For reference, I paid C$12.99 at Best Buy for King Kong back in March. I also own a copy of the regular DVD.
Both (The Pianist and KK) are available at deepdiscount.com for $11.98 at the moment. I just noticed that Adrien Brody is in both!
They are out of stock on The Pianist. I appreciate the heads up and time you took there, however. I've got KK in the cart, and if they had Pianist, I probably would've ordered both. Why not order KK by itself? I don't know now, I am hesitating, and I'm a strange cat sometimes.
Why would they get the DNR treatment and why would it make things worse?
Why would they put in DNR? Hmrz, I think allargon probably has read more in the software forums than I have, but I think its a combination of:
1) They think that most of us actually want it. That making it all look pasty, with zero "grain" *must* be better, because smooth without grain looks closer to a Pixar cartoon or something. But, all of the detail is inherent to the film grain, its just how it is. Some films can be less "grainy" yet be very detailed, and some look more grainy, while showing lots of detail. DNR will always negatively affect detail, no questions. Could it possibly make the viewing less distracting for some, by removing grain? Maybe. But then DNR haters would say that it should be left to the individual consumer to add it at his/her choice. Cuz once you take the detail out, you can never get it back.
2) Applying DNR
does help mask a few defects in an old master, or any master. Scratch here, or a speck here. But, to be honest, it is OVERWHELMINGLY hurting more than it is helping. If you take the recent BD release of The Thing for example, Im telling you it looked
phenomenal considering its age (and possibly budget? Well, Carpenter doesn't work with Spielberg type budgets in any case). Here is a comparison pix thread by a dude named Xylon. He doesn't have time to get to every movie by any stretch, but does hit quite a few up. His reviews are completely trustworthy, and revealing, and if he says thumbs up, I buy it, and if he says thumbs down, I think pretty hard.
The Thing comparison *PIX*
Look at post #5 in this link. You can see the flaw that's been somewhat minimized. I've seen this twice now in the last couple of months (because I had to use it as a demo!), and I never noticed it. DNR, OTOH, is extremely distracting. Look at Pan's Labyrinth on a good, large display. The faces are completely waxy. The effect is as if your friend loved to watch a good transfer, in the dark, but with the display on Vivid mode, with brightness cranked. A bald head will look utterly bright, no detail, no wrinkle, no freckle, etc. Just a solid piece of bright white. That's what DNR sort of looks like at its worst... I think.
