by John Schuermann » Mon Sep 22, 2014 5:35 pm
OK, I picked up the 3D version of GODZILLA yesterday and just spent about an hour comparing the 2D disc that came with the 3D version with the standalone 2D disc.
The transfers are identical.
The 2D transfer is a dark transfer. That's all there is to it. On a properly calibrated TV all the image detail is there, it's just that the overall image is dim. As pointed out by many, if you are losing detail in the dark areas of the picture, it's your display that's at fault, not the Blu-ray.
That said, those who are disappointed that the image is dim and not comparable to the brightness of the theatrical release have a legitimate gripe. The movie definitely looked brighter overall in the theater than it does on the Blu-ray. What is also true is that this transfer most likely represents the intent of the filmmakers in terms of how they want the movie to appear on home video. There could be all kinds of reasons for this, reasons we are not privy to (at least, not yet). So to say that WB just doesn't care, or that this represents sloppy workmanship on their part, is almost certainly not accurate. For whatever reason, this is how they wanted the film to look.
Now, if there is a movement afoot to get WB to release a brighter overall transfer, I don't have an issue with that. My only caveat is that this is a matter or preference - in that you prefer a brighter transfer - more than it's a matter of some kind of screw-up or carelessness on WB's part. Accusing WB of that in an effort to get a brighter looking transfer isn't going to win you any cooperation.
There also seems to be DELIBERATE misinformation being spread on the part of the person circulating the YouTube video that supposedly compares the brightness of the 2D disc distributed with the 3D version to the standalone 2D version. My guess is either that they pulled the video from the 3D version (which will definitely be brighter in order to overcome the brightness reduction that comes from wearing 3D glasses) or that they deliberately boosted contrast and brightness with some kind of video processing software. My best guess, though, is that they just ripped a single eye view from the 3D version and then tried to pass it off as the 2D disc.
While I find that deliberate distortion of the truth reprehensible, at the same time the video pulled from the 3D version does more accurately represent how the film looked in the theaters. I saw the theatrical release twice, both times in 2D. I think my memory of overall brightness is pretty accurate, because part of what I do for a living is analyze displays and images critically.