Hampy1972
Distinguished Member
LOL! If not for Brad Pitt saving this from the bottom shelf in Blockbusters.Somebody finally points that out.
LOL! If not for Brad Pitt saving this from the bottom shelf in Blockbusters.Somebody finally points that out.
I know this has been said dozens of times before but why do you buy 4k films at £25? I haven't bought a single film at the price and that includes new ones.Heading into Christmas, I'm being all economical and not buying new 4K discs for a while. Expensive time of year, so building me general blu-ray collection through second-hand seller. I can get 15-25 films for the price of this one disc by just taking the time to comb gumtree for the good stuff. Will get back to buying new stuff in the new year sometime and will surely add this to the collection. I think my pricing anchor point has just shifted recently. Getting so many great films so cheaply makes £25 for one feel unnecessarily wasteful.
I know this has been said dozens of times before but why do you buy 4k films at £25? I haven't bought a single film at the price and that includes new ones.
Just the usual. Amazon, eBay, etc etc. I've picked up brand 4k films only a few weeks old for 10 quid. More often than not it comes down to patience. I've only bought a couple of films at day 1 full price: The Matrix & Avengers at £20 each. Cap America and Dark Knight box sets were also picked up day 1 but on special offer. So the current used prices is basically the same price I paid brand new.Well, you still won't find it for much less that £20 if you go hunting. Unless you have some tips on finding it cheaper?
Yep, I agree, most I’ve spent is £23 for Apoc Now 6 disc set, keep an eye on hotukdeals and the classifieds here. I’ve picked up many £10, sold them on for the same price.
If you purchase new after release on the likes of Amazon, you are going to pay top price.
@Slinkywizard while you are correct in the Blu-ray bargains compared to UHD, at the end of the day, while blu good, resolution/wcg and Atmos (on some) is worth the uptick in price for those with 4K sets/surround sound setups.
Once you try one with a decent transfer (not all do have one), you might find it difficult to go back, that’s what I found anyway.
That's a good example because I've picked that up for £13.Yep, I agree, most I’ve spent is £23 for Apoc Now 6 disc set,
Definitely true. Just be careful of very poor transfers like the Bourne Trilogy.Once you try one with a decent transfer (not all do have one), you might find it difficult to go back, that’s what I found anyway.
Just looking at your setup, nice! I'm surprised you don't see too much difference on a 133" screen.But the difference is not huge on most discs and a good blu-ray still looks STUNNING on my setup.
yeah, the US import was going for a cracking price recently, almost sold my UK version on ebay when it was hitting £65, but couldn't give it upThat's a good example because I've picked that up for £13.
2k upscale is not an issue. It really isn't. People get hung up on resolution when it is actually contrast and colours that are more important. It's why the 720p Kuro was the best TV on the planet for a long time even after 1080p sets became the norm. It's also why OLEDs are said to be state of the art.I have about a hundred 4K blus, but of the films I want to own, only about 5% are available in 4K, and the vast majority of those are 2K upscales. My display algorithmically adds detail to 1080p images, and my audio set-up upmixes to use the height channels on standard blu-rays. Sure, if the UHD disc is native 4K through the entire production chain it makes a difference. But the difference is not huge on most discs and a good blu-ray still looks STUNNING on my setup.
2k upscale is not an issue. It really isn't. People get hung up on resolution when it is actually contrast and colours that are more important. It's why the 720p Kuro was the best TV on the planet for a long time even after 1080p sets became the norm. It's also why OLEDs are said to be state of the art.
This shouldn't bug me as much as it does but here goes:
the movie is referenced both here and on IMDB as Once Upon a Time... in Hollywood but all the marketing materials clearly print the title as Once Upon a Time in...Hollywood.
The ellipsis comes after the in. After!
THIS IS IMPORTANT TO ME!
Now I'm even more confused!!Yeah, you might need to watch the movie again then, as that's how Tarantino wrote the title:
Once Upon a Time
... in Hollywood
If it makes you feel any better I don’t think IMDb updated it until after watching the movie too; they were clearly also going by promo material.Now I'm even more confused!!
Fire that marketing team immediately!!
If it makes you feel any better I don’t think IMDb updated it until after watching the movie too; they were clearly also going by promo material.
This is Inglorious Bastards all over again. Sorry, I mean Inglourious Bastards. Inglourious Basterds. Inglhuouyuss Bartlets. Ingmarbergmanous Blistoids.
Nice review Cas, enjoyed it mostly but for me has got some faults.
I found it hard to suspend my disbelief after the 'tip tap' Bruce Lee character though and thought this was an easy but stupid way of Tarantino 'bigging up' a certain character. Would have liked more character development and screen time of DiCaprio with Pitt. I'd give it a 7/10.
Is that made clear? That is the first time I have heard this explanation.The Bruce Lee stuff was all in Brad Pitts mind, it was his flashback to the events and how he remembers it with all the embellishments of how he probably told people he beat Bruce Lee in a fight.
Is that made clear? That is the first time I have heard this explanation.