Sunday, June 13, 2010

BD impressions: Transporter 3

5:03 PM / BD Impressions / Comments4 Comments

BD Impressions
Blu-ray

In THE TRANSPORTER, Jason Statham (I'm not going to call the character by his name - he's just Jason Statham being Jason Statham) drove bank robbers to safety and indulged in people trafficking with nary the blink of an eye. In TRANSPORTER 2, he jacked that in in favour of ferrying a rich brat to and from dental appointments. In TRANSPORTER 3, he FALLS IN LOVE, and the series (I'm assuming they aren't planning on making any more) dies with a whimper rather than a bang.

With TRANSPORTER 1 and 2 director Louis Leterrier's star ascendant, Olivier Megaton takes up the reins for this third outing. However, while Megaton certainly deserves his share of the blame for the film's problems (in terms of camerawork and editing sensibility, think Michael Bay on acid - yeah, it's that bad), it wouldn't be fair to claim that everything is down to him. Luc Besson and regular writing partner Robert Kamen's script is a mess, reining in the over-the-top nature of the second film in favour of something that tries desperately to be epic and taken seriously, meaning that the more ridiculous elements (the over-the-top car chases, the blatant homoeroticism that has Statham removing his shirt on the flimsiest of pretences) don't gel at all, resulting in a film that just doesn't know what it wants to be. The plot is overly convoluted, to the extent that, when the credits began to roll, I wasn't sure what had actually happened - not a good state of affairs for the latest instalment in a series of deliriously stupid summer blockbusters.

Besson also throws in the most annoying sidekick this side of Spielberg's wife in INDIANA JONES AND THE TEMPLE OF DOOM. Besson apparently spotted Natalya Rudakova in the street, took a shine for her and paid for her to take acting lessons - a wasted investment if ever there was one, because her performance, to put it bluntly, sucks. Not that a better actress would necessarily have made the role any more palatable, as her character's personality is so loathsome that I spent the bulk of the film hoping she'd get it in the neck. Nice freckles, though.

So, in summary: TRANSPORTER 2 > THE TRANSPORTER > TRANSPORTER 3.

Image quality: This is comfortably the best-looking of the TRANSPORTER films on BD - if you compare the captures below to those from the first film, you can clearly see just how much the technology improved in the space of a few years. Detail is razor-sharp, and I'm convinced that the noticeable haloing in Example 13 and Example 21 is some sort of photographic effect rather than tampering (any idea if that particular scene was shot against green screen?). Alas, the excess of quick Michael Bay-style cutting in this film takes its toll, and despite the generous bit rate there are some really nasty compression artefacts at times (see Example 7). Generally they're not too distracting in motion, because the camera rarely remains still long enough for them to register, but their presence is disappointing nonetheless and well below the standard I've come to expect from Icon as far as encoding goes. 9/10

Transporter 3
studio: Icon; country: UK; region code: ABC; codec: AVC;
file size: 29 GB; average bit rate (including audio): 40.13 Mbit/sec

Transporter 3 Transporter 3 Transporter 3 Transporter 3 Transporter 3 Transporter 3 Transporter 3 Transporter 3 Transporter 3 Transporter 3 Transporter 3 Transporter 3 Transporter 3 Transporter 3 Transporter 3 Transporter 3 Transporter 3 Transporter 3 Transporter 3 Transporter 3 Transporter 3

 
4 Comments

1. Anonymous said:

Dude, check out the blu-ray release of Kundun. I think the VHS probably would look better:

http://www.dvduell.de/blog/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/06-kundun-blu-ray-brd-kinowelt-010-18.jpg
http://www.dvduell.de/blog/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/04-kundun-blu-ray-brd-kinowelt-007-16.jpg

(Posted on Monday, June 14, 2010 at 11:34 PM)

2. Author Profile Page Michael said:

Holy crap, what on earth IS that? Instant watercolour filter? Seriously, those captures look so bad it's almost impressive.

(Posted on Friday, June 18, 2010 at 3:23 PM)

3. Anonymous said:

I would bet a lot of cash and say them scenes were not shot Green Screen :) but it does look a bit odd thats for sure. I blame that digital processing, turning Day into dusk/night etc..

Latley in the cinema I notice so many films have been messing so much with scenes obviously shot in daylight, then turned into dusk/night etc.. that it produces them evil halo effects. It is just so much easier with a computer than the old days I guess, hopefully they will get better at it.

I noticed the Halo effects in the cinema on Transporter 3, so at least it is a consistent transfer with the cinema cut. Which if I remember correctly I saw in Digital, and it looked cracking.
I hate seeing that Halo effect in cinemas, it is more distracting than at home - as it just amazes me they have not found a way around it by now with all this digital tinkering they are obviously doing.

Keep up the quality work on the reviews, always a good read.
J.P.

(Posted on Saturday, June 19, 2010 at 8:02 PM)

4. Author Profile Page Michael said:

Anonymous:

Ah, thanks for the explanation/theory. Yes, I admit green screen was a bit of a stretch - excessive tweaking at the DI stage sounds a lot more plausible.

Thanks for the kind words, by the way. :)

(Posted on Sunday, June 20, 2010 at 12:22 PM)

 
To combat spam, commenting is automatically disabled on entries older than 30 days.

Did a comment you tried to post accidentally get eaten by the spam filter? It happens from time to time. I get upwards of 200 spam comments every day and unfortunately don't have the time to weed through all of them in case something genuine ended up there by mistake. If one of your posts gets incorrectly flagged as spam, email me at whiggles[at]ntlworld[dot]com and I'll do my best to retrieve it.