Top critical review
47 people found this helpful
disappointing Blu-Ray transfer
on November 17, 2009
I'm giving this Two Stars not because of the film itself but for the following three complaints I have with this disc (I'm a huge fan of the movies, I have all three and have watched them dozens of times):
1. Price: $25.49 is awfully expensive for a movie that's been out for 11 years. Especially considering that much newer movies (e.g. "Watchmen: The Director's Cut", loaded with extras, btw) are going for lower. The aforementioned "Watchmen" is nearly $10 cheaper.
Surely a $35 or $40 boxed set of all three Blade films could have been issued.
2. Quality of Transfer
The transfer is hardly stunning and hardly worth the aforementioned price. Both my Blu-Ray player (a 120GB PS3, the very latest version of Sony's flagship console) and my HD-DVD player (a Toshiba A-30) upscale/up-res standard DVDs and I cannot tell the difference between THIS Blu-Ray transfer and the upscaled SD-DVD. Thus I'm feeling more than a little taken advantage of. Unfortunately, Amazon's policy limits me to a 50% refund, if they give me one at all. This film is still part of the best Vampire franchise out there (so far), in my opinion, but stick to the standard DVD versions. Not only do you get the extras, but since there's no discernible difference in picture quality, you'll also save yourself a good bit of cash.
3. No extras
Unfortunately, I missed the notice, which is just a single line of print, that no extras were included which scotches my reason for returning the disc. Surely this notification should have been bolded or rendered in a different color, something that would catch the eye better.
Although, in general, I am not a big fan of extras (with certain exceptions, they are rarely worth watching), I think a Blu-Ray release should at least contain everything on the original DVD release. After all, there's more than enough room on a BR disc to accommodate everything on a Standard DVD release since all BR videos are 50GB discs. And "Blade" will fit on a 4.7GB DVD (i.e. a single layer disc) WITHOUT the extras. Therefore, there's no reason NOT to include the extras given the huge amount of space the BR gives the studio for extra content.
Thus, if Blade requires 4.7GB of space for its 2 hours in Standard Definition, multiplying it by 6 (since we are constantly reminded that "Blu-Ray has SIX TIMES--!!!--the definition of DVD!"), that still leaves 26GB for extras, more than enough if these are left in standard def (as the majority of extras are).
Finally, as for the difference in aspect ratios: this is not an issue for me. Both Blu-Ray and HD-DVD normally use a 2.40:1 ratio (resulting in slightly smaller black bars bordering the film) and, strictly, speaking, I suppose, the original aspect ratio should have been preserved. However, the increase (?) in aspect ratio does NOT result in a distorted picture so I don't feel this is a drawback.