Another Blu Letdown

email this story
read comments (36)
post a comment

The long-awaited Bluray of Michael Mann's Heat (Warner Home Video, 11.10) lacks that Bluray schwing. Here I am sounding like a plebian again, but dammit, you buy a Bluray version of a film you already own on DVD because you want enhancement -- something with finer detail, more color gradation, sharper focus -- a more robust pop-through quality. That's what you pay for, right?

Diane Venora, Al Pacino in Michael Mann's Heat.

The Heat Bluray offers a slight sense of enhancement, okay, but there's nothing all that "extra" about it. The instant I popped it in last night I said to myself, "Oh...this again." That's because it looks almost exactly the same on my 42-inch plasma as the Heat Special Edition DVD looked on my 36" Sony analog back in West Hollywood.

If I didn't understand and respect what Mann has approved here -- he wants a theatrical look and/or doesn't believe in tweaking what a film looked like to begin with -- and if I was in a pissy-type mood, I'd call this Bluray a bit of a burn.

As DVD Beaver's Gary Tooze puts in his just-up review, "The Heat Blu-ray presentation "is significantly ahead of the DVD counterparts but doesn't exhibit the demonstrative depth and detail that many have come to expect from this new format."

The Heat Bluray is a very handsome and honest presentation of how the movie looked on the big screen under the finest of circumstances. There's obviously nothing "wrong" with that -- shot on film, looks like film, etc. I guess I'm just a Blanche Dubois type where Blurays are concerned -- "I don't want realism, I want magic!"

You know what does look significantly enhanced and more visually exciting than its previous DVD version? The Planes, Trains & Automobiles "Those Aren't Pillows!" special edition DVD that came out on 10.20. I know the previous DVD very well and this, played on my 42-inch plasma, looks very nice. And it's not even a Bluray.

So in a Pepsi-challenge battle with the Heat Bluray, PTA wins. I'm sorry, but it's more pleasing to the eye.

Precious and Rage<< previous | next >>Mirren Kudos Deserved

Posted by Jeffrey Wells on November 5, 2009 at 10:21 AM

comment #1

Alexander says ...

Oh well, I suppose I'll stick with my DVR copy from TCM.

Posted by Alexander at November 5, 2009 12:26 PM

comment #2

Rich S. says ...

I'm telling you Jeffrey, if you want to see what Blu-Ray can do, pick up a copy of Snow White.

Posted by Rich S. at November 5, 2009 12:28 PM

comment #3

corey3rd says ...

a good blu-ray should let you get lost in the space if you have a Mombo TV

Posted by corey3rd at November 5, 2009 12:28 PM

comment #4

JBarragan says ...

What's that odd green tinge on Diane Venora's temple?

Posted by JBarragan at November 5, 2009 12:36 PM

comment #5

LexG says ...

I saw HEAT twice in theaters when it came out, and I've NEVER thought it's looked right in ANY video or television incarnation.

Wasn't Spinotti's lensing more... Spinotti-ish in theaters? I remember it being rich and aqua and beautifully blue. It's looked washed out ever since -- on VHS, on HBO, on the first (awful) DVD and the S.E.

I just seem to remember it having more of that chic MANHUNTER look on the big screen, bold and bright, which the L.A. skyscrapers having turquoise-green lights against the night sky, and L.A. skyscapes looking so rich and colorful.

It's always looked totally wan, desaturated and gray on home video.

Posted by LexG at November 5, 2009 12:37 PM

comment #6

Stringer Bell says ...

Reading Paul Shaffer's book (I met him a few times. he's a bit of a dick). Great insight into SCTV since he grew up in Canada and was friends with Marty Short & Eugene Levy and knew of John Candy.

Candy was great. He was a thousand times the talent that Chris Farley ever was. Let them both rest in peace.

Posted by Stringer Bell at November 5, 2009 1:05 PM

comment #7

Mr. F. says ...

Coming from not just WHV but Mann as well... this is a surprise. The new NxNW BD looks absolutely incredible -- sure, there's a much greater degree of improvement you can get out of something that old... but it sounds like they didn't even try in this case.

(And JBarragan: there's plenty odd about Diane Venora.)

Posted by Mr. F. at November 5, 2009 1:08 PM

comment #8

TL says ...

Jeff, you seem to be criticizing an aesthetic failing (as you see it) of the film more than a fault of the Blu-ray. Personally, I'm just glad I never bought the 2-disc SE and stuck with the '99 single disc; I'll have no problem upgrading to the BD after 10 years.

Posted by TL at November 5, 2009 1:13 PM

comment #9

kknepper says ...

too bad, it's a great film (though stringer bell's the wire is much better! ha.) Kim

Posted by kknepper at November 5, 2009 1:54 PM

comment #10

bildeaux says ...

JBarragan - That green tinge is Jeff's green lamp reflecting in the TV.

Posted by bildeaux at November 5, 2009 2:12 PM

comment #11

YND says ...

Of course, if you read the *rest* of that review (and look at the screen captures!), you understand why I immediately ordered HEAT from Amazon as soon as I read it:

"One of the more significant differences is seeing how much the SD transfer was vertically stretched - especially in Pacino's face which seemed abnormally longer and disproportionate. The Blu-ray is darker and shows some grain - skin tones get warmer but more real. You may lose a tad of information in the darkness but the outdoor action sequences looks and sound dramatically superior. The differences are significant in motion."

Sounds like an improvement to me.

Posted by YND at November 5, 2009 2:15 PM

comment #12

Geoff says ...

Why was the SD transfer "stretched"?

Posted by Geoff at November 5, 2009 2:50 PM

comment #13

HanekeFanBoyNumberOne says ...

You spelled "plebian" like a plebeian too. (I joke)

Posted by HanekeFanBoyNumberOne at November 5, 2009 3:13 PM

comment #14

QualityGibberish says ...

JW, your 42" inch plasma is 720p, right? I don't think it's legitimate to criticize the quality of a blu-ray transfer unless you're seeing it on the kind of quality playback system it's capable of, which means 1080p. Saying, as you might, that you can't tell the difference if you're back six feet is bogus. You can tell the difference, so if you're going to keep up these critiques you should spring for a better TV.

Posted by QualityGibberish at November 5, 2009 5:29 PM

comment #15

Mr. Gittes says ...

"They" better not fuck up Barry Lyndon.

Posted by Mr. Gittes at November 5, 2009 6:18 PM

comment #16

Jeffrey Wells says ...

My plasma is NOT 720 -- it's 1080. Who has a 720 plasma?

Posted by Jeffrey Wells at November 5, 2009 6:30 PM

comment #17

Jeffrey Wells says ...

My plasma is NOT 720 -- it's 1080. Who has a 720 plasma?

Posted by Jeffrey Wells at November 5, 2009 6:31 PM

comment #18

Dan Revill says ...

Pretty sure all plasma is 1080.

720 is the top on smaller LCD (under I think 37").

Posted by Dan Revill at November 5, 2009 6:34 PM

comment #19

bitplayer says ...

This to me is the problem with Blu-ray. I have a 1080p tv and a ps3. It looks good but not $300 dollars good. Or go out of my way good. An upconverted dvd gets a very similar quality IMO. Blu-ray is dead before it begins.

Posted by bitplayer at November 5, 2009 8:00 PM

comment #20

corey3rd says ...

What looks great on DVD is Michael Mann's Vegas, Season One, Volume 1. The transfer allows you to freeze frame and read all the casino marquees for the big acts like Nipsey Russell playing the casinos.

Posted by corey3rd at November 5, 2009 8:49 PM

comment #21

Bob Violence says ...

Blu-ray is dead before it begins.

And yet here we are 3 1/2 years later

P.S. Much better comparison here

Posted by Bob Violence at November 5, 2009 8:58 PM

comment #22

QualityGibberish says ...

Oh, that's good if your plasma is 1080p, but they weren't available until not that long ago. Panasonic and Samsung still sell 42" 720p plasma TVs.

Posted by QualityGibberish at November 5, 2009 10:06 PM

comment #23

JBarragan says ...

I've never been a big fan of Heat. Always thought the Pacino character's domestic issues took up too much of the screentime and were fairly uninteresting. The heist is amazing but the movie goes downhill from there.

Ronin came out just a couple of years later and was a far better, leaner action film, as far as my tastes go.

Posted by JBarragan at November 5, 2009 10:26 PM

comment #24

Daniel Tayag says ...

Blu-ray is not just about the picture, it's also about the sound. The shootout scene on the Heat Blu-ray makes the DVD sound like a VHS.

Get a receiver that decodes Dolby TrueHD and DTS-MA and you're in for a treat. For example, I liked Drag Me to Hell in theaters but the soundtrack on the Blu-ray is jaw-droppingly immersive.

Posted by Daniel Tayag at November 6, 2009 12:27 AM

comment #25

mtgilchrist says ...

serious question: did you see where or what was changed? the film supposedly lost two minutes of footage but i have yet to read a review that can determine the differences. any ideas?

Posted by mtgilchrist at November 6, 2009 2:52 AM

comment #26

Bob Violence says ...

Runtime is all of twelve seconds longer than the last DVD release, so if there really are changes, I doubt they're anything significant

Posted by Bob Violence at November 6, 2009 5:14 AM

comment #27

Me says ...

"Get a receiver that decodes Dolby TrueHD and DTS-MA and you're in for a treat. "

These are the arguments FOR blu-ray which always seem to me like reasons AGAINST it. Someone says, "I can't see a difference," and the blu-ray supporters say, "Well, you need to spend $3,000 on a bigger, better tv and sound system and you'll really see the difference."

I don't think blu-ray is going away, but I'm not sure how soon it will overtake DVD. The thing about DVD from VHS was that people could spend $200 and see the difference on their systems. Now you have to buy the expensive better system to see the difference.

Posted by Me at November 6, 2009 6:01 AM

comment #28

TL says ...

P.S. Much better comparison here

Wow -- check out the detail on Pacino's watch on the last still.

Posted by TL at November 6, 2009 7:28 AM

comment #29

Gogocrank says ...

Blu-ray will overtake DVD by attrition. DVD sales are dropping steadily, while Blu-ray is steadily (though not significantly) growing. Personally, I'm happy with my DVDs, and a night spent A/B DVD vs. Blu at a friend's house didn't convince me otherwise. It looked "better," but not deal-breaking better, and more to the point, it didn't make DVD look wildly inferior. Anyway, by the time we reach the industry's apparent goal of 2012 as the year of Blu-ray's definitive victory, I can only imagine how far technology will have moved on.

Posted by Gogocrank at November 6, 2009 8:43 AM

comment #30

DavidF says ...

Uh, I have a really good, 42",year-old 720 Plasma.
My dad actually has the same TV in the 50" model.

Should we be ashamed of our techno inferiority...?

Posted by DavidF at November 6, 2009 9:40 AM

comment #31

Floyd Thursby says ...

The virtues of Blu are best seen in older films such as An American in Paris, Dr. No, and The Godfather. Some older Blus are disappoint, though: Third Man, Rio Bravo. There is little difference in more recent films. A big exception is Shine a Light which looked even better than it did in IMAX. Also had the best sound I've ever heard from a DVD.

Posted by Floyd Thursby at November 6, 2009 10:09 AM

comment #32

Bob Violence says ...

The reviewer at Home Theater Forum has noticed a couple of changes, bothfairly minor. Notably, the Hank Azaria scene has been slightly tweaked.

Posted by Bob Violence at November 6, 2009 5:15 PM

comment #33

Valentinus says ...

http://annisattic.net/

levitra 20 mg

Posted by Valentinus at March 17, 2010 7:19 PM

comment #34

free online games says ...

I previously commented on your web log and picked notify me on new commentary. There has to be a way to eliminate that service? I am receiving a whole lot of e-mails.

Posted by free online games at March 18, 2010 12:19 PM

comment #35