Why is everyone complaining about the image quality?
Added 11/14/2009
I've seen several reviews -- both in magazines and on-line -- excoriating this transfer for its mediocre image quality. I'm not sure what they're talking about.
As for sharpness and real detail, this transfer has gobs of it. Richard Harris is a lined and wrinkled geezer, and the close-ups of the women -- well, woman -- plainly reveal that they're (she's) not wearing makeup.
My only complaint is that this is the first Blu-ray I've seen with visible edge enhancement. You will occasionally see trailing-edge overshoot. It's not common, but it does occur.
Regardless, the BD's image quality quite obliterates the DVD's. Oddly, the CGI looks much more believable in the Blu-ray than it does on the DVD. I've seen this with other films, and have no explanation, other than the extra detail makes the fake stuff more plausible.
As for the film... It's "Ben-Hur" redux, without the Christianity. The /overall/ arc of the stories are the same -- a man is unjustly accused of crimes, then has to "prove himself" to the Roman populace. The principal difference is that "Ben-Hur" is a story of revenge in which the principal character eventually discovers how unimportant revenge is, while "Gladiator" is explicitly not about revenge, but about a man's desire to return to what /is/ important to him.
Russel Crowe might /think/ he's the world's greatest actor, but he ain't. The otherwise-sharp script portrays him primarily as someone who /doesn't/ want to be where he is. It's hard to act /negative/ attitudes, and he does little except yearn and pine and be noble. Perhaps this is all for the good -- the part is better underplayed. Richard Harris is far more effective -- and memorable -- as Marcus Aurelius.
Outside of the fact that the story is a broad fictionalization of real people and events, there are surprisingly few (apparent) errors or anachronisms. Surprisingly, it gets the "thumbs-up/down" gesture wrong. The thumb represents the sword -- "thumbs up" means cut the guy's throat, "thumbs down" means bury the sword in the sand. And when Oliver Reed's character complains that his giraffes won't mate -- "You sold me queer giraffes!" -- it reflects a modern view of sexuality that would have made no sense to Mediterranean people.
"Gladiator" is, overall, an very entertaining and well-paced film -- but it's hardly an Oscar contender. It won because, as with many Best Picture winners, it lavishly combines Spectacle and Sentiment. Though almost everyone dies, it's still a Happy Ending.
The extras are lavish, including a 3.5 hour (!) feature on the film's making. The first 12 minutes or so of it were transferred with the wrong cadence, and every time something moves, you see scaning-line breakup. There are also at least 100 short segments on various aspects of the film and its production. (I believe all of this appeared in the three-DVD set, but I no longer have it for comparison.)
2 out of 4 people found this helpful.
|
When in Rome.
Added 11/10/2009
Once upon a time, Hollywood made films like this on a regular basis. Russell Crowe sucessfully carries on the sword-and-sandal tradition with this star-making performance, bringing a newfound realism that past epics like 'Ben-Hur' and 'Ten Commandments' lacked. The excellent cast, especially Joaquin Phoenix as the amoral Commodus, help to personify the debauchery and arrogance of ancient Rome, while Crowe delivers both as a man's-man and also as a humbled slave, defeated in life by Rome's excesses but redeemed in death by his devotion to family and honor. A fine epic, well worthy of its many awards.
0 out of 1 people found this helpful.
|
DON'T BELIEVE THESE BAD REVIEWS!!
Added 11/9/2009
THERE'S NOTHING WRONG WITH THIS BLU RAY!! HOW CAN YOU SAY HOW BAD THE PICTURE IS 9 DAYS BEFORE IT CAME OUT!? YOU CAN'T BASE REVIEWS OFF OF SCREEN SHOTS!! One review creates a wave of 1 stars just; jump on the bandwagon and make stuff up. I have BraveHeart Sapphire Series and Gladiator has better picture than it! You people need to get your vision checked, or actually purchase and watch the movie before you post a review! THIS MOVIE LOOKS OUTSTANDING!!
2 out of 4 people found this helpful.
|
Gladiator BD
Added 11/8/2009
Has anyone noticed the audio is only DTS
not DTS HD MA as one was led to believe.
This blu ray audio is worse than both the
original 5.1 and the subsequent 6.1 from the
later release.
2 out of 6 people found this helpful.
|
Excellent movie
Added 11/7/2009
This was a great action packed movie.
Can there be a more versatile actor today than Russell Crowe, especially when he's directed by the great Ridley Scott.
0 out of 3 people found this helpful.
|
Why is everyone complaining about the image quality?
Added 11/14/2009
I've seen several reviews -- both in magazines and on-line -- excoriating this transfer for its mediocre image quality. I'm not sure what they're talking about.
As for sharpness and real detail, this transfer has gobs of it. Richard Harris is a lined and wrinkled geezer, and the close-ups of the women -- well, woman -- plainly reveal that they're (she's) not wearing makeup.
My only complaint is that this is the first Blu-ray I've seen with visible edge enhancement. You will occasionally see trailing-edge overshoot. It's not common, but it does occur.
Regardless, the BD's image quality quite obliterates the DVD's. Oddly, the CGI looks much more believable in the Blu-ray than it does on the DVD. I've seen this with other films, and have no explanation, other than the extra detail makes the fake stuff more plausible.
As for the film... It's "Ben-Hur" redux, without the Christianity. The /overall/ arc of the stories are the same -- a man is unjustly accused of crimes, then has to "prove himself" to the Roman populace. The principal difference is that "Ben-Hur" is a story of revenge in which the principal character eventually discovers how unimportant revenge is, while "Gladiator" is explicitly not about revenge, but about a man's desire to return to what /is/ important to him.
Russel Crowe might /think/ he's the world's greatest actor, but he ain't. The otherwise-sharp script portrays him primarily as someone who /doesn't/ want to be where he is. It's hard to act /negative/ attitudes, and he does little except yearn and pine and be noble. Perhaps this is all for the good -- the part is better underplayed. Richard Harris is far more effective -- and memorable -- as Marcus Aurelius.
Outside of the fact that the story is a broad fictionalization of real people and events, there are surprisingly few (apparent) errors or anachronisms. Surprisingly, it gets the "thumbs-up/down" gesture wrong. The thumb represents the sword -- "thumbs up" means cut the guy's throat, "thumbs down" means bury the sword in the sand. And when Oliver Reed's character complains that his giraffes won't mate -- "You sold me queer giraffes!" -- it reflects a modern view of sexuality that would have made no sense to Mediterranean people.
"Gladiator" is, overall, an very entertaining and well-paced film -- but it's hardly an Oscar contender. It won because, as with many Best Picture winners, it lavishly combines Spectacle and Sentiment. Though almost everyone dies, it's still a Happy Ending.
The extras are lavish, including a 3.5 hour (!) feature on the film's making. The first 12 minutes or so of it were transferred with the wrong cadence, and every time something moves, you see scaning-line breakup. There are also at least 100 short segments on various aspects of the film and its production. (I believe all of this appeared in the three-DVD set, but I no longer have it for comparison.)
2 out of 4 people found this helpful.
|
When in Rome.
Added 11/10/2009
Once upon a time, Hollywood made films like this on a regular basis. Russell Crowe sucessfully carries on the sword-and-sandal tradition with this star-making performance, bringing a newfound realism that past epics like 'Ben-Hur' and 'Ten Commandments' lacked. The excellent cast, especially Joaquin Phoenix as the amoral Commodus, help to personify the debauchery and arrogance of ancient Rome, while Crowe delivers both as a man's-man and also as a humbled slave, defeated in life by Rome's excesses but redeemed in death by his devotion to family and honor. A fine epic, well worthy of its many awards.
0 out of 1 people found this helpful.
|
DON'T BELIEVE THESE BAD REVIEWS!!
Added 11/9/2009
THERE'S NOTHING WRONG WITH THIS BLU RAY!! HOW CAN YOU SAY HOW BAD THE PICTURE IS 9 DAYS BEFORE IT CAME OUT!? YOU CAN'T BASE REVIEWS OFF OF SCREEN SHOTS!! One review creates a wave of 1 stars just; jump on the bandwagon and make stuff up. I have BraveHeart Sapphire Series and Gladiator has better picture than it! You people need to get your vision checked, or actually purchase and watch the movie before you post a review! THIS MOVIE LOOKS OUTSTANDING!!
2 out of 4 people found this helpful.
|
