I don't know, I can think of a TON of movies that have been released in the past 5 years with muted color palates, from the Saw films, to Max Payne, to Sweeney Todd, to even Children of Men; I think it'd be just as prevalent right now if it wasn't for 3D. Maybe whoever was behind the scenes working on the transfer didn't do it to appeal to a modern audience (it's an opinion), but either way it's WRONG, plain and simple. Someone thought they knew better than Bava what the film should look like. As I stated before, Tim Lucas said the color timing is wrong based on a handful of theatrical screenings, and I'd trust his comments on a Bava film over anyone at Arrow. Regardless of the added clarity and nice-looking transfer (and it'd be a winner with the proper color palate), I'm not going to give a company money to support them changing the look of film's I love; and I'm paying them, after all. They should get it right, I shouldn't have to adjust it to get it to look the way it's supposed to in the first place. When they get stuff right (Battle Royale, City of the Living Dead), they get my cash. And I just can't figure the company out; I'm not sure why they feel the need to mess around with certain films but leave others alone. Check out a review with screenshots for Vamp. It looks fantastic. Why leave well enough alone on a film that has a substantially smaller fanbase and screw around with titles that many more people will scrutinize? The screens from BU's Inferno tell the tale: Arrow is obsessed with video filters on a number of their releases.