PDA

View Full Version : A Blade in the Dark dvd


Jason25
07-19-2001, 07:00 AM
How did I miss this release. I already own an import version, but man, how did I let this release slip by me?

Anyone own this disc care to comment on transfer/sound quality? I need to get my ass in gear and get this dvd.

Lamberto Bava was in top form here. Bava and Soavi, how can you go wrong?

dotgain37
07-19-2001, 11:37 AM
Anchor Bay has done another great job on this DVD. Overall, the image is sharp and the colors look good. A few scenes look a bit soft, nothing major though. There's some grain in the bright areas. But considering (IIRC) that Blade was shot on 16mm, it's no biggie and this is probably the best the film will ever look. This transfer definitely beats the EC release.

Isn't the EC version a non-anamorphic 1.66:1 transfer? The AB disc is in 1.85:1 and it's anamorphic. Don't know what the original aspect ratio was, but the framing looks just right at 1.85.

There isn't that much to say about the audio. It's a pretty standard, distortion free mono track the does the job (but not much more).

The high light of the extras is a 10 minute (or maybe it's 20 min, can't remember) interview with Bava and Dardano Sacchetti. The rest is the usual AB stuff; a trailer and some bios.

Not Anchor Bay's best release, but still a very good one.

bruce h
07-20-2001, 05:28 PM
The Anchor Bay DVD actually reinstates about 15 minutes of previously unseen (in English) footage back into the feature, and while some may see it as a blessing I see it more as a curse. The xtra footage fucks up the pacing of the film and essentially slows it down much more than it needs, causing sections to drag out longer than before. It's always nice to see additional footage but sometimes I can't help but think that there was a damn good reason for taking it out in the first place. Same goes for Autopsy.
bruce h

NickyDoyle
07-20-2001, 06:08 PM
Still, many people want their films to be uncut and uncensored, even if the pace suffers. Esspecially in this movie, where the movie doesn't nesseceraly fire at a machine gun clip.

Print wise, there is some grain that is noticable when there is a white wall in the background, but the image is sharp and the colors are right on.

It's a nice buy, especially if you can get it cheap (I got mine for about $20 w/ two day shipping at 800.com).

bruce h
07-20-2001, 07:15 PM
There's a big difference between a film being Cut or Censored and a film having bits removed because of pacing reasons. Does the fact that the other prints of A Blade In The Dark don't have this footage in them make them cut? No. All gore and nudity is intact, so censorship is not the issue (except the Lightning release from certain provinces in Canada, but that's another thread altogether...). It quite simply means they're alternate (and in my opinion superior) versions. I agree it's all a matter of taste, and my intentions aren't to start an argument, but I personally wouldn't have had a problem with the additional scenes being included as supplements instead of edited back into the film.

AceRimRat
07-20-2001, 08:43 PM
Originally posted by bruce h
There's a big difference between a film being Cut or Censored and a film having bits removed because of pacing reasons. Does the fact that the other prints of A Blade In The Dark don't have this footage in them make them cut? No. All gore and nudity is intact, so censorship is not the issue (except the Lightning release from certain provinces in Canada, but that's another thread altogether...). It quite simply means they're alternate (and in my opinion superior) versions. I agree it's all a matter of taste, and my intentions aren't to start an argument, but I personally wouldn't have had a problem with the additional scenes being included as supplements instead of edited back into the film.

I haven't seen this film, but Bruce makes a very good point - with all these "uncut" releases hitting DVD from studios major and minor, some films are better off the way they are - if censorship, studio interference, etc., wasn't the reason for the cuts.

I would above all like to see the director's definitive vision for a film when I get an "uncut" version. For instance, in the BVHE "Reindeer Games," the re-release was the way the director wanted the film to be. The upcoming "Basic Instinct" is restored from the cuts needed for an "R." Anyone who watched the deleted scenes on "Disturbing Behavior" or saw the Sci-Fi version with them edited back in probably agrees the movie was better off before they were taken out. The list goes on.

But if a director makes changes in a non-censoring way, that's probably because that's the way he or she wants the film, and that's the way I want to see it. Changing a film to put stuff in, without director approval, is in some ways the same as taking stuff out - it changes what the director wanted, and isn't that what we're opposing? (I don't know if that's the case with this film here, I mean that as a general statement.)

Sorry, got off on a bit of a rant there. Didn't mean to.

Mario77
07-23-2001, 08:33 AM
I like the Blade In The Dark DVD overall and it's definately one of Lamberto's better films. I'm excited for that Basic Instinct SE, AceRimRat. Have you seen what it looks like? It comes in an "ice block" with a ice pick inside. So cool...