F13 hits blu-ray - Feb 3, 2009

Discussion in 'High Definition' started by rxfiend, Nov 3, 2008.

  1. old-boo-radley

    old-boo-radley They stay the same age...

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2004
    Messages:
    1,869
    Likes Received:
    36
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Saskatchewan
    I wasn't going to get the Blu anyways (if I ever do, it'll be a box set), but I wouldn't mind a Blu-ray of Joe D'Amato's Absurd! ;)
     
  2. Zombie Dude

    Zombie Dude Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2008
    Messages:
    5,739
    Likes Received:
    1,099
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Australia
    You know, I created that petition and still have yet to actually see the film.:lol: I just like Anthropophagus and though Absurd had a right to be on dvd with a nice looking transfer too.
     
  3. gore

    gore Guest

    That sucks. I wont buy it. But everyone else will, thus spoon feeding paramount cash once again for lackluster shit.
     
  4. Reverenddave

    Reverenddave New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2000
    Messages:
    906
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
  5. Matt89

    Matt89 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2004
    Messages:
    5,691
    Likes Received:
    961
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Toronto
    Fuck, my pre-order shipped last night. I mean to bitch about the slight cropping on the My Bloody Valentine DVD is just being way too fucking picky, but here...wow this actually is quite significant. Not that the movie had great cinematography or anything, but still, it's not framed properly, and even moreso...it's cropped 11%? Ouch. I'm seriously thinking of returning my blu-ray when I get it. This is bad.

    Seriously, I'm shocked, considering this is Paramount here. Sure they've never been that great with special features, but they always have been great with image quality. I mean, you get the odd DVD with subpar image quality (which is usually inherent in the way the movie was filmed), but a vast majority of their releases are great in the A/V department.

    Kevin Bacon's death always looked like crap. That's the one murder in the film that benefits from being cut.

    But looking at those stills (aside from the cropping) it's interesting to see how far DVD mastering has come since 1999. I remember being blown away by the old DVD when I first got it, but by comparison, they look like crap.

    Oh and rhett, your DVD/blu-rays were free, right? They were screeners? God I hope so...

    ~Matt
     
  6. gunner

    gunner Cropsy Maniac

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2000
    Messages:
    911
    Likes Received:
    14
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Location:
    Bar Harbor, Maine
    I did notice some cropping, like when Annie pets the dog by the gas pump, the "S" was cut off from the Sunday Papers sign in the background. But I really didn't notice anything too poorly marred by the cropping. You can still see the totem pole beside the Camp Crystal Lake sign. But as with the cropped blu-ray of The Shining, I'm too busy staring at other things in the frame that I'd never seen before to notice how it's framed. Maybe after 10 more viewings. But regardless, it's still an exciting transfer to view, rented or owned. I doubt I'll ever view the properly framed dvds again. I'm glad I own it. And, if Paramount ever does release an improved blu-ray, I'll get that too!!

    I just heard a little bit of unexpected negative news on the Friday 2 & 3 UK blu-ray discs. Apparently the 1080p film & features will play on US players. But the standard definition features (which are in pal) will not play. I had never thought of this, but it does make sense.
     
  7. Matt89

    Matt89 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2004
    Messages:
    5,691
    Likes Received:
    961
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Toronto
    Are you sure? I don't think Paramount uses PAL for its standard-def features. I thought they were always in 480p (much like Warner's and Universal's standard def features internationally), not 576p.

    ~Matt
     
  8. Stige

    Stige Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2003
    Messages:
    1,700
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    Stavanger,Norway
    oh well sent and paid for so I guess I will be happy, hoping the UK blu'a aren't cropped as well

    is this what they meant by brand new transfers?
     
  9. shithead

    shithead Death By Ejaculation

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2005
    Messages:
    2,906
    Likes Received:
    175
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Florida
    Are Parts 2 and 3 cropped this badly as well?
     
  10. gunner

    gunner Cropsy Maniac

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2000
    Messages:
    911
    Likes Received:
    14
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Location:
    Bar Harbor, Maine
    I don't think part 2 & 3 are cropped. I scanned through the dvds last night and they seemed ok. But then again, framing (as long as it isn't as severe as pan & scan) isn't an important thing with me. I wasn't bothered at all by Back to the Future's famous mis-framings on the boxset. Though, I have read in one of the reviews linked above that part 3's transfer was taken from a slightly alternate camera angle. I thought I would notice this, but I didn't. 2's new dvd transfer is very similar (if not the same?) as the original dvds, but 3's transfer is very different, much brighter. I've never seen Jason's hockey mask in such detail before, but it's also very flat & dirty looking. I can't wait to see the UK blu-rays. I'm hoping their both drastic improvements.
    And Matt89, I'm not sure at all about the blu-ray pal/ntsc features claim. It was posted and agreed to on another forum. The posts sounded convincing, but who knows. I sure hope your right!! Inaccessible special features would be a big downer. I'll be sure to report as soon as they arrive!!
     
    Last edited: Feb 3, 2009
  11. spawningblue

    spawningblue Deadite

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2004
    Messages:
    5,069
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
    I wonder why wouldn't they release a two disc version and include the theatrical and uncut version, especially on Blu Ray? As cool as it is to finally own the uncut version, it sounds like in some cases the theatrical version is better, especially concerning Bacon's death. Maybe when they release the box set they'll include both.

    Either way I am holding out until they release a box set on Blu Ray with all the movies. As much as I love the films, I can hold out, especially with the first film being cropped so much, hopefully they fix that by the time they do a box set. I am really getting sick of Paramounts treatment of the franchise though. It made their company so much money and they are embarrassed by it. Makes no sense to me. All of these movie should have been two disc sets, that way we could have the theatrical version of part one, and extras for part 3.
     
  12. Reverenddave

    Reverenddave New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2000
    Messages:
    906
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    This wouldn't surprise me. It's a common problem with SD extras on UK blu-ray imports.
     
  13. rhett

    rhett Administrator

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2000
    Messages:
    9,395
    Likes Received:
    45
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Canada
    No, this looks to be only a problem with the first film.
     
  14. Kolpitz

    Kolpitz Purely and Simply Evil

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2004
    Messages:
    1,503
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Boxborough, MA
    I just looked over the shots in the review, and I gotta say, they're not that bad. Look, I'm not saying that cropping an image is okay. It isn't and Paramount should've know better. But, that being said, Rhett and the rest of you are making it out to seem like the film is now unwatchable in it's current cropped state. Rhett even goes so far as to give the video a "D"! I haven't watched the new transfer yet but if these shots are supposed to represent the worst of the cropping, then they've failed to dissuade me from purchasing the Blu-ray. Like the mis-framed transfers of Back to the Future 2 & 3, this is something I probably wouldn't have noticed until it was pointed out to me. If Paramount does offer a free replacement plan, I'll send my disc in. If not, then I can't imagine myself being disappointed by this transfer.
     
  15. rhett

    rhett Administrator

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2000
    Messages:
    9,395
    Likes Received:
    45
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Canada
    Hey, I'm clear to point out that in many ways this is a beautiful transfer. There is no way I can just roll over and condone a severely cropped picture. Otherwise, why not just accept pan and scan? There is a glaring, unexplained modification to the picture - this is not the way it was meant to be seen. How can I saddle it with anything other than a failing grade? It's our job to raise a stink on forums like this, because it's us aficionados that make things right; Joesixpack certainly wouldn't notice. They may not be able to tell, but they'd certainly feel that this is a much poorer shot film than it actually is. The symmetry and composition of so many scenes are compromised. Shots that adhered to the rule of thirds no longer do (where did that tree top go in my screen caps?) and suddenly the rule of not cutting on the joints is broken when hands get mangled by the zoomed frame.

    I was as excited for this release as many were and are, and I know it's tough to deny oneself the pleasure of seeing it in HD because of a cropping issue. But it is an issue, and if you're supporting it in dollars, then don't expect any quality control on the re-issues of the rest of the films to come. We've waited ten years for a proper special edition of the first film - certainly we can wait a bit longer for them to fix it.
     
  16. Grim

    Grim Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2002
    Messages:
    7,669
    Likes Received:
    109
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Baltimore, MD
    I just watched mine and didn't even realize anything was cropped until I saw the comparison shots in Rhett's review. The cropping shouldn't have been done, but its really not that noticeable unless you stack it side-by-side with an uncropped version. I know I'm not helping the cause by buying this release, but I think OVERALL, this is the best the film has looked. Being the dedicated fan I am, though, I'll buy into Paramount's marketing schemes and more than likely buy another blu-ray with the proper framing if released and sell off my old copy. Like I said, I accept my guilt in not helping us get the best possible release from Paramount, but I'll be satisfied with this for the time being.
     
    Last edited: Feb 3, 2009
  17. spawningblue

    spawningblue Deadite

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2004
    Messages:
    5,069
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
    Agreed. I will hold out, hopefully they will fix the disc what what they did with the Back to the Future discs.
     
  18. Angelman

    Angelman OCD Blu Ray Collector

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2004
    Messages:
    3,603
    Likes Received:
    1,138
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Agreed.

    What baffles me is that of all DVD buyers genre fans are the most fickle and most likely to pick things apart... so... how does this happen? Seriously?
     
  19. Kolpitz

    Kolpitz Purely and Simply Evil

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2004
    Messages:
    1,503
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Boxborough, MA
    It may be unexplained by Paramount but we all know why they did it. It's become a common occurence with Blu-rays and newer DVDs. It's what I like to call "HD Pan & Scan." Because HDTV's native aspect ratio is 1.78:1 and not 1.85:1, almost all Blu-rays are cropped to 1.78:1 from their original 1.85:1. Seriously, when was the last time you saw a newer release that had small black bars at the top and bottom to compensate for the extra picture that 1.85:1 offers. I can't think of any. They're all slightly cropped to 1.78:1, even when they say 1.85:1 on the back. With that in mind, should we boycott all newer "flat" films because they're all slightly cropped to 1.78:1? I suppose we could but that would mean missing out on A LOT of films on home video. As I pointed out, I'm not saying that the cropping isn't bad or that it's acceptable, per se. I would never send Paramount a letter thanking them for cropping the image. But, I just don't think, judging from the screenshots, that the cropping is "boycott bad." Send them e-mails, sure, and maybe, just maybe, they'll do a proper transfer but I doubt it. If we all boycott this release, we'll just be stuck waiting and waiting and waiting. And, while we're at it, let's send e-mails to every company who's ever released a 1.85:1 film in 1.78:1 and then do some more waiting. I just think that we tend to make mountains out of molehills all the time.

    - They're releasing the uncut My Bloody Valentine footage as deleted scenes! Oh wait, now it's in the film ... BUT NOT ALL OF IT! And it's slightly cropped! Lionsgate sucks! Forget that we've been waiting 28 years for this release, we must bitch!

    - Mausoleum is edited and the full frame image showed more gore! The VHS was uncut! It wasn't? Oh, well the UK DVD was! And there was more gore! Sure, if it were in full frame, we'd bitch too but that's beside the point!

    - All these Media Blasters releases are missing gore from the full frame Japanese laserdiscs! I hate Media Blasters!

    Those are just a few of the bitch sessions that I've been privy to and can think of off the top of my head. Hell, I've been part of them and I'm ashamed of myself. We can never just be happy for what we're given. We always have to dig as deep as possible to find flaws in every single release. This isn't meant to insult anyone on here so I apologize ahead of time if I offend anyone. As I've said, I'm just as guilty as anyone else. And, surely, Rhett, as a reviewer, it's your job to call out Paramount. It's my job as a consumer and reader to come to my own conclusion. And my conclusion is that the cropping isn't bad enough to boycott the Blu-ray and that your "D" rating was a bit harsh.

    With all that out of the way, I'll still be sending an e-mail to Paramount and for anyone else who would like to do the same, here's the only e-mail address I could find:

    PHE_CustomerService@Paramount.com
     
    Last edited: Feb 3, 2009
  20. Grim

    Grim Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2002
    Messages:
    7,669
    Likes Received:
    109
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Baltimore, MD
    One thing I noticed that I thought was really cool, but I guess really wouldn't be good for someone who is going into the first film without any prior knowledge of the series (which I think is basically impossible), is that in the scene where Ned notices somebody walking into a cabin, in this release you can clearly distinguish that it's Pamela (or at least a light-haired woman) in a slicker walking in the cabin. At least its the first time I've noticed it.
     

Share This Page