DVDizzy Forum

Yes, it is about the same as The Lion King as far as the bonus disc goes. Except that there's no repetitive globe menus. The voice cast was sadly undercovered. There was more of Ming-Na in the Mulan II sneak peek than anywhere else.

No mention of Stephen Schwartz. I was quite disappointed in the lack of the trailer - the one that used that ubiquitous selection from the Dragonheart score was a good preview. Shame they'd lose it.

Thanks for the kind words. I'm glad to hear you folks enjoyed the review!

Yes, great review, Luke. I think one area the Mulan DVD will excel over The Lion King with (besides a better menu system) is a lack of promotional feel. The Lion King felt like one huge ad for The Lion King franchise (the soundtrack, the musical, Animal Kingdom, The Lion King 1.5, etc.) and not enough on the film itself. At least Mulan won't have any of that. From the sound of it, this release sounds very much like Tarzan's: an overall solid look at the film's creation, but mildly hurt by a fragmented style of presentation (though this at least has a "Play All" feature for certain subdivisions, even if there's none for the entire disc).

As I've already written in the other topic, this DVD is exactly what I was hoping it would be, so I'm not disappointed by any strech. No, it's not as extensive and comprehensive as "Aladdin", but I don't like comparing DVDs so, on its own, it seems to be a great release. I mean, there are around 120 minutes of video-based extras, plus audio commentary and extensive galleries, besides no children's games. So, as long as the extras are of good quality (let's forget the Raven video clip for a moment) and we get a good overview on the production, I end up being not that picky regarding the navigational system (as long as they don't mess up with it, as they did with "The Lion King").

I still have to check the quality of video and audio of the DVD, but as far as extras go, I have no reason to worry about this release. By the way, it is good to know that the galleries are extensive this time around. This gives me higher hopes that the extensive galleries from the "Pocahontas" LD will be ported over to the DVD (unlike "Alice In Wonderland").

Is the picture quality comparable to any other DVD of a newer Disney Film like Tarzan or The emperors new groove? I can't believe that it's not perfect. It still is an digital transfer, isn't it?

Don't know whether it's a digital to digital transfer, but the things the video suffers from (some edge enhancement, color banding) aren't transfer problems, but filtering & compression.

Like the issues on the R1 Beauty And The Beast, and all of the Brother Bears, no?

The color banding issue might be alleviated by playing the disc through 10 bit or (more) mpeg2 decoders and electronics, since playing it through just 8 bit mpeg2 decoders or passing them through 8bit video level video controls (if the software adjusts things like color/brightness/contrast/gamma on the settings instead of passing straight digital to digital video levels) and playing them back on a 8 bit display device (like many LCD's or Plasmas etc or any TV that only have 8bits electronics) makes the only 216 levels of Digital video be reduced some more.

Pure digital renders seem to showcase this level gradation steps cus they may not be masked by more mundane things like analog grain or noise...



Some of Her Majesty's Secret Service UD agents may be working on resolving the truth of the case

deathie mouse wrote:Like the issues on the R1 Beauty And The Beast, and all of the Brother Bears, no?

The color banding issue might be alleviated by playing the disc through 10 bit or (more) mpeg2 decoders and electronics, since playing it through just 8 bit mpeg2 decoders or passing them through 8bit video level video controls (if the software adjusts things like color/brightness/contrast/gamma on the settings instead of passing straight digital to digital video levels) and playing them back on a 8 bit display device (like many LCD's or Plasmas etc or any TV that only have 8bits electronics) makes the only 216 levels of Digital video be reduced some more.

Pure digital renders seem to showcase this level gradation steps cus they may not be masked by more mundane things like analog grain or noise...

"Well, there's egg and bacon; egg, sausage and bacon; egg and DAC; egg, bacon and DAC; egg, bacon, sausage and DAC; DAC, bacon, sausage and DAC; DAC, egg, DAC, DAC, bacon and DAC; DAC, sausage, DAC, DAC, bacon, DAC, tomato and DAC; DAC, DAC, DAC, egg and DAC; DAC, DAC, DAC, DAC, DAC, DAC, baked beans, DAC, DAC and DAC..."

I just like saying DAC! (Digital to Alalog Converter). Yes, check your player's Video DAC and see how many bits it is (it should be 10 or more ideally). But as Deathie says, it may not be the player, it could be the display.

Generally Animation tends to exhibit colour banding more than live action is it is contains many solid areas of bright, gradient colours.

I agree with Joe Carioca. There's really nothing to complain about. In terms of not being as comprehensive as some of the Platinums, I attribute that to not having a Play All system. Smaller featurettes give the impression that the DVD is empty, which is not necessarily true. I'm just glad that all of this material is new. Alice in Wonderland by comparison was a big let down. While I was watching those features, I had a recurring feeling of deja vu, like I had seen or heard about the information somewhere. Some of the stuff wasn't even pertaining to the movie at all!

I was a little bit dissapointed that, through and through, Mulan is still considered one of the "weaker" films of the last decade. I've noticed that too pure Disney fans, (such as those who make up this board), that's generally the case. In the general public and critical arena, however, Mulan is considered an A-list animated classic. In the book, The Disney Films, the author said Mulan was a major improvement over its three predecessors and Roger Ebert said Mulan was a return to the glory days of Beauty and the Beast and The Lion King. For some reason, The Hunchback of Notra Dame and Hercules are much more resonant to Disney fans. Oh, well, we each have our own opinions, and I respect that.

I was a little bit dissapointed that, through and through, Mulan is still considered one of the "weaker" films of the last decade

Heh, I feel the same way too. Mulan happens to be my favorite animated movie, however, so I might be a tad biased Still, I've always considered Mulan to be the beginning of another mini-renaissance for Disney in the late 90s. After the diminishing returns and IMO, uneven film-making, of Pocahontas, Hunchback, and Hercules, Mulan began a new upward trend that would continue with Tarzan.

I think, though, that one of the reasons that Mulan may not be considered a favorite is because of the songs. The score was undoubtedly one of the best ever in a Disney movie (the "Transformation" sequence still sends chills up my spine), but the songs were perhaps a bit weak and not quite as memorable as songs from other movies.

Roger Ebert said Mulan was a return to the glory days of Beauty and the Beast and The Lion King.

Heh, but the late Gene Siskel lambasted the movie. I remember he kept going on and on about how "empty" the backgrounds felt. I was really shocked that a "professional" movie critic couldn't understand the concept of style.

That1GuyPictures wrote:Does anybody know if Mulan was framed at 1.66:1 or 1.85:1?

The pan-and-scan edition on the Gold Collection/Limited Issue disc appears to be cropping off quite a bit of picture...

With the new transfer, are they opening up the matting, or are they blowing it up closer and lopping off the sides

Since i may be ill with Mulanitis (probably cus i don't have any version of it! YET. ) (naah, i just like Mulan ), and the mistery incredibly leads itself to unfold and seek a question, I found 2 images from the same scene that, one showed more width than the other, and one showed more height than the other, and threw them into a magic pot and brewed and chanted and stewed in a low simmer till lo and behold I had twins!

So I carefuly poured the contents onto black projector aperture plates and proceeded to eat my food for thought so you could see what you would see on a 1.85 movie screen and on a 1.66 movie screen side by side. (All movie screens should be the same height) (except CINERAMA and IMAX shot movies )

So how does this compare to the actual dvds?

Lots of scans and captures from the DVD posted: http://forums.dvdfile.com/showthread.php?t=49281
You need to register to see the pics.

Gotta love those fancy menus, hehe!

The menu intro to disc two reminds me a lot of Tarzan's. Perhaps you were right, Joe, in thinking that this release has been prepped up a long time. This makes me wonder if the same was done for Hercules...

Disneykid wrote:The menu intro to disc two reminds me a lot of Tarzan's. Perhaps you were right, Joe, in thinking that this release has been prepped up a long time. This makes me wonder if the same was done for Hercules...

That's exactly what I thought. Not only the animated introduction, but the pencil drawings of the characters on the menus as well.
Let's hope there is some "Hercules" material burried in those vaults!

'Mulan' Musical Masterpiece!

OMG!!
Is there a invasion of (badly cover drewn) MM Editions or something!
This cover is awful!

I actually like that cover art. A lot.

all of the sudden i'm feeling less and less jealous of europe and their cover art. Welcome to the R1 world!

Ugh, a 4th DVD for Mulan? If this is released in region one, I'm gonna be pissed.

Two words Disney. Hercules. Hunchback.

GET ER DONE!

Urgh, yeah, that is just not good.

And I agree with you Widdi. HERCULES, HUNCHBACK, LILO AND STICH NAO!

singerguy04 wrote:all of the sudden i'm feeling less and less jealous of europe and their cover art. Welcome to the R1 world!

Er... I live in Europe, and we get the same covers as the US!
Only France (and Germany sometimes) get beautiful DVD's!