The Secret of NIMH on Blu-ray
- Sotiris
- Ultimate Collector's Edition
- Posts: 19913
- Joined: Sat Sep 23, 2006 3:06 am
- Gender: Male
- Location: Fantasyland
The Secret of NIMH on Blu-ray
Last edited by Sotiris on Sun Feb 27, 2011 12:58 am, edited 4 times in total.
- jpanimation
- Anniversary Edition
- Posts: 1841
- Joined: Mon Sep 07, 2009 12:00 am
I was just re-watching this film on DVD over the last day or so. I'm interested to see what kind of treatment it is going to get in terms of restoration. The DVD I have, which is pretty much a bare-bones release, no special edition or anything, doesn't look all that great in terms of quality. Although I doubt we'll see the attention to detail that Disney provides their films with during restoration, I hope they take their time and aren't simply out to make a quick buck on another mediocre re-release.
- jrboy
- Anniversary Edition
- Posts: 1245
- Joined: Sat Sep 10, 2005 7:38 pm
- Location: Baton Rouge Gender: Monster
- Contact:
First, 20th Century Fox Home Entertainment and MGM will be releasing more MGM catalog titles on Blu-ray Disc on 3/9, including All Dogs Go to Heaven, All Dogs Go to Heaven 2, Picture This, The Secret of NIMH, Material Girls, Teen Wolf and Legally Blonde 2: Red, White and Blonde (SRP $19.99 each). They're also releasing Norman Jewison's musical Fiddler on the Roof on Blu-ray as a new 40th Anniversary Edition on 4/5 (SRP $29.99).
- Sotiris
- Ultimate Collector's Edition
- Posts: 19913
- Joined: Sat Sep 23, 2006 3:06 am
- Gender: Male
- Location: Fantasyland
Thanks for letting us know! Could you also give us the link to the above news?jrboy wrote:First, 20th Century Fox Home Entertainment and MGM will be releasing more MGM catalog titles on Blu-ray Disc on 3/9, including All Dogs Go to Heaven, All Dogs Go to Heaven 2, Picture This, The Secret of NIMH, Material Girls, Teen Wolf and Legally Blonde 2: Red, White and Blonde (SRP $19.99 each). They're also releasing Norman Jewison's musical Fiddler on the Roof on Blu-ray as a new 40th Anniversary Edition on 4/5 (SRP $29.99).
- jinkinquackers
- Gold Classic Collection
- Posts: 162
- Joined: Mon Jun 21, 2010 11:28 am
- Location: Columbus, Ohio
Thanks jrboy for posting the info! Sotiris, here is the link: The Digital BitsSotiris wrote:Thanks for letting us know! Could you also give us the link to the above news?jrboy wrote:
- Sotiris
- Ultimate Collector's Edition
- Posts: 19913
- Joined: Sat Sep 23, 2006 3:06 am
- Gender: Male
- Location: Fantasyland
Thanks! Digital Bits have also revealed the artwork for the Blu-ray release. Apparently, it's the same as the 2-disc Special Edition DVD.jinkinquackers wrote:Sotiris, here is the link: The Digital Bits.
Someone over at Blu-ray.com posted about the colorful cover not really reflecting the mood of the film. I'd have to say I agree; if I didn't know about this film already, I might skip over this on the shelf because the cover makes it look like a cheap direct-to-video movie. It's not really a big deal, and isn't the first or last time someone doesn't get a cover right, but it would have been nice to get something that reflected the film properly.
Either way, I'm still glad it's coming to Blu-ray and hope that more Bluth films, and more animation in general, make their way onto the format.
Either way, I'm still glad it's coming to Blu-ray and hope that more Bluth films, and more animation in general, make their way onto the format.
- jinkinquackers
- Gold Classic Collection
- Posts: 162
- Joined: Mon Jun 21, 2010 11:28 am
- Location: Columbus, Ohio
MJW, I completely agree! I was just thinking that very same thing before I scrolled down enough to read your comment. lol I just don't think I like how "happy" and "bright" everything looks on the cover. I'm just wondering how funny it's going to be when kids see the cover and beg their parents to buy it thinking it's some fun "kid" movie. Boy, are they going to be surprised!MJW wrote:Someone over at Blu-ray.com posted about the colorful cover not really reflecting the mood of the film. I'd have to say I agree; if I didn't know about this film already, I might skip over this on the shelf because the cover makes it look like a cheap direct-to-video movie. It's not really a big deal, and isn't the first or last time someone doesn't get a cover right, but it would have been nice to get something that reflected the film properly.
Either way, I'm still glad it's coming to Blu-ray and hope that more Bluth films, and more animation in general, make their way onto the format.
On another note, I'm very excited for this release, along with everything else coming out in the upcoming months.
- Sotiris
- Ultimate Collector's Edition
- Posts: 19913
- Joined: Sat Sep 23, 2006 3:06 am
- Gender: Male
- Location: Fantasyland
The film is now available to pre-order on amazon.com. It looks like it will be a single Blu-ray disc (no combo pack). It is set to be released on March 29.
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/ ... eimprovemz
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/ ... eimprovemz
Argh, what is it with the US not getting the combo packs for the Bluth films? I am not even sure if I am going to buy any of these releases yet, but the fact that they’re not getting partnered with a DVD copy is definitely makes me consider not getting them. I know some people don’t care about the DVD, but I only have a HDTV/Blu-ray player in one room and have no plans to upgrade throughout the rest of the house at this time. So, it’s nice to get that DVD copy so I have the freedom to view the movie outside of the living room, if need be. I know some films ONLY come out as a single Blu-ray release, but the fact that non-US releases of the Bluth films are getting combo packs shows that that option is available.Sotiris wrote:It looks like it will be a single Blu-ray disc (no combo pack).
I do already have The Secret of NIMH on DVD, so getting a single Blu-ray for this one is okay, I guess. However, I was interested in getting Anastasia too, which I currently only own the VHS of.
Last edited by MJW on Fri Feb 25, 2011 5:30 pm, edited 1 time in total.
- KubrickFan
- Anniversary Edition
- Posts: 1209
- Joined: Sun Sep 17, 2006 11:22 am
Well, from what I've read the Blu-ray looks far from horrible. It's not a grain-removed, color adjusted Disney Classic, but that's not necessarily a bad thing.MJW wrote:This title would probably already be in my collection if it weren't for what I've read to be horrible video quality. Maybe if I can get it for about $5, I'd grab it, but until then, I'm not interested.
The review at Blu-ray.com (2.5 out of 5 stars for picture quality) says the transfer shows scratches, color flickering, and telecine wobble. Grain I am fine with (even though the review says this grain present is thick and inconsistent), but print damage should not be there.KubrickFan wrote: Well, from what I've read the Blu-ray looks far from horrible. It's not a grain-removed, color adjusted Disney Classic, but that's not necessarily a bad thing.
According to Don Bluth's website, MGM is said to have mentioned that they would spend 3 days to a week tops on the restoration of this film. The source material would have had to have been in excellent condition to be transferred with that little attention to detail, and from what I hear, it wasn't.
Top notch video quality and sound are the signatures of the Blu-ray format, and when multiple reviews state that we're better off sticking with our DVD copy of this film instead of upgrading to BD, that's not a good sign.
- KubrickFan
- Anniversary Edition
- Posts: 1209
- Joined: Sun Sep 17, 2006 11:22 am
Print damage and specks are nearly unavoidable when you're dealing with film. It costs an extraordinary amount to clean it all manually, and can lead to removing other things that are part of the film when done automatically.MJW wrote: The review at Blu-ray.com (2.5 out of 5 stars for picture quality) says the transfer shows scratches, color flickering, and telecine wobble. Grain I am fine with (even though the review says this grain present is thick and inconsistent), but print damage should not be there.
According to Don Bluth's website, MGM is said to have mentioned that they would spend 3 days to a week tops on the restoration of this film. The source material would have had to have been in excellent condition to be transferred with that little attention to detail, and from what I hear, it wasn't.
Top notch video quality and sound are the signatures of the Blu-ray format, and when multiple reviews state that we're better off sticking with our DVD copy of this film instead of upgrading to BD, that's not a good sign.
The three days to a week comment is only about the transferring. No restoration was made because a film that age doesn't need one. I'm not an expert on this, but I have a hard time believing a transfer really takes that much time. Gary Goldman, the producer was involved in the color correction that happened, and some clean up of the film was done. You have to understand that MGM was working with a limited budget here. We're not talking about a Snow White too. It's nowhere near that popular.
Also, what does top notch video mean? Something that has been cleared of all its grain? Something that looks like film? I agree that it's not perfect by any means, but definitely not the disaster some make it out to be just because mainly they expect something else like what Disney has given them.
I agree that overscrubbing can remove detail from a film, and in no way do I dislike grain and think it should be abolished just for the sake of it.KubrickFan wrote:Print damage and specks are nearly unavoidable when you're dealing with film. It costs an extraordinary amount to clean it all manually, and can lead to removing other things that are part of the film when done automatically.
The three days to a week comment is only about the transferring. No restoration was made because a film that age doesn't need one. I'm not an expert on this, but I have a hard time believing a transfer really takes that much time. Gary Goldman, the producer was involved in the color correction that happened, and some clean up of the film was done. You have to understand that MGM was working with a limited budget here. We're not talking about a Snow White too. It's nowhere near that popular.
Also, what does top notch video mean? Something that has been cleared of all its grain? Something that looks like film? I agree that it's not perfect by any means, but definitely not the disaster some make it out to be just because mainly they expect something else like what Disney has given them.
I think the advantage of Blu-ray's video quality is that a film can be presented as it premiered in theaters or as the director's originally intended. I am aware that dirt is embedded in every frame, but I am also sure that the print or negative used for this transfer was in better condition in 1982 (when the film premiered) than it was a few years ago when they scanned it to digital files (not sure when this took place). Multiple reviewers have reported scratches and/or other flaws from damage, and it's unlikely the film showed like this on its first run in theaters with fresh prints.
Filmmaking/home video presentation has come along way in 29 years, so unless they had some kind of "virgin" source, there would be print damage that should be fixed. Unfortunately, as you mentioned, this isn't Snow White or another highly regarded classic, so I can see why they didn't give it much attention. Plus, I'm not sure MGM has loads of money to throw around.
I guess my main point is that when buying a Blu-ray (or at least when I do), you expect to receive the best quality video/audio presentation available at the current time. Scanning a film and throwing it onto Blu-ray isn't a benefit to the consumer if it isn't an improvement over what is/was already available. I think that the general consensus is that this release is a bit of a dissapointment, not because it didn't receive Disney-level clean-up, but that it appears like it didn't receive enough clean-up to remove flaws that aren't supposed to be there.
I should probably just stop reading the reviews and take a look for myself before I continue to overanalyze all of this. It wouldn't be the first time that a reviewer was harsh on something that I ended up being satisfied with. Thanks for your input, KubrickFan, hopefully I didn't come across as argumentative as it was not my intent at all!
- KubrickFan
- Anniversary Edition
- Posts: 1209
- Joined: Sun Sep 17, 2006 11:22 am
In a perfect world, every Blu-ray would be sourced from a 4K (or higher) transfer that's meticulously restored, with hours and hours of bonus material . Unfortunately, that's not the case.MJW wrote: I agree that overscrubbing can remove detail from a film, and in no way do I dislike grain and think it should be abolished just for the sake of it.
I think the advantage of Blu-ray's video quality is that a film can be presented as it premiered in theaters or as the director's originally intended. I am aware that dirt is embedded in every frame, but I am also sure that the print or negative used for this transfer was in better condition in 1982 (when the film premiered) than it was a few years ago when they scanned it to digital files (not sure when this took place). Multiple reviewers have reported scratches and/or other flaws from damage, and it's unlikely the film showed like this on its first run in theaters with fresh prints.
Filmmaking/home video presentation has come along way in 29 years, so unless they had some kind of "virgin" source, there would be print damage that should be fixed. Unfortunately, as you mentioned, this isn't Snow White or another highly regarded classic, so I can see why they didn't give it much attention. Plus, I'm not sure MGM has loads of money to throw around.
I guess my main point is that when buying a Blu-ray (or at least when I do), you expect to receive the best quality video/audio presentation available at the current time. Scanning a film and throwing it onto Blu-ray isn't a benefit to the consumer if it isn't an improvement over what is/was already available. I think that the general consensus is that this release is a bit of a dissapointment, not because it didn't receive Disney-level clean-up, but that it appears like it didn't receive enough clean-up to remove flaws that aren't supposed to be there.
I should probably just stop reading the reviews and take a look for myself before I continue to overanalyze all of this. It wouldn't be the first time that a reviewer was harsh on something that I ended up being satisfied with. Thanks for your input, KubrickFan, hopefully I didn't come across as argumentative as it was not my intent at all!
I wished too that MGM had put more effort in this title (and many others that don't look pristine), but sadly, that's not the case. Many people had hoped that with the introduction of HD-DVD and Blu-ray, the consumers would be given an HD version of a movie that looks like it's theatrical counterpart (the good kind). Unfortunately, we've come a long way since then. Decades old masters are being reused. Some are DNR'ed. Others still have edge enhancement. A rare few suffer from all three. But, when you know a favorite of yours is released, you either tend to be extra critical, or less (since you want to buy it regardless of what it looks like). I don't know, maybe I had that. There's also the fact that I prefer my movies with a little bit (or a lot, depending on the movie) of grain, so any title that has more than it should basically looks alright by me.
And might I give one suggestion? Check out the reviews on HomeTheaterForum. Most of their reviews are spot in. Incidentally, the reviewer there gave NIMH a 4.5, which is higher than I personally would have given it, based on the screenshots.
- Elladorine
- Diamond Edition
- Posts: 4372
- Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2006 1:02 pm
- Location: SouthernCaliforniaLiscious SunnyWingadocious
- Contact:
Out of curiosity, has anyone here ever seen the DTV sequel? I'm not expecting high praise for it, but when I was a kid I was a huge fan of the book's sequels, and wonder how closely it could possibly follow either of them due to the differences between the original book and the Bluth film (like the fates of Nicodemus and especially Jenner).
I've been tempted to buy the DVD a handful of times but wasn't sure it would be worth the $5.
I've been tempted to buy the DVD a handful of times but wasn't sure it would be worth the $5.