Login
Super Mario Bros. is an almost perfect kids film. It's stunningly animated, it has enough momentum to keep youngins from being bored, and almost every character is unique and likable (even Bowser himself, thanks to the comedic stylings of Jack Black). It's clear that Nintendo didn't want to repeat the mistakes of that other Mario movie, the live-action 1993 film that's ironically beloved by some '90s kids (it's all we had!), but ultimately failed to capture the magic of the games. This film, meanwhile, is chock full of everything you'd remember from NIntendo's ouvre. It's a nostalgic romp for adults, and it's simply a fun time for children.
But boy is it safe. Maybe I'm a bit spoiled by the excellent non-Pixar animated films we've seen over the last decade, especially the ones that Phil Lord and Chris Miller have touched (The Lego Movie! Into the Spider-Verse!). But it's glaringly obvious Nintendo didn't want to take any major creative risks with this adaptation. The script from Matthew Fogel is filled with enough humor and references to keep us from feeling bored, and directors Aaron Horvath and Michael Jelenic deliver some inspired sequences. But it's almost like the film is trapped in a nostalgia castle thanks to the whims of an aging corporate dinosaur. (Bear with me.)
That wasn't a problem for the kids in my matinee audience, but it's a bit disappointing if you've waited decades to see a truly great Mario adaptation. It's in line with the recent live-action Sonic the Hedgehog movie — Super Mario Bros. is "fine." There's no attempt to achieve anything deeper than the basics: Mario (voiced by Chris Pratt) and Luigi (Charlie Day) are two floundering Brooklyn plumbers who are inexplicably transported to the Mushroom Kingdom. Luigi, ever the scaredy-cat, is almost instantly captured by Bowser's minions, and it's up to Mario and Princess Peach (an effervescent Anya Taylor-Joy) to save him. Big bad Bowser, meanwhile, has plans to either marry Peach or, barring that, take over the kingdom.
The film bombards you with an endless series of references from the start – just look at all those Punch-Out! characters on the wall! – something that will either delight longtime Nintendo fans or make your eyes roll. Personally, though, I mostly enjoyed seeing how all of the nostalgia fodder was deployed (the adorably fatalistic Lumalee from Mario Galaxy practically steals the film). The filmmakers also show off plenty of visual flair, like an early scene in Brooklyn that rotates into a 2D chase sequence. If only some of the musical choices were more creative. (A Kill Bill reference? Bonnie Tyler's "Holding Out for a Hero" during Mario's training montage? Come on.)
It's always nice to see kids movies reach far beyond our expectations — The Lego Movie wrestled with the prison of capitalism, the importance of pushing against restrictive social expectations and how fandom can ruin the thing you actually love, all in addition to being a fun adventure for kids and injecting a dose of smart humor for adults. In Super Marios Bros., Mario learns to eat mushrooms because they literally make him big and strong. What subtext!
At the same time, I can still respect a movie that simply accomplishes its goal of entertaining children. Over the years, I've been subjected to plenty of truly awful kid's films with ugly animation and production design, lazy writing, and zero creative vision. I wish I could reclaim the time I spent watching Space Jam: A New Legacy or the 2011 Smurfs movie. The Super Mario Bros. may be a bit basic and safe, but it's not a waste of time.
For one, we've never seen Mario and the Mushroom Kingdom look this good. Illumination may not have the stellar track record of Pixar, but this movie is filled with gorgeously detailed characters, vibrant worlds jam-packed with detail and some of the most fluid animation I've seen in years. It's a visual feast, and it makes me long for the day when a Mario game can look so lush (as much as I loved Super Mario Odyssey, it's visuals are held back by the Switch's aging hardware).
And for the most part, the voice acting kept me invested. Jack Black is inspired as Bowser, a hopeless romantic who can only express his feelings through song and world domination. Charlie Day basically plays his usual harried persona, but it fits Luigi, a character who mainly exists to support his little bigger brother. And Anya Taylor-Joy makes for a perfect Princess Peach, a leader who has to feign bravery to protect her adorable Mushroom Kingdom people.
For all of Chris Pratt's hype about his Mario voice, though, it's merely serviceable. The movie jokes about Charles Martinet's original problematic accent (Martinet also voices two characters in the film), but Pratt's spin on it just feels like someone pretending to be a schlubby Brooklynite. That's particularly surprising since Pratt injected so much life into his Lego Movie lead.
What's most disappointing about The Super Mario Bros. Movie is that it's so close to being genuinely great. If the film had more time to build up its characters, or if it made room for Jack Black unleash his full Tenacious D talents as Bowser, it would easily be stronger. Why not go a bit harder on that Mario Kart sequence? (Even Moana managed to fit in a Mad Max: Fury Road reference!) Why not spend a bit more time on the rivalry/budding bromance between Donkey Kong (Seth Rogen) and Mario?
With a projected opening weekend of $150 million or more, it's clear that Nintendo has a hit on its hands. A sequel is inevitable. I just hope that the company loosens up the next time around. After all, what fun is a Mario adventure without taking a few creative leaps over chasms of uncertainty?
This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/super-mario-bros-movie-review-fun-safe-romp-135146207.html?src=rss
The Super Mario Bros. Movie
Mario and the team in karts in The Super Mario Bros. Movie
Google finally opened up its Bard AI for testing, and it turns out it’s a little loopy. This week, Cherlynn and Devindra dive into their experience with Bard, as well as how it compares with Microsoft’s BingAI (and GPT4, consequently). Also, we discuss even more AI news from NVIDIA, Microsoft and Midjourney, as well as TikTok CEO Shou Chew’s date with Congress.
Listen below or subscribe on your podcast app of choice. If you've got suggestions or topics you'd like covered on the show, be sure to email us or drop a note in the comments! And be sure to check out our other podcasts, the Morning After and Engadget News!
Google opened its Bard AI chatbot to the masses, it seems a little drunk – 1:22
So many other AI updates from Microsoft, NVIDIA, Adobe and more – 23:14
Other news: TikTok’s CEO goes to Congress – 36:25
Cherlynn’s experience with Tesla’s wireless charging platform – 42:05
Acer announces production on…an e-bike?? – 48:20
Around Engadget: Tripod desk, Konnected Kamada Joe grill, history of game controllers – 49:43
Working on – 51:57
Pop culture picks – 54:56
Credits
Hosts: Cherlynn Low and Devindra Hardawar
Producer: Ben Ellman
Music: Dale North and Terrence O'Brien
Livestream producers: Julio Barrientos
Graphic artists: Luke Brooks
Engadget Podcast
Engadget Podcast
This week, we chat with Senior Editor Andrew Tarantola about Neuralink, Elon Musk’s brain computer interface (BCI) company. The FDA reportedly denied approval for human trials last week—Andy explains why that happened, as well as what BCIs could mean for humans in the future. Also, Cherlynn dives into the accessibility news from Microsoft’s Ability Summit.
Listen below or subscribe on your podcast app of choice. If you've got suggestions or topics you'd like covered on the show, be sure to email us or drop a note in the comments! And be sure to check out our other podcasts, the Morning After and Engadget News!
What’s going on with Neuralink and BCI tech? – 2:05
Elon Musk goes after disabled Twitter employee, quickly apologizes – 19:52
Microsoft touts new accessibility tech at 2023 Ability Summit – 28:32
Sonos’ Era 300 speaker finally has spatial audio – 35:04
What we think of the Yellow iPhone and a few other colorful gadgets announced this week – 45:25
Working On – 51:49
Around Engadget: the reMarkable Folio is a very pretty e-paper keyboard – 54:28
Pop culture picks – 56:29
Credits
Hosts: Cherlynn Low and Devindra Hardawar
Guest (Audio): Andrew Tarantola
Producer: Ben Ellman
Music: Dale North and Terrence O'Brien
Livestream producers: Julio Barrientos
Graphic artists: Luke Brooks
Engadget Podcast
Engadget Podcast
Spoilers for The Mandalorian seasons 1-3 and The Book of Boba Fett below.
Somehow, Grogu has returned. At least, that's what many people will assume when they tune into the first episode of The Mandalorian's third season. When last we left our lone bounty hunter and cub, Grogu was heading off to Jedi training with a creepy de-aged Luke Skywalker. Mando took off his helmet and braced for solitude. We all shed a tear. (How did a show manage to make us care so much for a monosyllabic man in armor and a green puppet? Bless you, executive producers Jon Favreau and Dave Filoni.)
But at the start of this season, Mando (AKA Din Djarin) and Grogu are paired up once again, saving people from gigantic monsters, fighting space pirates and generally being adorable. To a casual viewer, it's like that dramatic season two finale was Jedi mind-tricked away. It turns out if you wanted to get the full story – which also explains why Din is flying a Phantom Menace-era ship, or why Grogu is becoming a more adept force user — you had to watch the final few episodes of The Book of Boba Fett.
If I wasn't already a hopeless Star Wars fan, I'd be pretty confused and annoyed. How are normal people supposed to know that The Book of Boba Fett basically served as a stop-gap between Mandalorian seasons? Disney didn't promote the connection between the shows much, so if you weren't reading geeky news sites, or talking to nerdy friends, it was easy to miss.
The first few episodes of Boba Fett made it seem like a far less ambitious series – did we really need to learn the specifics of how he survived the Sarlacc pit? And who cares about his future as Jabba the Hutt replacement? I've talked to several Star Wars fans who tapped out early on, only to catch up once they heard Mando and Grogu popped up. (Honestly, it almost seemed like Favreau and crew got tired of the Boba Fett story – so did we.)
It's not like I'm against the idea of narratives shifting between different shows and films. Everything Marvel's done since Iron Man has practically trained us to consume pop culture this way, with the rise of the Avengers initiative to the ultimate smackdown with Thanos in Endgame. The geeky side of me is overjoyed when I discover connections between films I love. (You should have seen me in the theater at the end of M. Night Shyamalan's Split.) But the idea that viewers have to keep tabs on everything is beginning to feel like homework, and it's particularly frustrating when one piece of media is inexplicably crucial to something that comes later.
It doesn't help that The Mandalorian barely referenced The Book of Boba Fett during its introductory episode. Even a bit of a nudge during the "previously on" opening section would help. Instead, the premiere episode just wants to get us back to normal, with Mando on a video game-like quest and Grogu having fun along the way. It's a shame, since the end of season 2 made it seem like The Mandalorian would actually change things up moving forward.
Speaking to The Hollywood Reporter, creator and executive producer Favreau said he appreciated being able to check in on characters between shows. “I knew that I didn’t want to dedicate a lot of screen time within The Mandalorian to a period of time where there wasn’t a lot of character progression," he said. "Both [Din and Grogu] were kind of stuck, as far as character progression goes, until they were reunited. So, my feeling was that it would allow me to do both of those things and freed me up now two years later to have a whole new context for these two characters to have a relationship and move forward.”
But what Favreau saw as a problem, I see as an opportunity. In Book of Boba Fett, Din and Grogu's time apart is handled briskly. Neither can fully let each other go. That stalls Grogu's Jedi training, as that's mostly focused on detaching yourself from the world and emotional connections. (Did that really work so well for Anakin Skywalker? Come on, Luke.) Din, meanwhile, acts like an empty nester who's lost his life's purpose. This is all good material for drama, but Favreau cuts through it as quickly as possible on a spinoff show. What a waste.
I may be particularly annoyed by The Mandalorian's disjointed narrative after seeing how Marvel handled its latest big bad, Kang the Conqueror, in Ant-Man and the Wasp: Quantumania. In that film, Kang is introduced as a castaway, someone banished to the Quantum Realm because of his penchant for, well, conquering. But we never got a sense of his true motivation, his powers or what he's actually trying to accomplish.Perhaps that's because the folks behind Quantumania assumed you saw Kang's brief introduction at the end of the Loki streaming series, where he's presented as more of a trickster and vague threat.
If you didn't watch Loki and were confused by Quantumania, it's almost like Marvel is saying that's your own fault. To me, that's simply irresponsible storytelling.
Coming off of Andor, Tony Gilroy’s self-contained and trenchant exploration of the Star Wars universe, the simplistic and confusing nature of The Mandalorian feels like a letdown. The show was always a pulpy and almost video game-like romp. But after the end of season two, there was potential for something much greater. Instead, Favreau took the easy way out to deliver more of the same.
This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/dont-make-me-watch-boba-fett-to-understand-the-mandalorian-season-three-203004802.html?src=rss
The Mandalorian Season 3
Din Djarin in The Mandalorian Season 3
The AI news just won’t stop! This week, Cherlynn and Devindra discuss the latest on Bing AI – Microsoft is loosening up some recent restrictions, following reports of its bad behavior – as well as the rise of ChatGPT stories on the Kindle store. Spotify is also launching its own AI DJ, starring the digitized voice of one of its current hosts. In other news, we discuss Microsoft’s recent agreements with NVIDIA and Nintendo, which could warm regulators towards approving its Activision Blizzard acquisition.
Listen below or subscribe on your podcast app of choice. If you've got suggestions or topics you'd like covered on the show, be sure to email us or drop a note in the comments! And be sure to check out our other podcasts, the Morning After and Engadget News!
After the Microsoft and Google announcements, AI is suddenly everywhere – 1:17
Microsoft tries to win over regulators by putting Xbox games on GeForce Now – 26:29
Glucose monitoring on the Apple Watch could be coming soon – 28:16
Twitter limits SMS two-factor authentication to Blue users – 30:43
Amazon’s acquisition of One Medical is finished, regulators are still curious – 35:31
No Man’s Sky Fractal VR update is out just in time for PS VR 2 – 39:04
Working on – 42:58
Pop culture picks – 46:10
Credits
Hosts: Cherlynn Low and Devindra Hardawar
Producer: Ben Ellman
Music: Dale North and Terrence O'Brien
Livestream producers: Julio Barrientos
Graphic artists: Luke Brooks
Engadget Podcast
Engadget Podcast
Since the Mac mini's debut in 2005, it's been Apple's affordable small form factor trooper. Need something cheap to pair with an old monitor? Just get the Mac mini! Want to start a low-power media server, or a computer right near your TV? Mini, baby. The line has had its share of ups and downs — the 2014 refresh was criticized for replacing a quad-core model with a dual-core chip, the 2018 update had notoriously weak graphics — but it made a full recovery with the M1-powered model in 2021.
This year, though, the Mac mini is different. The $599 model remains an entry-level champ, especially since it's $100 less than the M1 version (maybe we'll see the $499 option return eventually). But you can also pay over double that — $1,299! — for a Mini with a slightly stripped down M2 Pro chip and 16GB of RAM. That might have sounded crazy a few years ago, but now it sits neatly into Apple's desktop ecosystem. Not all creatives need the power of a $1,999 Mac Studio with an M1 Max, but those same folks may feel limited by the base M2 chip. At last, there's a mighty Mini to serve them. (And no, the now-dead $1,099 Intel model never really filled that role.)
Just like with Apple's new MacBook Pros, the Mac mini doesn't look any different than before. It's still a squat little aluminum box with a ton of ports on the back, and a slightly raised black base underneath to allow for airflow. The $599 model features an M2 chip with eight CPU cores, 10 graphics cores, 8GB of RAM and 256GB of storage — that's about as basic as you can get with PC hardware these days. The $1,299 M2 Pro Mini offers 10 CPU cores, 16 GPU cores, 16GB of RAM and a 512GB SSD. For an additional $300, you can also upgrade to the full-powered M2 Pro chip with a 12-core CPU and 19-core GPU (but that's probably not a wise idea, as I'll discuss later).
On the rear, the base Mac mini offers two Thunderbolt 4 USB-C connections, HDMI 2.0 (with 4K 240Hz and 8K 60Hz output), two USB-A ports, a headphone jack and gigabit Ethernet (upgradeable to 10 gigabit). The M2 Pro model adds two additional USB-C ports, making it even more useful for creatives with a ton of accessories.
Most striking about the Mac mini is its combination of simplicity and functionality. Unlike the taller and more domineering Mac Studio, the Mini is meant to disappear into your desk, a sliver of power that doesn't need to be seen. That could be a bad thing if you need to access its rear ports frequently, though. The Studio, in comparison, offers two USB-C ports and an SD card slot up front. You'll need a separate adapter to use SD cards with the Mini — a cheap fix, but one that also leads to more desk clutter.
Our review model, which featured the pricier 12-core M2 Pro chip, performed as well as I expected. It's slower than the M2 Max in the 14-inch MacBook Pro in GeekBench's CPU benchmark, but it also beats the M1 Max in the Mac Studio. The M1 Ultra-equipped Studio is far faster, not surprisingly, because that's essentially two M1 Max chips joined together. What's most important for some creatives though is its potential rendering performance. The Mac Mini scored 2,000 points higher than the M1 Max Studio in the Cinebench R23 benchmark, and it was on-par with the MacBook Pro 14-inch with M2 Max.
None | Geekbench 5 CPU | Geekbench 5 Compute | Cinebench R23 | 3DMark Wildlife Extreme |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Apple Mac Mini (Apple M2 Pro, 2022) | 1,826/13,155 | 43,241 | 1,647/14,598 | 12,769 |
Apple MacBook Pro 14-inch (Apple M2 Max, 2023) | 1,970/15,338 | 71,583 | 1,603/14,725 | 18 ,487 |
Apple MacBook Pro 13-inch, (Apple M2, 2022) | 1,938/8,984 | 27,304 | 1,583/8,719 | 6,767 |
Apple Mac Studio (Apple M1 Max) | 1,715/12,642 | 61,412 | 1,534/12,314 | 10,017 |
Apple Mac Studio (Apple M1 Ultra) | 1,785/23,942 | 85,800 | 1,537/24,078 | 10,020 |
In a more practical test, the Mac Mini transcoded a minute-long 4K clip into 1080p in 37 seconds with pure CPU power using Handbrake — the same job took 32 seconds with the GPU. Both figures narrowly surpassed the M1 Max Studio, which took 43 seconds with a CPU encode and 34 seconds using the GPU.
Beyond benchmarks, the Mac Mini was an absolute dream for my typical workflow (dealing with dozens of browser tabs, batch image processing, and practically every chat app out there). But I’d expect a similar result from the $599 model, so long as I cut down on demanding browsers to survive with 8GB of RAM. The computer remains a solid entry for mainstream users, and it’s potentially a great home theater PC if you wanted something more customizable than an Apple TV.
As I tested the Mac Mini, I started to wonder if it was even worth having a giant mid-tower PC as my daily driver. Realistically, though, I could never become a fulltime Mac guy because I like games. There are a few modern titles like Resident Evil Village that natively support Macs, but there simply aren’t enough titles out there. That game, by the way, easily reached 60fps while playing in 1,440p on the Mac Mini.
To reiterate, though, you'd have to pay $1,599 for the upgraded M2 Pro to get the same performance figures. I didn't have the slower Mac Pro model to compare it to, but based on what we're seeing with Apple's M2 chips, it would still be a noticeable step up from comparable M1 hardware. Stepping back a bit, I can’t help but think that the $1,299 M2 Pro Mini makes more sense for creatives. If you upgraded our review model to 32GB of RAM, it would come to the same $1,999 as the base Mac Studio. And given that the Studio is almost a year old, it's due for an M2 refresh in the coming months.
My advice? Get the $1,299 Mac mini if you're looking for a beefier Mac desktop, but try to avoid upgrading any hardware if possible. I could see stomaching the $200 upcharge to get 1TB of storage, but spending an additional $400 just to get 32GB of RAM isn't worth it. Apple has always been notorious for expensive upgrades — remember the $999 monitor stand? — let's not encourage them.
Apple might as well have just called this computer the Mac mini Pro – but I can see how that would have been confusing. Now the Mini exists in two forms: A cheap computer for most people, and a secret powerhouse for creators. It’s close to being the ideal small-form factor PC, if only it didn’t cost so much to get more RAM.
Apple Mac Mini with M2 Pro
Apple Mac Mini with M2 Pro desk setup with Apple Studio Display
We’ve finally got new gadgets to review! This week, Cherlynn, Devindra and Engadget’s Sam Rutherford dive into the new 14-inch MacBook Pro with an M2 Max chip. Sure, it looks the same as before, but demanding users may appreciate the performance bump. Also, they discuss where the new M2 Pro-powered Mac Mini fits into Apple’s lineup. And of course, Cherlynn and Sam update us on everything they expect from Samsung’s Unpacked event next week. We’ll get the Galaxy S23, naturally, but rumors also point to new computers too.
Listen below or subscribe on your podcast app of choice. If you've got suggestions or topics you'd like covered on the show, be sure to email us or drop a note in the comments! And be sure to check out our other podcasts, the Morning After and Engadget News!
MacBook Pro M2 Max review and Mac mini thoughts – 1:26
Samsung Unpacked 2023 preview – 13:02
Other news: Hacker leaks 2019 No Fly list – 27:14
Microsoft announces multibillion dollar investment in OpenAI days after layoffs – 33:45
Scientists found a colony of Emperor penguins after tracking poop markings on satellite images – 43:10
Formovie Theater UST projector and LG CineBeam projector reviews – 47:30
Ayaneo 2 handheld review: Like a Steam Deck, but fancier – 59:00
Pop culture picks – 1:06:14
Credits
Hosts: Cherlynn Low and Devindra Hardawar
Guest: Sam Rutherford
Producer: Ben Ellman
Music: Dale North and Terrence O'Brien
Livestream producers: Julio Barrientos
Graphic artists: Luke Brooks
Engadget Podcast
Engadget Podcast
Who wouldn't want a small box that can spit a 120-inch image onto your wall? That's the basic pitch behind 4K ultra short-throw (UST) projectors, which are sometimes called "Laser TVs." They're technically easier to set up than traditional projectors, and unlike large TVs, they don't require a huge footprint. Once you've placed it in front of a screen (or treated wall), you can summon an enormous cinematic image in an instant.
We've reviewed a few UST projectors over the years, most recently Formovie's excellent $3,000 model. Personally, I've been in love with LG's Cinebeam HU85L since we first saw it in action in 2019. Sure, it was expensive at over $6,000, but that was far less than the $10,000 earlier models cost (and certainly better than Sony's early eye-watering $30,000 to $40,000 UST projectors). Much like LG's first OLED TVs, the CineBeam represented everything I wanted from the future of home cinema.
Now after spending a few months with the company's latest UST, the CineBeam HU915QE, I'm even more enamored. It's brighter than its predecessor, reaching up to 3,700 lumens with a 2,00,000:1 contrast ratio, which makes it ideal for daytime viewing and HDR content. (Unfortunately, it doesn't support Dolby Vision, a rare feature we were surprised to see on the Formovie UST.) The new CineBeam can also be pushed even closer to your wall with the ability to spit out a 90-inch 4K image from 2.2-inches away, or a 120-inch image from 7.2-inches. I just wish it was cheaper than $5,000 — with the Formovie unit coming in at thousands less, it's hard to justify LG's premium.
The HU915QE looks similar to most other UST projectors — it's just a large rectangular box — and its design is practically the same as the previous CineBeam. Still, LG gave it enough flair to make it look at home in a classy living room. Its front speaker is covered in cloth, and the entire unit is encased in a solid light gray plastic. (There's also a black model for better nighttime viewing, though that one inexplicably spits out a darker image.) Around back, there are three HDMI ports, 2 USB connections, an optical audio port and Ethernet. It's not exactly heavy, at 26.9 pounds, but you definitely need a wide table or credenza to align it with your screen.
That setup process, by the way, is more annoying than you'd think. Configuring any projector is a pain, as you'll need to place it in just the right spot to fill your screen. With a traditional long- or short-throw projector, you're often able to shift the lens around manually. But configuring a UST like the CineBeam involves finding the exact height and distance from the screen to make everything look perfect. If it gets nudged by even a millimeter, the image will simply look wrong. That makes USTs less than ideal for homes with small children or overzealous pets. (Also, you don't want kids peeking into the projector lens, as it's bright enough to cause serious eye damage. That’s hard to do with a traditional projector, but far too easy when it’s just sitting on the floor)
When I tested the previous CineBeam HU85L, it took me a few hours to find the proper position to work alongside my dropdown projector screen. That involved buying a small table and stacking a few wide boxes to get everything aligned. Even then, I couldn't quite get the image to fill every corner of my screen properly. That's when I learned that dropdown screens aren't ideal for UST projectors (Engadget's Steve Dent also found that small creases in dropdown screens could lead to rippled images). Ultimately, I was able to get the older CineBeam to fill around 98 percent of my 120-inch screen, but I gave up on the dream of having the whole thing covered.
Thankfully, I was able to drop the HU915QE into the exact same spot as the earlier CineBeam. After tweaking the manual focus wheel a bit, it ended up covering the same area of my screen. If you're building your home theater or living room around a UST projector, you'll ideally want to use a tensioned ALR (ambient light rejection) screen. Those are built to block light from everywhere but your projector, which means they'll deliver even better brightness and contrast. If you want to use a UST during the day like a TV, you'll definitely want to push away as much ambient light as possible.
While my setup wasn't ideal, the CineBeam HU915QE still delivered most of what I wanted: A large and luscious dose of cinema in my basement screening room. Almost immediately, I noticed that it produced richer and more vibrant colors than the CineBeam HU85L. Colorful films like Thor Ragnarok looked just fine on the previous projector, but the new model delivered a far bolder dose of cosmic psychedelia. The improved contrast also made the HU915QE better suited for dark scenes, like the spooky nighttime sequences in Nope where you’re trying to make out something floating through the clouds.
The HU915QE is a triple laser projector, relying on red and blue lasers for their respective primary colors, as well as another blue laser shining through a phosphor to create green. That setup works well, but it can only reach 94 percent of the DCI-P3 color gamut. Newer UST projectors with three distinct RGB lasers, like the HiSense PX1-Pro, can reach a wider 107 percent of the BT.2020 gamut. Like many other UST units, the HU915QE relies on pixel shifting to achieve a visible 4K resolution. It has a native resolution of 2,716 x 1,528, which is shifted twice to hit 4K. The result is an image that's sharper than cheaper projectors, which typically have 1080p native resolutions with four-phase shifting.
After spending a few hundred hours watching everything from streaming shows like Midnight Mass, to blockbuster action films like Top Gun: Maverick, I found myself preferring the experience of using the HU915QE compared to trekking out to the theater for many films. And, to be clear, that’s a pretty big deal for a movie lover like me. Even with the COVID-19 pandemic threatening the viability of theaters, I’ve held out hope for a comeback. The strong box office performance of the Top Gun sequel and Avatar: The Way of Water makes me think that there’s still room for the true cinematic experience (though as I write this, Regal is shuttering more locations in the US after its parent company Cineworld declared bankruptcy last September). Those films, as well as the recent Dune adaptation, are so large and bombastic that even a 120-inch home projector can’t fully capture their grandeur. But the HU915QE sure comes close.
Like most projectors, the CineBeam HU915QE isn’t ideal for gaming thanks to its noticeable input lag. Still, I had a great time playing PS5 titles like God of War Ragnarok, Ratchet and Clank: Rift Apart and even the fast-paced Returnal on my giant screen. LG hasn’t issued any latency figures, but some reviews peg the projector’s input lag between 50ms and 67ms. There’s an auto low-latency mode that cuts off extra processing to speed things up, but you obviously won’t be using this thing for lightning-fast competitive gaming. Based on my experience with the 55-inch Samsung Odyssey Ark, though, that’s not something you’d want to do on a gigantic display anyway. Twitch gaming requires smaller screens so you can actually focus on all of the super-fast action.
When it comes to sound, I can’t imagine that anyone buying a $5,000 projector would be relying on built-in speakers, but it may make sense if you just want to avoid extra clutter in your living room. The CineBeam’s 40-watt 2.2 speaker setup sounds good enough for casual viewing – it’s certainly far better than what you’d get on modern TVs. It’s basically a fairly simple soundbar sitting below the projector, but it delivers clear dialogue and some surprisingly boomy bass. Seriously though, look into surround sound systems if you’re actually buying this thing. You deserve it.
While I spent most of my time using an Apple TV 4K, the HU915QE is also powered by LG’s WebOS platform, which offers all of the smart TV apps you’d expect. That’s nice to have, especially if you don’t want to juggle multiple remotes, but I’d wager most home theater fans will stick with their set-top box platform of choice. If you’re used to WebOS from LG’s OLED TVs, you’ll feel right at home with this projector. It even uses the same Magic Remote found on LG’s TVs, which has voice controls and (so-so) motion controls.
As much as I loved the CineBeam HU915QE, it’s not exactly priced competitively against newer entries like the $3,000 Formovie Theater. Sure, that’s not as bright, but at half the price of the CineBeam, that projector delivers Dolby Vision, great sound and excellent image quality thanks to a modern triple-laser setup. You can easily add in an excellent $2,000 surround sound system to match the CineBeam's price . As for other high-end competitors, the HU915QE competes directly with Hisense’s much-lauded L9G, which currently sells for $4,500 to $5,000 depending on the screen you get. Samsung’s Premiere LSP9T triple-laser UST also retailed for $6,500 when it debuted, though it can now be found for around $3,500 at online sellers.
If you’re an LG loyalist, the CineBeam HU915QE is still a very compelling UST projector. It offers enough brightness to use during the day, and it’s vibrant enough in darker rooms to deliver a truly cinematic experience. But it’ll be an even better buy once it comes down in price.
LG CineBeam HU915QE
LG CineBeam HU915QE
With its last batch of MacBook Pros, Apple gave its more demanding fans everything they wanted: Tons of ports, lots of power, and genuinely great screens. As usual, the company is following up that major redesign with a straightforward chip upgrade, featuring the new M2 Pro and M2 Max. They're faster, as you'd expect, but they also deliver a few features power users may appreciate, like 8K video output and support for WiFi 6E.
Once Apple locks in a redesign, it typically doesn't mess with a good thing (save for complete disasters like the trashcan Mac Pro). So it's no surprise to see that this year's MacBook Pro 14 doesn't look any different than the 2021 model. It still boasts a gorgeous 14.2-inch Liquid Retina XDR display with ProMotion support and a prominent notch housing a 1080p webcam. It has all of the ports you'd actually want, including a MagSafe power connection, three Thunderbolt 4 USB-C ports, HDMI, a headphone jack and a full-sized SD card slot. And the overall shape of the computer remains relatively flat, an evolution of the long-lived unibody MacBook Pro design.
Under the hood, though, the MacBook Pro 14 has been dramatically upgraded. It can be equipped with Apple's new M2 Pro chip, which offers up to a 12-core CPU and 19-core GPU, or the M2 Max, which squeezes in a 12-core CPU and 38-core GPU. Much like Intel's new hybrid processors, as well as mobile chips from Qualcomm, Apple relies on a combination of core speeds for its CPUs (the 12-core chips, for example, have eight performance cores and four efficiency cores). The previous M1 Pro and M1 Max topped out with 10 CPU cores and 16 or 32 GPU cores, respectively.
Apple claims the M2 Pro is around 20 percent faster than its predecessor in CPU speeds, and up to 30 percent faster when it comes to graphics. The M2 Max, meanwhile, is up to 30 percent faster than the M1 Max in terms of graphics. We tested the fully-upgraded $3,299 MacBook Pro, which was equipped with the M2 Max chip with 38 GPU cores and 64GB of RAM. It scored around 2,600 points (19 percent) faster in the GeekBench 5 multitasking CPU benchmark, compared to the M1 Max-equipped MacBook Pro 16. It was also 18 percent faster in the GPU-powered GeekBench 5 Compute test and a whopping 60 percent faster than the M1 Max Mac Studio in the 3DMark Wildlife Extreme benchmark.
None | Geekbench 5 CPU | Geekbench 5 Compute | Cinebench R23 | 3DMark Wildlife Extreme |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Apple MacBook Pro 14-inch (Apple M2 Max, 2023) | 1,970/15,338 | 71,583 | 1,603/14,725 | 18 ,487 |
Apple MacBook Pro 13-inch, (Apple M2, 2022) | 1,938/8,984 | 27,304 | 1,583/8,719 | 6,767 |
Apple MacBook Pro 14-inch (Apple M1 Pro) | 1,767/11,777 | 38,359 | 1,515/12,118 | N/A |
Apple MacBook Pro 16-inch (Apple M1 Max, 2021) | 1,783/12,693 | 60,167 | 1,524/12,281 | N/A |
Apple Mac Studio (Apple M1 Ultra) | 1,785/23,942 | 85,800 | 1,537/24,078 | 10,020 |
These are phenomenal results if you're planning to use the MacBook Pro to its full potential. But I'll admit, during everyday usage, I didn't notice any major performance benefits over the previous models. That's not really a knock against the new computer, it's more a testament to how much Apple got right last time. Unlike PCs, you probably won't be gaming too much with your Mac, either, so there's less of a reason to chase frequent upgrades. On that note, it's nice to see some modern games with native Mac support. Resident Evil Village easily hits 60fps on the MacBook Pro at full resolution, but I wouldn't be surprised if the same was true for the M1 models.
If you're among the folks dealing with large video encoding or high compute jobs daily, though, it may be worth moving up from the last MacBook Pro. It took me 31 seconds to transcode a minute-long 4K clip into 1080p using Handbrake — but the M1 Max MacBook Pro 16 took a full 10 seconds longer. Extrapolate that to longer jobs and you could be saving yourself some serious time. And if you've managed to hold out with an Intel MBP until now, it's definitely time to upgrade — you'll easily see a night and day difference in speed.
Aside from its performance, the MacBook Pro 14 remains a wonderful workhorse to live with. The MiniLED Liquid Retina display looks fantastically bright, especially when viewing HDR content. Mostly, though, I appreciated the smooth scrolling thanks to Apple's 120Hz ProMotion refresh rate. The six speaker sound system remains excellent, with crisp and punchy audio that's leagues ahead of most other laptops. And I remain impressed with the MacBook Pro's built-in three-mic array. It's no replacement for a dedicated USB microphone, but it sounds great during video calls.
The MacBook Pro's keyboard is certainly better than the old butterfly models, but I wish Apple was able to deliver more key travel. It's still great to type on, to be clear, I'm just feeling a bit spoiled from the mechanical keyboards I've seen in some gaming laptops. The Pro's trackpad remains best in class though, with a large surface area and responsive performance. After testing the XPS 13 Plus last year, which featured an attractive yet hard to use trackpad hidden in the wrist rest, I'm even more appreciative of Apple's clean design. It turns out that being able to feel the difference between the trackpad and the wrist rest is pretty helpful!
Apple is touting better battery life as another major benefit of the M2 Pro and Max chips, and I definitely noticed an improvement. The previous MacBook Pro lasted 12 hours and 36 minutes during our testing, but the new model made it to 15 hours and 10 minutes. That's a healthy step up, especially if you find yourself stuck on a long flight without any working outlets. Apple says that the new MacBook Pros can reach up to 22 hours of battery life, but take note that figure only refers to the 16-inch model.
Just like last time, the 14-inch MacBook Pro starts at $1,999 — a huge leap from the $1,299 13-inch model. I'm still a bit baffled by that MacBook Pro, though. Most mainstream shoppers would be better off with the revamped M2 MacBook Air, while power users might as well bump up to this more powerful 14-inch model. If you're aiming for something bigger, the 16-inch MacBook Pro starts at $2,499. New gear also means the old models will inevitably go on sale, so it's worth keeping an eye on the M1 Pro and Max machines if you're aiming to save some money. Sure, they're a bit slower, but you could put that extra money towards buying more RAM or storage.
It's no wonder Apple announced the new MacBook Pros without much fanfare. It's just a simple spec bump, not the sort of thing most buyers would get too excited about. But for the creative professionals who need the most power possible, it's another reason to stick with Apple instead of jumping to a PC.
MacBook Pro 14-inch (2023)
MacBook Pro 14-inch (2023)
Apple’s first major announcements of 2023 are here! This week, Devindra and Deputy Editor Nathan Ingraham chat about Apple’s new M2 Pro/Max MacBook Pros and Mac Mini. Sure, they seem like solid upgrades, but did they come too late? Also, we dive into the latest rumors around Apple’s AR and MR headsets, as well as news about cheaper AirPods and new AirPods Max. And in other news, we explore the downside of AI in journalism, as well as another round of layoffs in tech.
Listen below or subscribe on your podcast app of choice. If you've got suggestions or topics you'd like covered on the show, be sure to email us or drop a note in the comments! And be sure to check out our other podcasts, the Morning After and Engadget News!
Apple announces M2 Pro and Max chips for MacBook Pro and Mac Mini – 1:23
The big HomePod is back from the dead! – 15:34
Apple’s AR headset may be delayed, a cheaper mixed reality headset may be in development – 25:41
Other News: CNET’s AI article problem, Twitter breaks third party apps, and layoffs at Microsoft – 32:11
Working on – 44:44
Pop culture picks – 46:08
Credits
Hosts: Devindra Hardawar and Nathan Ingraham
Producer: Ben Ellman
Music: Dale North and Terrence O'Brien
Livestream producers: Julio Barrientos
Graphic artists: Luke Brooks
Engadget Podcast
Engadget Podcast
FreshRSS 