MovieChat Forums > What's Up, Doc? (1972) Discussion > Blu-ray of "What's Up, Doc?" Is Distract...

Blu-ray of "What's Up, Doc?" Is Distractingly Clear


Can a movie transfer be TOO good?

I've seen this film innumerable times, and have owned three versions: LaserDisc, DVD and Blu-ray. But I hadn't taken the shrink-wrap off of the Blu-ray for some time, until about a week ago. We watched it at a friends house (they unbelievably hadn't ever seen it) and watched it on their high-end 70" HDTV.

Oh, wow. It was like the movie was shot this year. Crystal clear, amazingly detailed. But it was so clear, it looked. . .I don't know, less like a movie and more like it was video taped. Things that normally recede into the background just popped out at you. Almost 3D it was so focused.

I love the film and always will. But I'm surprised to learn that a film can lose something by being too clear. I probably sound nuts. Does anyone agree?

reply

I just watched a cheap x265 1.5GB version of this movie and even that looked crazy good! I couldn't believe it. Made me question my decision to waste so much storage space on other 4K high-bitrate movie files.

reply

Blu Rays are mastered from camera negatives if possible. Theaters show a 4th generation copy.

https://www.blu-ray.com/movies/Whats-Up-Doc-Blu-ray/9457/

What's Up, Doc? is a relic of its era, so I'm sure there will be critics who find this new Blu-ray release unappealing, expecting it to have a digital sharpness and clarity which is simply not inherent in the source elements. Like a lot of early-1970's films, this has an overall soft quality, with noticeable if not overwhelming grain, that somehow seems to drive a lot of videophiles crazy, despite the fact that this is exactly how the film looked upon its original theatrical release. Delivered via a VC-1 encode, in full 1080p and in a 1.78:1 aspect ratio, What's Up, Doc? may not in fact reveal eye popping new detail in this Blu-ray release, but there is a noticeable improvement in image sharpness and especially color saturation over the previously released SD-DVD. Several fanstastic sight gags which were muddy in previous home video releases now are at the very least visible, if not screaming out in high definition splendor. Look, for example, at the scuff marks left by Kahn's feet as she's dragged out of the ballroom. Or (without spoiling a great gag), the golf clubs after the fire alluded to above—a moment I never saw before in any home video release, which is now abundantly on display. Detail is sharpest of course in close-ups, where Streisand's luminous eyes flash with color, and every rumpled hair on O'Neal's head is discernable. Medium range and far shots do suffer more from softness, but overall this is a splendid presentation, if one takes the film's generational "look" into consideration.

reply