/vr/ - Retro Games

>>7920306
Arnold looked pretty fucking bad in that scene as well. It's kind of nuts that it took so long for a not gross Blu-Ray to come out, that scene in particular looked glaringly bad.

>>7429037
A lot of this has to do with the horrid trend of Digital Video Noise Reduction, which is software being used to reduce film grain and make films look smoother. The most infamous example of this was the first Blu-ray release of Predator, where at points it makes Arnold Schwarzenegger and Carl Weathers look like they're made out of glossy wax. The later Blu-ray release of Predator is fixed and looks appropriately grainy.

Looking at Return Of The Living Dead, the first VHS release had most of the cool punk music and original themes intact, but then when it starts coming out on DVD, the music is inexplicably replaced with completely soulless generic horror music, worse is that the original voices for the zombies are dubbed over with shitty and boring performances. This continued on to Blu-Rays, until the relatively recent UK Special Edition release, where all the music is restored, all the voices are original, and best of all it doesn't have any ghastly DVNR smoothing to ruin the picture, also featuring lots of bonus material. It's a good movie release, and the reason that the previous releases were bad had nothing to do with the format, and it was most likely just John Russo, a man with no taste or talent, trying to "improve" the movie, as he's the rights holder for it.

The truth is that if a movie looks bad on Blu-Ray, it's almost always because someone in charge somewhere made the decision to make it look bad, such as by raping it with DVNR, like with Predator. With Disney, it was their policy to DVNR the shit out of their classic cartoon Blu-Rays, which is why your example looks so incredibly bad, it was done on PURPOSE.

>>3911875
>wasn't akira BD butchered also

I don't know about that, but FLCL Blu-ray was an actual DVD upscale, and then there's of course this classic.

>>3849225