44 of 49 people found the following review helpful
Not the best they could have done, but still a great movie.,
Verified Purchase(What is this?)
This review is from: Basic Instinct [Blu-ray] (Blu-ray)
First of all, my rating is basically 5 stars for the movie and 2 for the Blu-ray presentation.
The main reason? The picture. I just don't believe this has been remastered at 1080p. I have original projection reels of this movie in my collection and they still look cleaner and sharper, which they shouldn't. Basic Instinct has incredibly good cinematography, but the Blu-ray image is SOFT. Meaning there must be anti-aliasing happening because the image is not sufficiently detailed to fulfil 1080p. It was really something of a disappointment. Yes, it looks okay, but not for a second is this the best is could look. What's more, it's from Optimum, who usually really are quite good with their material.
The audio is fine, and Goldsmith's beautiful score is not damaged by the poor treatment other aspects of the movie have suffered.
There are no extras. Not even the feature-length Making Of has been included. There is a picture option which allows you to follow their instructions on getting the best picture they believe possible out of this disc. Well, ignore it. You know yourself what looks sharpest and most vibrant, and for me it was NOTHING like what they were suggesting.
I find this release to be a big disappointment, given how popular the film was and, despite it's often sleazy reputation, it really is a finely crafted thriller with lush, warm cinematography, Goldsmith's last great score, great editing and Verhoeven's slick direction. It's too bad the Blu-ray doesn't give it the respect it deserves.
Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-5 of 5 posts in this discussion
Initial post: 12 Jul 2009 05:00:46 BDT
> I have original projection reels of this movie in my collection and they still look cleaner and sharper, which they shouldn't
Film beats HD every time. HD is a lossy format. 6K is close to true film quality.
In reply to an earlier post on 14 Jul 2009 14:11:20 BDT
Mr Ghostface says:
yes, when scanned in at 6K, but that isn't what I was saying. Film projected traditionally in a theatre does not look as good as film projected digitally. I was speaking about the viewer's experience, not the limits of the technology. Anyway, the fact remains that Blu-rays can look outstanding when remastered properly, but Basic Instinct doesn't, and seeing as the original cinematography is exceptional, then this is a very disappointing disc.
In reply to an earlier post on 25 Nov 2009 12:55:21 GMT
Nad Banton says:
I agree, this Blu ray is soft and nowhere near as clear as it should look.
The comment from GJ Salkeld about film beating HD every time is a rather silly generalisation. When used correctly, 35mm film can manage about 4K resolution before focus starts to lose its sharpness, and it can stand up pretty well at 6K. But there are very few films that were all shot to the limits of the 35mm format and so will always experience problems when scanned in digitally. Limits in traditional projection - which most screens still are at the moment - means that the general cinema experience is vastly improved by digitial projection. I agree with Mr Ghostface's appraisal of this Blu-ray, and it is a shame that such beautiful cinematography isn't given the showcase it could've had.
In reply to an earlier post on 26 Mar 2010 19:39:01 GMT
Last edited by the author on 26 Mar 2010 19:39:13 GMT
Neil of London says:
Have to agree, outside shots are fine and fairly detailed with good colour, inside shots are worse than the DVD, soft and full of white grain.
Posted on 8 Sep 2010 23:07:27 BDT
M. Park says:
I gotta say - Goldsmith's last great score (in my opinion!) was probably The Edge from 1997. Great, underappreciated music.
Good review here though, so thanks for the info - I was after getting Basic Instinct for the BR upgrade, but I might as well stick with the feature packed 10th Anniversary DVD.
‹ Previous 1 Next ›