Dredd 3D blu ray for £11
- Thread starter bigboss
- Start date
Seems like the link isn't working.
Tried to search on the Tesco site and it just takes you in a loop back to the search page when you click on the blu-ray.
Maybe someone in the web department is horsing around
Tried to search on the Tesco site and it just takes you in a loop back to the search page when you click on the blu-ray.
Maybe someone in the web department is horsing around
Also £11 on amazon (their link worked)...
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Dredd-Blu-ray-3D-Karl-Urban/dp/B008OGHUFK/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1358498951&sr=8-1
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Dredd-Blu-ray-3D-Karl-Urban/dp/B008OGHUFK/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1358498951&sr=8-1
I have just recieved the film from amazon,and the reviews did say that 2D wasn't up-to much,3D however was stunning,reason being that the film was shot with 3D camera's i 'spose?!
GSB said:I have just recieved the film from amazon,and the reviews did say that 2D wasn't up-to much,3D however was stunning,reason being that the film was shot with 3D camera's i 'spose?!
Yes but you wouldn't have thought it would take much just to put one half of the 3D on the disc really...
Oldboy
Well-known member
- Sep 13, 2007
- 421
- 0
- 18,890
Well I got my copy a few days ago in the post as I pre ordered and paid £13, watched it last night and was very impressed. The 3D rates amongst the best I've seen and the PQ is excellent with a soundtrack to test your system, I thoroughly enjoyed the movie and it was obviously made by people who had some love for the original beloved source like myself. At £11 I wouldn't even think about it, buy it, you won't be disappointed and the disc has none of the juddering that Paul experienced at the cinema.
It's a great test disc with some lovely colour filters and cctv like grain added in places and even better it's a great movie that banishes those painful memories of that simply awful Stallone attempt at a Dredd movie.
It's a great test disc with some lovely colour filters and cctv like grain added in places and even better it's a great movie that banishes those painful memories of that simply awful Stallone attempt at a Dredd movie.
Oldboy
Well-known member
- Sep 13, 2007
- 421
- 0
- 18,890
The_Lhc said:GSB said:I have just recieved the film from amazon,and the reviews did say that 2D wasn't up-to much,3D however was stunning,reason being that the film was shot with 3D camera's i 'spose?!
Yes but you wouldn't have thought it would take much just to put one half of the 3D on the disc really...
In the extras on the disc you see that they made special 3D cameras for the movie that could get in real close and that the whole movie was shot on the latest generation of 3D cameras so I would presume this has had an effect on the 2D presentation?? I will have a little look at the 2D version in a minute and report back if that's of any use?
Oldboy said:The_Lhc said:GSB said:I have just recieved the film from amazon,and the reviews did say that 2D wasn't up-to much,3D however was stunning,reason being that the film was shot with 3D camera's i 'spose?!
Yes but you wouldn't have thought it would take much just to put one half of the 3D on the disc really...
In the extras on the disc you see that they made special 3D cameras for the movie that could get in real close and that the whole movie was shot on the latest generation of 3D cameras so I would presume this has had an effect on the 2D presentation??
I can certainly imagine there will be an effect on the light levels but the reviews suggest that there are a lot of issues in the 2D version that just don't exist in the 3D, which seems a little strange.
That would be splendid, thank you!
Oldboy
Well-known member
- Sep 13, 2007
- 421
- 0
- 18,890
Well I've had a good flick through it now and to say the 2D version is awful is utter rubbish in all honesty. The transfer stands up remarkably well when compared to the 3D version i watched last night and there are none of those occasions when you are watching it where you think this is obviously a 3D shot.
Black levels and detail hold up very well when compared to the 3D version with only some occasional instances where I thought the PQ was ever so slightly softer but I would attribute this to the 3D perhaps making outlines seem sharper due to the depth of the picture. Colour levels hold up nicley too with the palette still really nice when you see shots of slo mo, obviously the depth of 3D really brings theses scenes to life but even in 2D I found them lovely. Whites and contrast hold up well too and nothing looks overblown or saturated with those colours remaining nicely judged (no pun intended).
The grain that is in the film doesn't have the same impact in 2D, when viewed in 3D it takes on this feeling of watching through a cctv camera which is a bit lost in 2D but the detail in black levels is still there and the blue filter used in the film gives it an other worldly feel. I feel that some of the visual and colour tricks used to give the film it's gritty and real feel in 3D don't quite work in the same way in 2D and this may be what the reviews are picking up on because the film can seem to be overly grainy at times and blacks take on a blue hue but this is all intentional and the PQ offered up in 2D is still sharp and well defined with realistic skin tones and good insight into blacks.
I would agree that black detail and insight is slightly better in 3D but I'm of the opinion that is down to the exceptional 3D effect of the movie than due to the transfer as the layers are better defined by the depth offered in 3D. I really can't find anything to suggest that in 2D the disc is not worth watching and it remains as enjoyable as it does in 3D.
I would still buy the disc if I could only watch it in 2D personally and you wouldn't feel short changed but that is just my opinion...what I will say is that 3D is the best way to watch it but in 2D it loses very little and remains a good movie and will test your system in all areas, the soundtrack is a stern test of any system.
Hope that helps our 2D members
Black levels and detail hold up very well when compared to the 3D version with only some occasional instances where I thought the PQ was ever so slightly softer but I would attribute this to the 3D perhaps making outlines seem sharper due to the depth of the picture. Colour levels hold up nicley too with the palette still really nice when you see shots of slo mo, obviously the depth of 3D really brings theses scenes to life but even in 2D I found them lovely. Whites and contrast hold up well too and nothing looks overblown or saturated with those colours remaining nicely judged (no pun intended).
The grain that is in the film doesn't have the same impact in 2D, when viewed in 3D it takes on this feeling of watching through a cctv camera which is a bit lost in 2D but the detail in black levels is still there and the blue filter used in the film gives it an other worldly feel. I feel that some of the visual and colour tricks used to give the film it's gritty and real feel in 3D don't quite work in the same way in 2D and this may be what the reviews are picking up on because the film can seem to be overly grainy at times and blacks take on a blue hue but this is all intentional and the PQ offered up in 2D is still sharp and well defined with realistic skin tones and good insight into blacks.
I would agree that black detail and insight is slightly better in 3D but I'm of the opinion that is down to the exceptional 3D effect of the movie than due to the transfer as the layers are better defined by the depth offered in 3D. I really can't find anything to suggest that in 2D the disc is not worth watching and it remains as enjoyable as it does in 3D.
I would still buy the disc if I could only watch it in 2D personally and you wouldn't feel short changed but that is just my opinion...what I will say is that 3D is the best way to watch it but in 2D it loses very little and remains a good movie and will test your system in all areas, the soundtrack is a stern test of any system.
Hope that helps our 2D members
Oldboy
Well-known member
- Sep 13, 2007
- 421
- 0
- 18,890
mitch65 said:Good coz I'm bought it anyway!
Seriously, I'm glad it seems like a sound purchase and I can't wait for tomorrow to find out for myself............if it's that bad I can always buy a 3D TV :rofl:
You won't be disappointed I'm sure but if you are then I'm sure a new 3D tv would soften the blow
Its Ironic really this film had such great reviews from pretty much everyone critics an all, how true to comic it was, the qaulity of the 3D
There was much anticipation and hope that a sequal would be on the cards,BUT as I understand it it cost only $80-million to make, but only took $50-million on opening, one would assume that it will make some money, but this does not bode well with the studios who after all want to make as much money a possible, maybe the 18cert had some thing to do with it, that is a lot of customers kids that can not see it, so that will hit hard, so they could have made it a 12A made $100-million made 3-Sequals 7-prequals then remake it again, you know what I mean. But the film would have been utter S--T, so fair play to the guy that wanted to keep it original, but I think a Sequal, I am not sure. The last Punisher was brilliant and that was made 3-times, but took a loss, Anyway just my bit :clap:
There was much anticipation and hope that a sequal would be on the cards,BUT as I understand it it cost only $80-million to make, but only took $50-million on opening, one would assume that it will make some money, but this does not bode well with the studios who after all want to make as much money a possible, maybe the 18cert had some thing to do with it, that is a lot of customers kids that can not see it, so that will hit hard, so they could have made it a 12A made $100-million made 3-Sequals 7-prequals then remake it again, you know what I mean. But the film would have been utter S--T, so fair play to the guy that wanted to keep it original, but I think a Sequal, I am not sure. The last Punisher was brilliant and that was made 3-times, but took a loss, Anyway just my bit :clap:
pioneer7 said:
$45m was the budget, which is bloody good considering special effects, 3D costs, etc., and $36m at the box office but the result is the same - good film, faithful to source material but still scarred by Stallones/Cannons 1995 abomination....ho hum.
Similar threads
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram