Quantcast

Gemini Man 4K Blu-ray Review & Comments

MikeTVMikeTV

Well-known Member
I think a 5 is fair, it is really really really rubbish.

Will Smith is going to end up with a very so so career doing garbage like this.
 

xxGBHxx

Well-known Member
I think people are being very harsh about this film.

Based on the reviews I went into this film with very low expectations but it was far better than that. I'd give it a solid 6.5/10. It's a turn your brain off action flick and it's a mindless couple of hours you don't have to think too hard about. Others have done it better of course but overall it wasn't meant to be anything other than a mindless action flick. I don't regret watching it but likewise I wouldn't watch it again either.

G
 

silent ninja

Well-known Member
I enjoyed this film. Critics have been overly harsh. It was about 20 times better than 6 Underground which was unbearable. Ignore the critics, go watch it!
 

mikemag

Distinguished Member
The only fault with the film for me was that it’s just another average action flick, a throwback to the 80’s and 90’s given a fresh coat of paint that’s not to everyone’s tastes.

For better or worse there’s no denying that it looks different to a lot of what’s out there and the audio is pretty impressive as well.
 

gadget man

Active Member
yea it's not a good film but like someone above mentioned way better then the awful 6 underground. 9/10 for picture quality really? come on it's a 10, the 60fps did not bother me for a fantastic demo disc only.
 

keithwiggins

Active Member
I really like will Smith and I have enjoyed most of his
past fayre. Started watching this with an open mind, really didn't/couldn't get into it , it was both, predictable and boring, pass the 6 underground!
Given the cast and the director and the technology at his disposal it feels like a squandered opportunity. Yes I love a good scifi actioneer as much as the next man, but this wasn't it.
 
Last edited:

Evinger

Well-known Member
I'm most interested more in the fact that when I get around to watching this (As a rental) this will be, I believe, the first 4K Disk I watch running at 60fps
 

Nobbler

Distinguished Member
I quite enjoyed it. Picture and sound as you say is sublime but I got the iTunes version which is in 24fps so I may be missing something.
6.5 for me film wise and pic and sound are 10 each. The sound on the disc will be better but for me it’s faultless
 

Wolkenhaus

Standard Member
Are you telling me if I get this 4K disc I get a 60 fps movie? Well that would be amazing!!!
I love the 4k disc format, but the jitter during fast movement is really a let down and I assumed it was due to the 24 fps Bluray specification. But if this is actually invalid for 4k Blurays then I'm expecting all of them to be released this way. It won't matter if the upsampling was done afterwards, I expect it to be a better result than the motion modes of our TVs.
 

mclingo

Member
8, say what???, if you movie was only 5 I cant help feeling that a great picture and sound can only add 1 or two points to an overall figure, if the movie is so bad it only gets a 5 I dont think its fair for it to get an 8 overall regardless off the rest.

Cant wait for your Cats review....
 

Nobbler

Distinguished Member
Cats isn’t getting a 4K release so don’t hold your breath
 

mark6226

Well-known Member
As a movie its absolutely diabolical. Simply dreadful. Couldn't wait for it to end. Wish it had never begun.
Smith could be about to enter the dreaded straight to video club unless he wakes up and starts to make decent movies again
 

Mallardo

Well-known Member
8, say what???, if you movie was only 5 I cant help feeling that a great picture and sound can only add 1 or two points to an overall figure, if the movie is so bad it only gets a 5 I dont think its fair for it to get an 8 overall regardless off the rest.

Cant wait for your Cats review....
To be fair, the total score divided by 5 categories is 7.4 so mathematically the overall score is sound. At the end of the day, some people will buy this just for the reference quality picture and sound. Other people (myself included) wouldn't dream of buying any film for that reason alone, and so the movie score is all I really need to see.
 

CrossyX

Well-known Member
60fps just leaves it not looking like a film... I'm all for 4k, HDR, DV, HDR10+, however, it just looks unnatural...

Turned it off halfway through, far too distracting for me.
 

jimbean9

Member
Watched it last night, the movie itself was pretty average but I quite enjoyed the 60fps once my eyes got used to it.
 

tiberian9

Active Member
60fps just leaves it not looking like a film... I'm all for 4k, HDR, DV, HDR10+, however, it just looks unnatural...
I have seen this comment made before about movies that are not presented in 24 fps, it's even in the above review, it was also made about The Hobbit and Billy Lynn's Long Halftime Walk. I actually think it is the other way round, it is too natural. People have become so conditioned by the blurry juddery mess that is 24 fps that when movies are presented outside this 'normal' and look too realistic the brain isn't expecting it and you get distracted trying to work out what is wrong. There is nothing wrong, it is just different, but that is enough to put a lot of people off relaxing into and enjoying the movie.
 

Base13

Active Member
I’m glad we are starting to get 60FPS films. 24FPS creates a certain look, which doesn’t suit all films. It is a technical limit that has been overcome. I’ve turned films off because not being able to see what’s going on at 24, as the action is too fast for the frame rate. One of the worst examples was the 2nd Transformers film. I’ve not tried another in the series since because it gave me such a headache.
 

bertha

Active Member
"Don't make me Ang Lee...you won't like me when I'm Ang Lee"


Sorry always thing of this whenever I read about Ang Lee...anyone who hasn't seen this - hope you enjoy :)
 

Kotatsu Neko

Well-known Member
60fps just leaves it not looking like a film... I'm all for 4k, HDR, DV, HDR10+, however, it just looks unnatural...

Turned it off halfway through, far too distracting for me.
Real life isn't juddery. 24fps was chosen because it was the minimum rate for believable motion when celluloid was prohibitively expensive. It wasn't chosen for any artistic reason.

In time 60fps and higher will be completly standard.
 

simonblue

Distinguished Member
Real life isn't juddery. 24fps was chosen because it was the minimum rate for believable motion when celluloid was prohibitively expensive. It wasn't chosen for any artistic reason.

In time 60fps and higher will be completly standard.
Yes it is,you try running fast and keeping everything around you in exact motion,plus movie are not always about seeing things in real life,director have artistic reason.
It's a bit like saying Vincent Van Gogh painting did not look like real life,in his time,but in time,everybody will be painted in real life.
Or when they upgraded Saving Private Ryan,lets cut out all those blurry scenes on the beach,thats not like real life.
And cinematographer don't DOF,or long telephoto and wide angle lens,as it not real life

:(
 
Last edited:

Kotatsu Neko

Well-known Member
Yes it is,you try running fast and keeping everything around you in exact motion,plus movie are not always about seeing things in real life,director have artistic reason.
It's a bit like saying Vincent Van Gogh painting did not look like real life,in his time,but in time,everybody will be painted in real life.
Or when they upgraded Saving Private Ryan,lets cut out all those blurry scenes on the beach,thats not like real life.
And cinematographer don't DOF,or long telephoto and wide angle lens,as it not real life

:(
You're conflating artistic intent with a technical and financial limitation. 60fps does not prohibit shooting a film in a stylistic way.

24fps isn't smooth, and pans on a screen with a fast pixel response, like an OLED at such a low frame rate look pretty awful.

In the world of video games higher frame rates have always been desirable, hence we're now seeing PC displays capable of 300fps. Movies will follow.
 

Graham

Well-known Member
An Interesting debate here! I’m all for people trying new things and want to check out the 60fps out of curiosity (not for £25 though), but I doubt it will happen very widely as I think people find it too much of a shock compared to 24 frames. That theatrical 24 frame look is something we’re all so used to.

Having said that, I do agree with you that 24 frame pans can look absolutely horrible on OLED - a film projector in the cinema doesn’t look anything like as juddery on pans, so I don’t believe that an OLED (due to its fantastic response rate) represents the 24 frame cinema feel accurately either. It may well be different on the Sony and Panasonic TVs, but panning on low frame rate material on my LG C6 looks horrible at times. My Epson projector, with its slower response rate, is far more forgiving of 24 frame material with no interpolation settings engaged.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

Latest News

Bowers & Wilkins CEO leaves amid restructuring
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Xbox Series X, more specs confirmed
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
AVForums Podcast: 24th February 2020
  • By Phil Hinton
  • Published
Disney+ announces discount for European launch
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Disney developing AI based video compression
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Top Bottom