High Def Forum
Thank you for visiting. This is our website archive. Please visit our main website by clicking the logo above.

Mel Brooks Collection on sale

elwaylite
11-08-2012, 10:22 AM
Amazon for $25.99

Link (http://www.amazon.com/Mel-Brooks-Collection-Blu-ray/dp/B007LNBS2I/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1352391677&sr=8-2&keywords=mel+brooks)

bruceames
11-08-2012, 10:56 AM
Thanks, I just bought this. This comes with a 120 page booklet, right?

elwaylite
11-08-2012, 11:07 AM
AFAIK, its 120 page book and 9 discs.

ImRizzo
11-08-2012, 11:20 AM
AFAIK, its 120 page book and 9 discs.

great price but I already have many of Mel's BRD's

bruceames
11-08-2012, 12:20 PM
Blazing Saddles on HD DVD is the only one I have. But that was released by Warner and this collection is from Fox. I wonder if there is any difference in PQ between the Warner single disc Blu-ray release of Blazing Saddles and that which is in this collection?

Malanthius
11-08-2012, 09:00 PM
I was tempted at the price. Then I read the reviews from people who own the set. They say the transfers look DVD quality? Think I'll wait. Maybe that's why it's dirt cheap.

mytime
11-08-2012, 09:11 PM
I was tempted at the price. Then I read the reviews from people who own the set. They say the transfers look DVD quality? Think I'll wait. Maybe that's why it's dirt cheap.

I saw where people were complaining about grain. Ummm yeah, that is supposed to there.

bruceames
11-12-2012, 08:18 PM
I was tempted at the price. Then I read the reviews from people who own the set. They say the transfers look DVD quality? Think I'll wait. Maybe that's why it's dirt cheap.

I saw where people were complaining about grain. Ummm yeah, that is supposed to there.

Yeah the difference is really not that much at all between the DVD and Blu-ray. The Blu-ray has more fine detail but a lot more grain to go along with it, so I understand why some people were complaining about grain. The grain is simply much more prominent on the Blu-ray and I'm not so sure that the trade off of having a sharper picture which is subtle at best is worth it. It is for me, as I don't mind grain and I watch the screen from only 6 feet away. But I'm not sure you'd see any difference at all on a 50 inch display from 10 feet away....except for the grain. That's the suck part about excessive grain. It'll be visible from any distance, while the fine detail won't.

I am disappointed because I have the Mel Brooks collection on DVD and when I upgrade I expect a big difference to make it worth my while. I got that with the Bond 50 set, the Universal monster set and hopefully with the Hitchcock set arriving next week. The Bond and Monster set differences are like night and day, the DVDs look like complete crap in comparison, but not so for the Mel Brooks collection. The biggest difference by far is the amount of visible grain. I am shocked that Young Frankenstein got such high marks. It doesn't look remotely as sharp as say, Dracula, which is a 1933 movie! I really don't think Fox did a damn thing to clean up this movie.

HD Goofnut
11-12-2012, 09:21 PM
I would have bought this, but I have all of his that I want already. I wasn't a big fan of Silent Movie or Robin Hood: Men in Tights either.

bruceames
11-12-2012, 10:53 PM
I would have bought this, but I have all of his that I want already. I wasn't a big fan of Silent Movie or Robin Hood: Men in Tights either.

I only had Blazing Saddles on HD DVD (which I notice is a WB disc and is probably the best looking one in the set). Got it because it was so cheap and because of Young Frankenstein (which I saw in the theater when it came out). I'm not sure if I've seen any of the others but for $25 I figured WTH I can't go wrong. But maybe I did anyway given these soft and grainy transfers.