A Little Background :
I first noticed that some movies were actually “films” back
around 1960 when I saw Seven Samurai (in the then popular
truncated version), Forbidden Games, La Strada and The Third
Man for the first time. It took me a while to include
American movies in what early on I snobbishly felt was a
rarefied club, but soon I came to see the art in such
popular films as Casablanca, The Maltese Falcon and Gone
With the Wind. What did I know – I was just a kid!
Perhaps the most influential of my academic experiences were
the courses I took with Alexander Sesonske at U.C.S.B. (He
supplied the recent notes for Criterion’s issue of Fellini’s
8 1/2) Sesonske encouraged the comparison of unlike objects,
which opened my mind to the study of art, rather than of
technique – in so doing, I discovered a greater
understanding of how technique is applied in order to
manifest the aesthetic experience. Eventually, I began to
apply similar criteria to all movies, regardless of their
target market. Funnily enough, instead of creating a
sure-fire mechanism for disappointment, such a broad
application helped me to find something to appreciate even
amongst the lamest of offerings.
While the practice of psychotherapy and photography
(weddings and portraits) pay the bills, music and film have
enriched my spirit for decades. I once composed and got
public performances back in the 60s. Since then I have
written about music and audio and have published articles in
print and on-line.
My take on video, or audio for that matter – about which I
feel more competent – is not particularly technical. Rather
it is aesthetic, perceptual and strongly influenced by
temporal considerations in much the same way as music. I
expect to focus not only on the image in absolute terms and
relative to the SD edition it "replaces," but how
effectively it supports the drama. I hope you will find my
musings entertaining and informative, fun, interactive and
very much a work in progress.
Openers
However good or less good any particular Blu-ray (BD) image,
there is something about them that can be said pretty much
across the board as compared to SD: There is a 3-dimensional
effect in high definition images that does not occur with
SD. Part of this is an outcome of clarity and resolution,
even of the background where things are in less clear focus.
But it is also a function of color contrast, which is enough
to effect a palpable reality that SD does not have. In
general, this will result in a BD image of about 2-2.5
points higher than its corresponding SD.
On the debit side, no sooner than my first few Blu-ray discs
arrived than I expect will be a default source of annoyance:
the packaging. It's flimsy, plastic and worst of all,
consistent. Imagine owning a few hundred Blu-ray DVDs - all
lined up neatly on your bookshelf, like so many fraternal
twins. Is there room in such thinking for such SD packaging
as The Searchers, The Godfather, Gone With the Wind,
Pandora's Box, or the original SE edition of Oldboy?
The Score Card
Image
I think it would be interesting to employ a grading system
that incorporates both standard (SD) and high definition
formats (HD & BD). Such a scale should be linear and
perceptual: 10 points (since we seem to have been
conditioned to think in those terms) where the size of the
difference between adjacent numbers is perceived to be
equal. I don't propose to make use of any measurement other
than what I see with my video system (except perhaps for
confirming the aspect ratio by ruler).
It will likely take a few months to fine tune the scale as
the range of high definition video discs sorts itself out.
But, for the moment, here are a few current tiles and the
image grade I might give them (give or take 0.5):
10 Cars (just a guess] BD Blu-ray/Buena Vista
9.5
Pirates of the Caribbean: Curse of the Black Pearl
BD Blu-ray/Disney
9.5
Good Night, and Good Luck
BD Blu-ray/Warner
9.0
Unforgiven BD
Blu-ray/Warner
9.0
Casino Royale BD
Blu-ray/Columbia
8.5
The Road Warrior BD
Blu-ray/Warner
8.5
The Searchers BD
Blu-ray/Warner
8.5
Kung-Fu Hustle BD
Blu-ray/Sony
8.5
The Queen BD
Blu-ray/Miramax
8.0
Enter the Dragon BD
Blu-ray/Warner
7.5
Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon SD R3/Columbia
Superbit (China)
7.5
Indiana Jones: The Last Crusade SD R1/Paramount
7.5
Toy Story SD R1/Buena Vista [10th AE]
7.5
Perhaps Love SD R3/MediaAsia (China)
7.5
Singin' in the Rain* SD R1/Warner [SE]
7.0
Owl's Castle SD R2/Pony Canyon (Japan)
7.0
Sin City SD R1/Dimension
7.0
Winter Light SD R1/Criterion
6.5
House of Flying Daggers
BD Blu-ray/Sony
6.5
Superman: The Movie
BD Blu-ray/Warner
6.5 Wonderful Days SD R3/Bitwin (Korea)
6.5
Casablanca SD R1/Warner
6.5
La Dolce Vita SD R1/Koch Lorber [DCE]
6.5 Crying Fist SD R3/Show East (Korea)
6.0
8 1/2 SD R1/Criterion
6.0
Gone With the Wind SD R1/Warner [CE]
6.0 Bedazzled (1967) SD R2/Second Sight (UK
5.5 Seven Samurai SD R1/Criterion [2006 edition]
5.5 Enter the Dragon SD R1/Warner [SE]
5.5
The Innocents SD R2/ BFI (UK)
5.5 Superman: The Movie SD R1/Warner [SE]
5.5 House of Flying Daggers ["Lovers"] SD R2/Big Time
(Japan)
5.5 House of Flying Daggers SD R3/Edko (China)
5.0
The Wizard of Oz SD R1/Warner [CE]
4.5 Bedazzled (1967) SD R1/20th Century Fox
4.5 The Little Mermaid SD R1/Buena Vista [SE]
4.5 Seven Samurai SD R2/Toho (japan)
4.0
The Natural SD R1/TriStar [DC]
4.0 Swing Time SD R1/Warner
4.0
Seven Samurai SD R1/Criterion [1998 edition]
3.0
Maborosi SD R2/Emotion (Japan)
3.0
The More the Merrier SD R1/Columbia
2.0
And Then There None SD R1/VCI
1.0
Jamaica Inn SD R1/Kino
*"The Broadway Melody" sequence.
Emotive Connection
This scale is as ambitious as it is subjective and
unverifiable. All the same I think what it represents needs
to be addressed. The grade indicates the level of our
emotional involvement as a function of the image and, to an
extent, how the video image fares against the original
theatrical presentation. While aspect ratio and the degree
of cropping is not unimportant, I believe it sensible to
make a comment on what we can recollect, or believe, or have
seen in restoration art houses, or have researched on the
subject. We do this more or less unconsciously anyhow, so
why not be up front it. I have read more than a few reviews
that knock the video image without realizing that it may not
have looked this good in decades. . . which, presently, will
bring me to my first review: the much maligned House of
Flying Daggers.
While calibrating my brain for this category, I thought I'd
try an experiment. I went to see the current Pirates movie,
At World's End, at a local first run theatre and, sitting in
my usual position about halfway between screen and
projector, I tried to compare the image to the Blu-ray
editions of the first two Pirates movies I had at home using
my 100+ inch screen. The angle of view was roughly the same
in both instances. Once I thought about it awhile, my
revelation was not so surprising: the image at home was much
better in terms of sharpness and grain. What the theatrical
image had in its favor was SIZE. And size is no small
matter, even more than you might guess. The effect on my
brain when I graduated from a 29 inch CRT to a projected
image onto a 100 inch screen was staggering. The ease and
readiness with which I was sucked into the drama seemed
roughly proportional to the difference in size, i.e. about
10 times. The new experience was relaxing, even hypnotizing.
Likewise, the effect of a theatrically projected image was
just that much more seductive, +/- the effects of the
presence of an audience, depending on the way in which they
made themselves known.
The drama notwithstanding, we naturally respond to the
quality of the image, whether it be in terms of size,
sharpness, contrast, or saturation. The same is true for
audio.
Up to a point, the smaller the picture, the less information
can be perceived regardless of the resolution. (I understand
that film is a more highly resolving medium than high
definition video, but the difference in theatrical screen
size and large screen home theatre should more than make up
for that.) No matter how sharp and highly resolved an image
on a 36 inch CRT, you will see more information when the
same image is projected with the same resolution onto a 100
inch screen.
Part of the reason is viewing distance. When viewing a CRT,
we don't sit at the point where the mechanics of the display
disappears and the image is completely integrated. We sit
much further away. But with front projection, we usually sit
proportionally closer than CRT, rear-projection or plasma
viewing. At such a distance from a large screen the image
approaches the angle of view that we see in a theatre, with
some of those benefits in tow. On the other hand, the
smaller the screen, the more we squint; the more we squint,
the more left-brained our viewing experience as we try to
make out all the detail we know is there, and so the less we
can be emotionally involved.
Audio
For the time being, I will make no remarks about audio
quality; with luck, by the end of the year.
Operations
Loading, Menus & Subtitles
10 points, total.
Extras
10 points, total.
The Movie
Leave us not forget the movie itself. Subjective, but worthy
of critique all the same. Another 10 point scale that
attempts to rationalize films of all sorts: dramas,
thrillers, comedies, silent films, TV series. A silly idea,
really, but I find it provocative and instructive.
The Equipment
SD: Ayre DX-7 DVD Player
BD: Sony PS3
Projector: JVC RS1 1080p DILA
Screen: 104 inch diagonal. Goo CRT White video paint on
Syntra
The Ayre does not upscale, so all the scaling and processing
following a basic progressive interlaced image is done by
the projector. The PS3 is a temporary Blu-ray player. I
expect to replace it in mid-late summer.
