Individual Entry


Don’t believe all they tell you

It’s a decent picture, but not superb.

- James Plath, DVD Town

Here we have yet another wildly inconsistent HD transfer from Sony. The movie has terrific photography and production design that should make nice High Definition eye candy, but what we get on disc alternates between periods of mediocre, awful, great, mediocre, great, and awful again.

- Joshua Zyber, DVD Talk

Granted, the transfer’s consistency does seem to improve a bit as the film’s runtime drags on, but maybe I was just getting used to the compression craziness. Either way, this one is just not a great example of what pre-recorded high-def should look like.

- Peter M. Bracke, High-Def Digest

These reviewers are talking about the Blu-ray release of Silent Hill, which arrived on our doorstep this morning (Lyris picked it up for a mere £10.49 at MovieTyme). Based on these advance warnings, we were expecting a frustrating viewing experience followed by a rapid listing of the disc on eBay. As it turns out, we were misled. Grossly. Reviews like these, as Lyris puts it, do damage to home theatre. Silent Hill on Blu-ray is a magnificent achievement, one of the most detailed and film-like high definition presentations I’ve ever seen, mirroring Kong Kong in terms of overall clarity and coming amazingly close to the top (10/10) tier. The compression isn’t perfect, due to Sony’s insistence of using MPEG2 as opposed to something more robust, and there is a hint of edge enhancement at times, but I was floored by this presentation. It is an exceptional piece of work by a talented encoder who clearly knew his stuff. It pains me that beautiful transfers like this are rubbished by incompetent reviewers while mediocre crap like Fantastic Four is praised to the high heavens.

Expect a full review at DVD Times soon to set the record straight.

Posted: Friday, February 02, 2007 at 1:42 PM | Comments: 3
Categories: Blu-ray | Cinema | Technology




Posted by: gva1116, February 2, 2007 4:11 PM


Is it the usual case of reviewers not realising film is supposed to have grain?

Posted by: Philly Q, February 2, 2007 9:23 PM


I don’t doubt it. All I can say is that this disc has been severely mischaracterised, and is giving me cause to wonder whether or not the same is true of many of the initial BDs that were, for want of a better world, slandered. Apart from this and Fantastic Four, I’ve only seen SWAT, which didn’t look very good, and Lyris has seen Underworld: Evolution, which he described as similarly underwhelming. Still, I’m very interested to get a wider sampling of what’s available. I’ll know sooner or later when my various orders arrive.

Posted by: Whiggles, February 2, 2007 9:30 PM

Comments on this entry and all entries up to and including June 30th 2009 have been closed. The discussion continues on the new Land of Whimsy blog:


Back to...