Worst/most disappointing Blu-Ray picture quality?

[vampirefan1]

So far i think 28 Days later is the most disappointing for me.

[Dr.Frankenstein]

This is precisely why I avoid blue-ray at present... thanks for sharing an example of your disappointment.

[APzombie]

28 Days Later was shot with DV cameras, so theoretically its impossible for the blu-ray to look better than the DVD.

[Dr.Frankenstein]

Well that may excuse that one-very insightful point.

[Huttjos]

Yeah I don't think 28 Days later is a fair comparision. It was meant to look gritty and hand shot..

All of my blu movies look great, but I hear that ghostbusters isn't good. And even though I read that it is film grain and not dirt, idk.. I have watched ghostbusters in HD on AMC and it does look worse than the dvd quality.

[ScaryFreak1827]

Yeah I don't think 28 Days later is a fair comparision. It was meant to look gritty and hand shot..

All of my blu movies look great, but I hear that ghostbusters isn't good. And even though I read that it is film grain and not dirt, idk.. I have watched ghostbusters in HD on AMC and it does look worse than the dvd quality.

I have the Ghostbusters BR and it doesn't look that bad but it's certainly not the best. The cinematographer even approved it before it was released but I think it comes down to how it was filmed.

I haven't seen 28 Days Later but I've also heard it doesn't look that good (mostly because of the cameras used.) Having seen other low budget horror films, the original Texas Chainsaw Massacre and Evil Dead II, it's understandable that some films won't glimmer and pop on screen like Speed Racer or Iron Man.

[KcMsterpce]

DRIVEN TO KILL - a 2009 DTV Steven Seagal classic. Looks like shit on BR.

BURN NOTICE - I was very unimpressed with the Season 1 set.

AMERICAN PSYCHO - serviceable, and certainly better than the DVD but still not that great.

THE LONGEST DAY - Worst DNR ever. EVER. Everyone looked like they were washed out with a Photoshopped oil painting mod.

Those are the ones that come to mind right now.
With 28 DAYS LATER (haven't seen it on BR yet), my guess is that it displays the FLAWS from the cameras used more than the DVD is capable of doing. That happens some times; grain can be more pronounced, and distracting, or filters/etc look much worse thanks to the jump up in video capabilities.

- With that said, besides THE LONGEST DAY (which is debatable), I have never seen a movie look "worse" on BR than the DVD counterpart. Even if it's not a good BR transfer, it's still better than the DVD, hands down.
Usually it's a significant improvement, or just plain jaw dropping (BLADE RUNNER, for example).

This is precisely why I avoid blue-ray at present... thanks for sharing an example of your disappointment.

ROFL that's a very silly thing to say.
Whether or not you choose to purchase new technology, BR is leaps and bounds above DVD. Even when it's "bad", it's still better. Regardless of one's ability to care and/or notice.
One of the worst DVDs I've ever seen; FOUR WEDDINGS AND A FUNERAL. I could hardly watch it, it was so ugly.

[MisterChristian]

Speaking of DNR. I hear Patton suffers because of that too. Same with A Bridge Too Far and The Battle of Britain (all FOX titles).

William Friedkin "changed" (aka fucked) up the transfer on The French Connection. I hear it looks horrible. Even the D.P. hates it. I cringe at the thought of what'll happen with The Exorcist.

[lilant2248]

Miss March
Christmas Vacation

[DarkKnight81]

Oceans 13. I actually put the dvd on one channel, bluray on the other, and flipped back and forth and several people agreed with me that the dvd looked better. I think it's probably because Soderberg always shoots with handhelds or something.

[Hucksta G]

I thought there wasn't much of an improvement with the Almost Famous picture

[athf1980]

so far i'm was not impress with x-men

[KcMsterpce]

so far i'm was not impress with x-men

That one looks alright.
X-Men 2 looks better.

Neither one is something I'd showcase to people for breakthrough in video/audio fidelity, though. They're pretty average, but STILL a nice improvement over the DVDs.

[cloneofkelso]

I am on the fence about buying a Blu Ray player because i like alot of older movies and im not sure if they would be an improvement or not.Especially after someone just mentioned Ghostbusters not looking good that was the top Blu Ray movie i wanted to buy.

[athf1980]

little of topic what does bnr meena

[KcMsterpce]

little of topic what does bnr meena

If you mean DNR, it's Digial Noise Reduction. I kind of clump that term with edge enhancement as well, because they often times go hand in hand.
DNR is faulting of video quality due to the compression methods used.
EH is "sharpening" the picture artificially, leading to halos around objects (especially text like in opening credits).

Other things happen with these effects as well, but other people can explain it better.

Here's an article on digital noise reduction (http://www.cinedrome.ch/hometheater/dvd/dnr/).
While I'm at it, I'll also throw in one on edge enhancement (http://www.videophile.info/Guide_EE/Page_01.htm), which is on TONS of DVDs and looks really bad.

[KcMsterpce]

I am on the fence about buying a Blu Ray player because i like alot of older movies and im not sure if they would be an improvement or not.Especially after someone just mentioned Ghostbusters not looking good that was the top Blu Ray movie i wanted to buy.

There are quite a few GREAT looking older movies. Even if the BR isn't top-notch audio/video quality (many times it's due to film stock used and BR reaching the limits of the video technology. Other times, audio isn't the best just because it's aged and was only filmed in mono anyway, etc...), you would be hard pressed to find a movie that looks just as good - or better - on DVD.
There are so few BRs that don't look better than the DVD that it's almost a non-issue.

It also depends on how picky you are. If you're a video/audiophile, you will probably be more discerning about what's playing on screen.

[blknge89]

Black Mask with Jet Li wasn't that great, a few good moments thad it but cool movie nonetheless. Can't comment on the audio quality but a 7.1 DTS-HD master soundtrack option doesn't sound bad, damn I need a set up now.

Then The Third Man on blu ray looks good but I also saw the film before on the criterion dvd and they seem to look the same but the blu ray booklet says otherwise. Confused?