'Gladiator' has been hands down one of the most hotly anticipated high-def releases since the dawn of the Blu-ray format. The wait has been long, but when Paramount announced Ridley Scott's masterwork would be one of the inaugural titles in the studio's new top-of-the-line Sapphire Series, fans hoped their Job-like patience would be well rewarded. Expectations for a super-deluxe transfer rose to stratospheric heights, and then, like a bolt from the blue, came the screenshots-heard-'round-the-world, and enthusiasm plummeted. Several days before the disc's street date, videophiles showered isolated frames from the transfer across many internet forums (including ours), and decried the heavy use of edge enhancement and digital noise reduction, as well as excessive dirt and scratch removal filtering, that supposedly plagued the film. As a result, the 'Gladiator' controversy has become quite the Blu-ray cause célèbre, and the debate continues to rage. So, has this beloved title been irrevocably ruined by shoddy workmanship, cost-cutting, and a shameful disregard for both the film itself and the fundamental principles of present-day high-def transfer methods? Or, with apologies to Mark Twain, have the reports of 'Gladiator's' demise been greatly exaggerated?

I hate to be a fence straddler, but the answer lies somewhere in between. While I can't pretend to be the ultimate authority on this issue – no one (except maybe Ridley Scott) can – my particular set of eyes found the transfer to possess many of the faults described above, but nowhere near to the extent some of the more vociferous posters have stated. Yes, there's edge enhancement. Yes, there's DNR. I noticed both, but neither destroyed my viewing experience. On the whole, I found 'Gladiator' to be a very worthy upgrade from the previous DVD editions and a fine addition to the Blu-ray catalogue. Clarity is much improved, colors are brighter and bolder, the print is cleaner, and the picture possesses a much greater degree of depth and dimensionality. No, it is not the breathtaking, gasp-inducing effort many fans (including myself) expected, and Paramount promised with the silly Sapphire Series label. But casual viewers who just want to enjoy the drama and spectacle of this Oscar-winning epic with enhanced video and sound should be delighted. Diehard aficionados seeking perfection, however, undoubtedly will be frustrated.

So let's talk specifics. I watched portions of the extended edition of 'Gladiator' on two different displays – a 57-inch Mitsubishi DLP and a 46-inch Mitsubishi LCD. (My TV of choice is the DLP, as I feel the technology provides a more theatrical viewing experience.) The "smaller" screen sizes probably somewhat diminish the offensive digital doctoring, but whether one views the film on a 40-inch or 100-inch display, there's no denying the transfer possesses a definite processed look. Film-like warmth comes at a premium. While light grain lends the picture welcome, necessary texture, a sterile coldness often prevails. At its worst, the transfer makes some images appear almost superimposed on the screen, as excessive sharpening ever-so-slightly detaches figures from their backgrounds and gives certain scenes an artificial layered look. The DLP display was much more adept at masking such deficiencies (although they were still noticeable) and replicating the look and feel of true celluloid. The LCD display, on the other hand, was more unforgiving. Noise was much more visible in solid colors, the image adopted a harsher sheen, loss of detail was more apparent in panoramic shots, and print imperfections (such as errant white dots) were easier to spot. On both displays, however, the Blu-ray still beat upconverted DVD by a wide margin.

Perhaps the biggest problem with the 'Gladiator' transfer is that it's not a consistent effort. Rumor has it the bulk of the film was struck from a 2000 HD master (approved by Scott) in which digital enhancements were made, while the extended scenes are taken from a 2005 HD master that reflects today's more natural transfer standards. As I watched the movie via seamless branching, I really couldn't distinguish between the two per se. Yet upon reexamination, I noticed that while the extended scenes do flaunt a slightly more realistic, film-like look, they're not head-and-shoulders above every sequence in the theatrical cut. In fact, many stretches of the theatrical version rival the extended scenes.

Which brings me to my next point. At times, 'Gladiator' looks spectacularly good, with moments of jaw-dropping dimensionality, terrific detail, and sumptuous color. Though the first third of the film is awash in blue tones or a golden haze, both of which slightly mute contrast, vibrancy perks up measurably when Maximus is captured by the slave traders. The blue sky, green fields, red blood, and clay-colored earth all enjoy marvelous saturation. Fabric details and uniform adornments come through quite well, fleshtones look stable and natural, and black levels and shadow delineation are both stellar.

Much has been made about the scratch removal process defacing the image, especially with regard to arrows and fireballs that disappear and reappear in varying degrees of intensity from one frame to the next during the opening battle sequence. If you'd like to take the time to watch the film in slow-motion to find these instances, be my guest, but you won't see them at normal speed. (That doesn't excuse their existence, but it shouldn't keep anyone from purchasing this disc.) As far as DNR goes, it's there, but not employed so excessively that the actors look like wax figures moving through a Roman tableau at Madame Tussaud's. Facial features can look a bit smooth and at times lack the striking detail we expect from Blu-ray, but plenty of close-ups are razor sharp and absolutely stunning.

All in all, I have to say I've made my peace with this 'Gladiator' transfer. Could it better? Absolutely. Would I trade my copy if a replacement disc was pressed? In a New York minute. Will I toss this Blu-ray in a corner and forget about it until a better version is released? No. While it's far from the knock-my-socks-off, died-and-gone-to-heaven effort for which I and many others had hoped, it's also equally far from the sky-is-falling disaster others have claimed. Until a revamped version comes along, this one will certainly suffice.