Horror Digital Forum  

Go Back   Horror Digital Forum > The Niche's Corner > High Definition

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 09-30-2012, 02:18 AM   #16
f.ramses
Maniac
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: region 0
Posts: 763
Pre-order canceled! :[ Seriously, why the hell don't they just give the option to branch in the original footage if they're going to do this? I really wonder if the people at this company are being assholes or if they're just complete idiots...
__________________
"I keep wondering why they keep making all these stupid fucking movies!" - Mickey Knox, Natural Born Killers
f.ramses is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-2012, 02:42 AM   #17
Demoni
HackMaster
 
Demoni's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,846
I could have done a better job on After Effects.

I laugh at the twitter message "Fisher & Lee were never happy w/ quality of original effects (ran out of budget). We have lovingly enhanced them."

Fisher died 30+ years ago... better leave the film as it was than to redo it without the input of the director... What a lack of respect!
Demoni is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-2012, 10:20 AM   #18
Katatonia
The Dark and the Light
 
Katatonia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Missouri
Posts: 17,951
Quote:
Originally Posted by Demoni View Post
I laugh at the twitter message "Fisher & Lee were never happy w/ quality of original effects (ran out of budget). We have lovingly enhanced them."
lovingly enhanced them? A dude can lovingly enhance himself as a drag queen, but that doesn't mean he's fuckable.
__________________
"We know nothing in reality; for truth lies in an abyss." - Democritus

Katatonia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-05-2012, 08:42 PM   #19
X-human
I ate my keys
 
X-human's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Illinois
Posts: 6,921
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katatonia View Post
lovingly enhanced them? A dude can lovingly enhance himself as a drag queen, but that doesn't mean he's fuckable.
There's a reason why you ask streetwalkers to lift their skirts before you pick them up. Some of them can look quite fuckable.

Anyways, Hammergate continues as the 1.66:1 transfer on The Curse of Frankenstein is severely cropped and nearly indistinguishable from its DVD counterpart: http://www.cathoderaytube.co.uk/2012...-curse-of.html (one needs to scroll down to the very bottom to see the BD discussed)

Hammer's quickly gone from competent and adequate on Blu-ray to overcompensating to the point of bumbling. The early good reviews must have gone to their heads and they felt they could do no wrong. Frustrating.
__________________
The combined weight of the horrors I have authored wrought would crush your carbon hearts into perfect diamonds of terror!

A Few Ants Short. And what the hell, check out my DVD Collection won't you?
X-human is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-05-2012, 09:30 PM   #20
dave13
HackMaster
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 4,909
thats disappointing about the frankenstein transfer. i'm not sure i understand exactly whats going on with the film sources being used. am i to understand that the 1.66:1 composition is a cropped version of the 1.37:1 version, and thats why heads and hands are being chopped? so what relationship do these versions have to the 1.85:1 version? i wasn't specifically looking for it the last time i watched my WB 1.85:1 dvd, but i don't remember it feeling cramped. if its just a further cropping of this newly available 1.37:1 version, shouldn't it be even worse than the 1.66:1? i'd really like to see some comparisons of the 3 side-by-side, so i can know just what the hell is going on. regardless, i'll be leaving my pre-order in place, since i really want all the supplements. i'll just have to hang onto my R1 WB dvd if the 1.85:1 ratio turns out to be the preferable way to watch it.

as for the devil rides out, it wasn't at the top of my list of studiocanal blu's to buy. thanks to this little incident, its dropped to the very bottom. i honestly don't see how these decisions get made. who do they think the market is for these changes? the type of person who would appreciate this type of change would not be the kind of person who would enjoy a film like The Devil Rides Out. its just that simple. you'd think they would realize that.
dave13 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-05-2012, 10:22 PM   #21
X-human
I ate my keys
 
X-human's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Illinois
Posts: 6,921
Well the reviewer seems to believe 1.85:1 is the correct aspect ratio because of Warner's involvement. This is somewhat doubtful but in any event all things being equal 1.66:1 would be MORE open then 1.85:1 not less. So if anything 1.85:1 would be the tightest. Since they have the unmatted full aperture to work from there's really no excuse for this.

There's some comparisons with the Warner DVD here: http://monsterkidclassichorrorforum....er-15th?page=2

It looks like they were simply haphazard in their 1.66:1 placement and that's probably why they felt the need to go 1.37:1. It looks like the 1.37:1 has more top and bottom but less left and right compared to the 1.66:1 they've done. Since the transfers are otherwise nearly identical it looks like both were modifications of a much larger original transfer. That's not so unusual however.

At least with this fans could feasibly create their own correctly framed release from the 1.37:1 transfer. Devil Rides Out fans are not so fortunate.
__________________
The combined weight of the horrors I have authored wrought would crush your carbon hearts into perfect diamonds of terror!

A Few Ants Short. And what the hell, check out my DVD Collection won't you?

Last edited by X-human; 10-06-2012 at 05:10 PM.
X-human is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-06-2012, 01:17 AM   #22
buck135
The Duke of New York
 
buck135's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: In Bruges
Posts: 2,672
I'm just glad "Dracula Prince of Darkness" is awesome. An excellent blu-ray.
__________________
"Do you read Sutter Cane?"
buck135 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-17-2012, 07:42 AM   #23
X-human
I ate my keys
 
X-human's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Illinois
Posts: 6,921
Hammer has posted a pretty long winded "Nah-ah!" in response: http://blog.hammerfilms.com/?p=166

My favorites are the title screens which look perfect at 1.66:1 but they claim to be "tight" when there's perfectly dead space in the 1.37 framing exactly fit for cropping. But here is the real beauty:
Quote:
we came to the conclusion that THE CURSE OF FRANKENSTEIN (TCOF) was composed at the Academy ratio, even though those who made it were fully aware that it would also be exhibited at 1.66:1 in the US and in UK cinemas which had already been converted to widescreen.


That's right, the filmmakers wanted their film to look like crap. It was their intentions all along.
__________________
The combined weight of the horrors I have authored wrought would crush your carbon hearts into perfect diamonds of terror!

A Few Ants Short. And what the hell, check out my DVD Collection won't you?
X-human is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-17-2012, 09:20 AM   #24
Katatonia
The Dark and the Light
 
Katatonia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Missouri
Posts: 17,951
Wow, Hammer's getting senile in its old age.
__________________
"We know nothing in reality; for truth lies in an abyss." - Democritus

Katatonia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-17-2012, 05:46 PM   #25
dave13
HackMaster
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 4,909
Quote:
Originally Posted by X-human View Post
Well the reviewer seems to believe 1.85:1 is the correct aspect ratio because of Warner's involvement. This is somewhat doubtful but in any event all things being equal 1.66:1 would be MORE open then 1.85:1 not less. So if anything 1.85:1 would be the tightest. Since they have the unmatted full aperture to work from there's really no excuse for this.

There's some comparisons with the Warner DVD here: http://monsterkidclassichorrorforum....er-15th?page=2
those captures make it look like the icon disc is horizontally squished. everything is noticeably thinner. thats why there's no new info at the sides, but less at the top and bottom. bummer.
dave13 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-18-2012, 06:25 PM   #26
X-human
I ate my keys
 
X-human's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Illinois
Posts: 6,921
Someone posted screenshots of an unmatted Japanese LD:
Quote:
I have a copy of the Japanese laserdisc of "Curse of Frankenstein" which is a transfer of the full-frame. Fortunately this transfer has retained the original theatrical changeover cues. As you can see they are cropped, but despite this you can easily see, especially to the projectionists amongst us, how much image is cropped from the right edge of the cue to the edge of the film. Projector aperture/mask plates would generally never crop this much picture edging into the cue this far. Only in telecine does this happen, due to the SMPTE tv safe area does this ruthless amount of cropping take place. If this transfer was zoomed in centrally on all sides by the amount indicated by the changeover cue, there would have been more than enough room for 1.66 and 1.85.
While the poster indicates it to be zoomed on all four sides to my eyes it shows more of the top of the frame (in the graveyard there are more tree branches above the vulture) while still being severely cropped on the three other sides. If such an image is so severely cropped on three of its sides I would imagine the top to be fairly cropped compared to the original film frame as well. I suspect the HD master may be cropped more at the top then Hammer realizes.
__________________
The combined weight of the horrors I have authored wrought would crush your carbon hearts into perfect diamonds of terror!

A Few Ants Short. And what the hell, check out my DVD Collection won't you?
X-human is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-01-2012, 07:01 AM   #27
dave13
HackMaster
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 4,909
am i going insane, or is there some slight speedup going on throughout both versions of Frankenstein and the bonus film, Four Sided Triangle? I'm talking about on the BD. Aren't BD's supposed to be completely free of speedup, since they're not encoded with PAL? Can anyone else who is sensitive to speedup comment on this? Anybody have any ideas why this might be occurring? It's slight, but it is definitely there. Looks like I may have to just consider this disc as a purchase made strictly for the supplements. Really disappointing treatment of the film itself.
dave13 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-03-2012, 02:03 PM   #28
Robert Simandl
Screamy Bopper
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 39
Just keep your Warner DVD's everybody. Nothing to see here. Neither the 1.37 nor the 1.66 version look any better than Warner's ten-year-old 1.85 DVD. In fact, the new Blu looks worse sometimes.
Robert Simandl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2012, 02:07 AM   #29
Risky1975
Screamy Bopper
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Chicago
Posts: 23
i have got all the studio canal releases and they are amazing... love em... i don't see why so many people are freaking out about the TDRO the extra effects have no affect on the the enjoyment of this movie for me.. it like 2 second of a change ... the transfer is amazing.. love it i very pleased with all the hammer releases.. even if they come out in the us with some of these i doubt the will be as packed with extras as these are... now as far as the TCOF yeah the color is a bit washed out but it;s def worth it for the new supps!!!
GO HAMMER!i loving it all...
Risky1975 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-22-2013, 07:04 PM   #30
dave13
HackMaster
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 4,909
i held off on watching The Curse of Frankenstein for a while after getting it, after all the poor press it was getting. i was mistakenly under the impression that the 1.37:1 print was a cropping of the 1.85:1 print from the WB dvd, but that's not the case, I was happy to see. The color may be a little desaturated, and its by no means a sharp image, but to my eye it was a definite improvement over the image on the dvd, at least in terms of picture quality. as far as framing goes, i didn't grow up with these films, only discovering them later in life, so i don't have any established preference for the 1.85:1 version. seeing more picture at the top and sides on the 1.37:1 version just makes the film feel more open. in the scene that directly follows the credits, of the baron's tutor riding his horse through the mountains, the matt painting in the background of the baron's mansion is all but completely cut off in the 1.85:1 version. in the full-frame version, you can actually see the whole building. stuff like this makes the 1.37:1 image feel pretty...correct...to me. i dunno, after all the hulabaloo that surrounded this release, i'm surprised to find that i actually am pretty happy with the picture.
dave13 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:19 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

Copyright 1999-2014 Horrordvds.com

No text or images from this site may be reprinted or used elsewhere without express consent from Horrordvds.com