludlum, but Gilroy is out and both Greengrass and Damon really had to be lured back. Plus the idea of Tommy Lee Jones as a Conklin-like character is just irresistible to me. Will I be disappointed? Almost positively.

I still think you could make one hell out of a picture from at least the original novel, if not the second as well. No they aren’t perfect, and you’d need at LEAST three hours to do them justice…but if you want to talk dark storytelling that is “realistic” and not the typical Hollywood stylization, Bourne is your guy…that is I should say Delta.

But the Ultimatum novel is just plain WTF. Seriously.

And don’t even get me started on the increasingly intelligence insulting sequel novels that are still being made.

I caved and got it since it was on sale and has the exclusive bonus disc release. Target has it for $23. Warner will likely never redo these until a 4K reissue and I wanted to upgrade my DVD of Begins.

I did direct comparisons with the opening, Robby’s first appearance and introduction, and the first arrival at the house (reel change point).

The mix seems the same. Both the Criterion and MGM have the sound panning. But the Criterion is limited in dynamic range and centered practically around the center channel only. This is with and without ProLogic engaged. The MGM is fuller and has more depth and is firmly stereo with the same slight panning.
Overall it sounds like a mono and stereo of the same source. The weird thing is they’re both technically stereo and both decode properly in PL. I can only describe the sound structure though and what actually is coming through my system.

Not to mention they both look closer to the 16mm caps above.

This review indicates the old pan and scan disc has the best color:
http://easyweb.easynet.co.uk/~robinson/Reviews/Forbidden-Planet-Review.htm

Found this one:

The mag prints were used for the DVD audio.
Oh crap! …Did I write that? [​IMG] After reading a few
posts afterwards, I decided to revisit the various video
versions of Forbidden Planet.
At one time or another I’ve either owned or have been able
to borrow from friends almost every LD/DVD version of
Forbidden Planet available in the US. I’ve watched the
first pan-n-scan laserdisc, which Doug Pratt claimed was
missing the surround tracks. Was Doug Pratt right? I don’t
know, but it wouldn’t surprise me, with the attention
stereo soundtracks received from the studios at that time
period. That disc went by “bye bye” when a friend acquired
the Criterion CAV letterboxed edition. (One of the FIRST
letterboxed LDs) Later there came the cheaper MGM CLV
version, (didn’t get to see the MGM CAV version) then
the MGM DVD, folled by the Warner Brothers DVD. My friend
no longer has the Criterion version nor do I own the CLV
MGM LD, but I did make VHS hi-fi copies of both way back
when, which allowed me to make a recent comparison of the
stereo mixes of the three video versions. …Now before
someone balks at VHS hi-fi, allow me to point out that VHS
hi-fi has phase error and channel separation specs equal to
most consumer digital formats. Yes, VHS hi-fi does suffer
in other areas, but these two specs ensure stereo and
matrix surround audio are played back properly. Those two
specs are the one’s important for these reviews, but if
someone wants to do a follow-up with the original LDs,
I’m all for it!
I tested three segments of the film in an A/B/C review fashion:

1. Opening narration with music right after opening credits.
2. Roughly 17 minutes into the film, Dr. Morbius has Robby
   show off the household disinegrator beam.
3. Roughly 20 minutes into the film, a protective shell
   consisting of panels is put up around the house.
   The opening narration highlights the differences in the
   audio transfers quite nicely. On the Criterion version,
   the announcer remains anchored in the center channel,
   while stereo synth music gently spreads to the left and
   right speakers. But the MGM version has the announcer in
   all three front speakers, along with the stereo music.
   The WB DVD keeps most of the dialog centered but with
   no perceptible stereo music.
   This makes me wonder if the MGM LD had slight phase errors
   during the mag audio transfer, which would effect the
   perceived stereo spread. The MGM LD’s audio is clean, and
   the stereo is intact… but it lacks the center channel lock
   that the Criterion version offers. This difference is
   later heard during the various slight directional dialog
   pans throughout the film. The Criterion transfer tracks
   these pans slightly better, while the MGM LD pans seem to
   “pop around” a smidgen more when Pro-Logic decoded, which
   again could be due to a slight phase shift. …The WB DVD
   simply has NO directional dialog.
   The Desinigrator Beam sequence has Morbius activating the
   beam briefly (leaning towards the right channel.) …Then
   there’s the securing the house sequence a few minutes
   later. This “closing panel” pan starts at the right and
   ends close to the center channel. Both the MGM and
   Criterion LD both have the same effect. The WB DVD version
   is flat mono.
   So is the WB DVD completely mono? During music passages the
   audio seems to spread out over the three channels some, but
   nothing that screams out true stereophonic sound. I was
   able to check out the WB DVD from my local library, and
   this disc was slightly remade by WB after they acquired the
   rights from MGM. (The disc opens with the WB logo.) …But
   does the first MGM DVD have the original stereo sound? I
   don’t know. In either case, I would have to give a NOT
   recommended review of the WB DVD version, due to the
   missing original stereo mix.

http://www.hometheaterforum.com/community/threads/forbidden-planet-se.41960/page-2

Digging around the HTF reveals manyhreads with complaints about the old DVD and how it pales in both color and sound to its LD source.

Not sure if we had gone over this before but I just stumbled across this on in70mm.

2001" and the flat screen

Quote from a Douglas Trumbull interview in Cinefantastique June 1994:

"The film was shot in Super Panavision for projection on the curved Cinerama screen but the unique format wasn’t accounted for during the years of production. During the entire production, we never once viewed footage on a curved screen or in the format.

What would happen is we’d shoot in 65mm, but the lab would generate 35mm anamorphic prints for us to look at on a small flat screen. We never saw it in a Cinerama theatre. It wasn’t until the very, very end of photography, or maybe once during production, that I think Kubrick took a couple of 70mm prints and went down to a 70mm theatre to see how it looked. So, in a sense, the movie was not made with a curved screen in mind. In some of the Cinerama theatres there were a serious projection problem, because the projection booths were mounted up too high and you had a horrible sort of curved, keystoning effect: the titles would come out badly curved and it looked very distorted".

No idea. My best reasoning would be this:
The rumored 4K work is the source of the new 4K DCPs that are slowly playing in theaters, of which GE is reputedly a new master. TSWLM is likely the first of these that has actually hit disc as I don’t see it being done otherwise since GE reverted to the old master.

The video sourced UEs are all over the place in terms of processing. TSWLM seems to be the lowest quality source they got to use, and they processed the living hell out of it-more than usual. Thus the worst transfer of the series became the best on the next go round.

Also of note, the old LD does seem to support the color of the BD. And when viewed on proper equipment it holds up better than remembered, that is aside from two sequences which have that lovely 80’s/90’s MGM video nasty look to them.

Those caps are interesting TAF. I can’t tell what the source of the hdtv airings are though my suspicions would be an uprezzed or tweaked variant of the SE. Here’s a cap of the SE I just did really quick, and sure enough that fleck is there and the framing fits.

After further comparison, the THX disc for TSWLM centers the dialogue AND score. The 5.1 was done and I believe the stereo matrixed PCM is a downmix. Why or how this was done is unknown or whether it is more accurate. Honestly I don’t think it is. Bond '77 in the PTS clearly shows the score being centered, as the opening bass notes are firmly centered as are the cymbal crashes in the chase. These were all panned hard right in the older release. It sounds as if they went back to the elements and played with the mix configuration in the 5.1 format.
Direct comparison to the older WS LD reveals the former as having a much better stereo spread and despite having some distortion and noise it is preferable I think. The film was supposedly a matrixed stereo release without Dolby encoding. No details of 70mm blowups have ever arisen.
The THX remaster has far better color and detail. The source transfer is identical, right down to the frame wobble in Gogol’s office after the titles. The THX DVD is a port and the SE is as well, though it may suffer from some additional processing.

Edit: the dts hdma on the Bluray sounds better than the 5.1/2.0 remixed track. It still centers everything but has far better clarity and detail in addition to better stereo imaging. Which is correct centered or not is unknown. Also the 2.0 track is the same as the thx LD.
The hdma has the original film version of the song.

This makes 4 mixes:
Original WS LD surround
Thx remaster 5.1/2.0
UE remastered 5.1 in Dolby/DTS with soundtrack title song
BD dts hdma remastered 5.1 with original song reinstated.

Here goes:

Firstly the 2006 DVD/HDDVD/BD is a WB restoration that tried to bring color back to the faded negative which I didn’t realize had gone. It’s early Eastmancolor.
Second the 5.1 remix reportedly centers the dialog. BOO! According to a HTF post only the LCR masters survive and the surround channel had deteriorated and was thus unuseable. Originall the film was to have premiered in full 4 track Cinemascope mag (LCRS) and Perspecta directed mono.

Now: The LDs use the same source. The Criterion is more stable and has less noise due to being CAV. The MGM CLV is noisier but has better framing. The Criterion is cropped a bit on top, and the MGM restores this while maybe giving a slight bit back on the sides as well. It also has some color fluctuation between reels where the Criterion does not despite them using the same source. Audiowise the mix is the same, but the Criterion is clearly mono-ed in feeling where the MGM is stereo despite feeling very boxed in. You can hear the directional dialogue panning in both tracks despite the Criterion being mono. The opening title score is far more effective on the MGM. (It may be one of their cut and paste the soundtrack CD master in the transfer jobs.)
The CAV MGM was reputed to have a better transfer and be even better on the framing. This was ported to DVD as shown in the DVdbeaver caps. Those look pretty much like the CLV image albeit with some differences probably like how MGM redid 2001 for the CAV box after the first CLV issue.
The BD restoration has better framing again but there’s just something about the color and contrast that seems off to me. It may be all that they could do with the negative but there are others online who have felt the same.

So now I need the CAV and the BD. Hmm…the collecting for research never stops does it? 😉

Discussions on the film tech forum:

“What prompted this question was a discussion about the intended correct aspect ratio for The Man With The Golden Gun. In the USA, that would have been 1.85, but the actual prints are full frame with sections that are hard matted to 1.66. As this is a British production, I was wondering if it was intended to be shown 1.66 in Europe. The general consensus is that it was intended to be shown 1.85 everywhere.”

Later in the thread it was suggested that the film may have been shown at 1.75 in Europe.

A handful of more 007 musings:

-After studying those screenshots more it may be very likely at least for DN that an IB was used for the Criterion/MGM LD.

-I think TB should definitely end with the TB end title reprise as heard on the mono mix. It fits thematically, it fits with Barry’s scoring technique and also matches his end title for Goldfinger which actually segues into a similar short end title instrumental on the soundtrack. I think the film differences may have been due to Peter Hint’s editing choices and that his documented love of the JB theme led to his use of it much to Barry’s consternation. This happened on both YOLT and OHMSS. So I’m thinking that if it was authentically put there in 1965 it was likely for a multitrack 70mm release with alternate dialogue etc and it was this that was unearthed in 1995 and utilized for the ProLogic stereo remix.

-I wonder if the new 4K DCP material will ever make it to homes.

-The THX discs for TSWLM and MR sound inferior to the original LDs, I’m almost positive it’s due to noise reduction as they don’t seem to have the same impact in the highs and for some reason a bit of the sound panning in the score is centered in TSWLM.

-Is it a sign of insanity that I just think about this stuff at random intervals during the day? 😉

I recently found the CAV criterion and hope to compare it to the MGM. I’d like to pick up the BD at some point too.

Also, was this a US or UK Tech? The respective labs are always reported as having different biases so this is just out of curiosity.

I’m totally and completely geeking out right now. This is incredible stuff.

And good find on that FYEO. I’m thinking ac3 on print would be from the Lowry era 35mm prints as it also appears to have DTS timecode. As far as I know no new prints were struck otherwise during the digital sound era.

Williarob said:

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

I just literally fell out of my chair at work. Now if only I can find my jaw on the floor…

Amazing truly amazing to finally see IB material from the initial three. The fact that the Criterion looks so close to the raw scan already is in fitting with my general feeling and preference for those older transfers. BTW did you use the CAV or CLV? And also the MGM disc from the Connery Collection uses the same print source with slightly better PQ. (Not to mention more open like their FRWL and GF at an odd almost 1.55:1 ratio) Criterions seem a bit hazy and contrasty when compared to MGM and other later studio transfers on LD, who had access to better sources or equipment. I’ve seen this on 2001, N by NW and even Forbidden Planet. That said there is always something to be said for their more vintage color appearance even though it seems very slight at times.

The SE is cropped and like the others that jumped from thx LD is a direct port for better or worse. The crop is rather awkwardly done and only enhances the video noise that was furthered by the thx processing which by and large affected the color and presentation of the ones that had it. This is even true of TSWLM and MR and their audio mixes as well. But image wise it strikes a nice middle ground in color and detail.

The BD has the detail but these print grabs despite not being graded show just how wrong at times the UE process could be. To my eyes DN and TB have a problem with being cast in shades of blue that at times can even manifest itself into shades of purple. This was most apparent when I saw the Lowry DN printed onto 35mm. The result is usually visible in skin tones, particularly Sean’s. Why this happens or how it happens is beyond me.

I have no idea what the UE teams (as there were several) used for reference or if they used any on all 20. The results vary widely but never seem to hold up when compared across the board and particularly not against original materials.

So it seems to fall like this from what I’m seeing with DN here:
Tech IB is the most colorful and saturated. Representative of what audiences would likely have seen on first run.
Criterion is a video copy of similar material that introduces a slight haziness and higher level of contrast due to the equipment and crts of the era.
MGM does their own transfer which is slightly sharper and better but is brighter and has slightly less color saturation in addition to being less hazy. In other words a step closer to the thx SE look.
The SE is an attempt at balance but seemingly without much reference as is the case with the others at this time and simply reutilizes the precasting master as do the rest. Badly cropped like FRWL and GF at this time.
The BD is the best in detail but the color differences cause the focus in scenes to shift at times. I still cannot always quite place my finger on it but it appears that something went wrong in the process which is always more evident on the older films. It goes without saying that there have already been numerous iterations of the Lowry work itself not to mention some BDs reverting to older transfers (TB, GE).

Man that is stunning. That’s everything I hoped and thought an IB of DN would feel like. I’d go nuts if I could ever see the whole thing.

Color wise the most damning ones to have IB evidence of will be FRWL (criterion and MGM wildly different, Lowry never feels right), GF (Criterion wildly different, first MGM too cold, 1995 stunning, Lowry all over the place), TB (1989 very saturated, 1995 box same transfer with little saturation, UE completely different, BD reverts to older work of some kind) and of course YOLT to finally see if the IB leans more towards the yellow cast older transfers or the colder BD.

Not sure where else to post this:
Producer’s personal production schedule indicates a full ROTJ mono mix made in between 35mm Dolby Stereo and 6 track.

So this indicates:
35mm DS mix, optical stereo track tested to ensure proper playback in the event of no Dolby decoding or decoder failure, full mono mix done from the dialogue music and effects stems, 6 track music and effects only mixed track, and the 70mm Dolby 6 track mix in addition to printing the blowups. So this is some official documentation indicating they were still doing mono at LFL post-SW, ESB and Raiders. It wouldn’t surprise me if a mono Temple mix is floating around too.

BTW this making of ROTJ paperback is fine reading.

Great thread and great posts so far. I’ll just duplicate my postings from a listening to thread I follow over on shtv.

Finally found a clean copy of Genesis 1983 S/T album. Recently I’ve been digging into their catalog and like both PG and PC eras. Stunning sound courtesy of a great pressing and production from Hugh Padgham. They don’t make LPs like this anymore.

Setup is: Technics sl-1200 mk2, Shure m97xe cart, Jico n97SAS diamond stylus, Yamaha rx-395 for phono stage, Sennheiser HD380pro.

That picture is still one heck of a weird fanboy dream mixed with a complete mismatching of ideals. I’m glad I read the comic first before seeing the thing one empty Sunday in an IMAX show. (An empty theater with nothing but me and the big blue…appendage blown up to IMAX size.) Though from what I understand the Director’s cut is better and there is another Ultimate cut, and of course the umpteenth repackaging in 4KUHD soon. At some point I’ll pick up the DC BD since it can be had for nothing and at least be a demo title for equipment setups. I’m kind of curious to try it again after all this time, but the picture simply does not work.

The Clash Westway to the World: The best docu of the only band that matters. Still too brief for me and the only real draw is the band interviews which include Joe Strummer before his death.

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.