![]() ![]() ![]() On average it’s a pretty fuzzy looking picture. They have done this well with a few releases but not so much here. There’s no sign this ever touched film.Īs I’ve mentioned many times before, even though I like it when films that were made on film retain that filmic look, I get why Disney does this (I believe they want you to feel as though you’re looking right at the original cells themselves.) As long as there are no adverse effects on the finished product I’m fine with Disney filtering out noise and grain. They’ve done plenty of noise reduction, though, giving a clean, polished look closer to a computer animation. Green is unsurprisingly the dominate colour and its rendering does look rather lovely. Yes, Disney has boosted colours, and they do look nice. So after those two why are we at the level of mediocrity we’re at now? Though The Jungle Book is nowhere near as bad as Oliver and Company and The Sword in the Stone it’s still absolutely bland. They had a horrendous batch months ago when they released The Sword in the Stone, Oliver and Company, and Robin Hood (though in fairness Robin Hood wasn’t too bad) but then right after they had a couple of nice looking titles with Winnie the Pooh and The Little Mermaid, the latter being especially good I thought. Transfers made at different times? Different teams are responsible for each and they each come out with different results? Someone just forgets to flip a knob or flips too many during each restoration? I don’t know, but they can differ wildly from title to title and there’s no consistency. Disney’s transfers are usually hit or miss and I’m not sure why this is the case. I was significantly underwhelmed by the transfer. ![]() The dual-layer disc presents the film with a new 1080p/24hz high-definition transfer. Disney’s The Jungle Book comes to Blu-ray in its original aspect ratio of about 1.75:1. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |