Within the Woods - NEW AB Statement

Found this today on a GERMAN board:

"Over the course of the week, the news of "Within The Woods" having to be dropped from the upcoming EVIL DEAD: BOOK OF THE DEAD has been announced and like everyone here at Anchor Bay, fans have been very vocal about their disappointment that it won't be present in the release.

However, over the past few days, several incorrect rumors have surfaced and also some misconceptions about this situation. I want to address these now, and hopefully put this to rest and move on. No one is happy about this, least of all Anchor Bay.

Ok...

1. WITHIN THE WOODS has been pulled because of a legal situation which I am not allowed divulge publicly. It was not related to the music issues, which had been cleared. It is a separate matter that was not anticipated and unfortunately cannot be resolved. This means that neither Anchor Bay Entertainment (or anyone else for that matter) will be able to release WITHIN THE WOODS on home video, ever. Delaying our release will not solve this issue. It will not be released by itself or as part of any other EVIL DEAD release. This is not our choice.

2. Related to the above point, many people have suggested that we are holding out on WITHIN THE WOODS to include it later in some other EVIL DEAD DVD or a EVIL DEAD TRILOGY box set. There are no other EVIL DEAD DVDs planned at this time. Also, there will NEVER be a box set with all three films included. Each of the three EVIL DEAD pictures are owned by separate participants which would make a box set highly difficult for a variety of reasons. Disregard any rumors you may read about a a box set. It is not going to happen, ever.

3. The retail price of $49.98 cannot be lowered due to the high cost of the Book of the Dead package. Each of these is a handpainted item (not made of degradable latex, but a high quality rubber material) with nearly 50 pages of printed material inside (Tom Sullivan's drawings & additional booklet). The book alone, without even considering the DVD, has been a very expensive project for us, and we set the retail price as low as we reasonably could. The dropping of the WITHIN THE WOODS, while very disappointing, isn't a viable reason for us to lower the price on this item.

4. Although we had finished our re-mastering of WITHIN THE WOODS, the discs had not yet been manufactured. We were in the final stages of production on the disc when this situation occured. Although the time and expense of altering our final materials is considerable, we fortunately don't have any finished product sitting somewhere that has to be destroyed or recalled.

5. As far as the whole aspect ratio debate goes, all I can say is this. Although the film has been shown on video in full frame all these years, Sam Raimi has always wanted to have the movie released in its original theatrical aspect ratio of 1.85 :1 Of course time and other projects often got in the way. He was finally able to come to us with this desire to see it released in that format, and that is what we have done. We have followed the director's intentions to see it presented on home video as it was presented in theatres. Those of you who get to see THE EVIL DEAD on the big screen over the next several months will be able to attest to the effectiveness of this presentation. We have plans to send restored prints of the film to selected markets over the next several months, and we will announce more information on that when we can.


Hopefully this will help resolve any questions people have understandably had concerning the WITHIN THE WOODS situation. There really isn't anything else I can add except that THE BOOK OF THE DEAD is still due on March 5th, and we are hoping that anyone who may be on the fence about purchasing it, will take a look at it then and consider it."

[zombi3]

So...Sam Raimi intended The Evil Dead to be seen at 1.85:1. Great, so let's crop the picture and make it "matted widescreen". If Ronald MacDonald doesn't like pickles on his Big Mac, does that mean the rest of us should hold the pickles. Personally I was fine with the 1.33:1 presentation of The Evil Dead and the only reason I was going to purchase the Book of the Dead edition was for the Within the Woods feature. Needless to say that is an order long since cancelled. Sorry Anchor Bay, but I'm not about to shell out 40 bucks for a cropped picture, two more extras, and a rubber box.

Originally posted by zombi3
Sorry Anchor Bay, but I'm not about to shell out 40 bucks for a cropped picture, two more extras, and a rubber box.

not to mention that the movie is an over-hyped piece of shit.

[rhett]

I can't wait for this great film to be released on what looks to be the definitive DVD. I am all for the new widescreen ratio, it makes the film look much more artistic and professional. I doubt anyone on this board prefers watching the full frame transfers of James Cameron movies for example, so I don't see what the big problem is. It looks like AB has done a lot of work on this title, and I for one will surely be supporting this new release.

[zombi3]

Hey, I'm all for widescreen-real widescreen, of which the whole point is to reveal more picture information. What I'm not for is a cropped picture, whether it be "matted" widescreen or pan & scan. Anyway I'm not bashing Anchor Bay. I have purchased many AB titles and will probably purchase more. I just don't think the Book of the Dead edition is worth the 40 beans, especially since I spent $35 on the Elite special edition when it first came out.

Originally posted by zombi3
Hey, I'm all for widescreen-real widescreen, of which the whole point is to reveal more picture information. What I'm not for is a cropped picture, whether it be "matted" widescreen or pan & scan.<snip>

Damn straight.

And Rhett, I sure prefer James Cameron's 1.85:1 SUPER 35 films to his pretensious overmatted 2.35:1 SUPER35 films... And yes, I would prefer a 4:3 version of Terminator 2 than the 2.35:1 - that special feature on t2UE showed that you ended up with more image on the 4:3 pan zoom and scan he used.

[ctyner]

Originally posted by zombi3
Hey, I'm all for widescreen-real widescreen, of which the whole point is to reveal more picture information.

I'm more interested in the intended composition, not getting "more" picture.

I am toatally happy with my Elite entertainment version of Evil Dead. the film was SHOT in 1.33 and MATTED to 1.85.
I am not gonna pay $50 for a fake 1.85 transfer and the new documentarys I am happy with my, 5.1, 2 audio comentarys, and 20 mins of deleted scenes and Trailer.
I currently own:
EVIL DEAD (ELITE)
EVIL DEAD 2 (ANCHOR BAY'S THX SPECIAL EDITION.)
ARMY OF DARKNESS (ANCHOR BAY'S THX THEATRICAL CUT.)

and the only ED related dvd I might buy would be Darkman.
I am very happy with what I've got.

[Hellbilly]

I always prefer 16:9 widescreen. Why? cuz I own a freakin monster:

SD-T50W1/SL 50" 16:9 PROJECTOR

1,240 (W) x 615 (D) x 1,215 (H) mm
Weight: 90kg

That's why

When I heard it was going to be matted that was enough for me to keep my Elite edition. I like the movies to be released on video as they were shot; full-frame or widescreen.

I hope when the 3-disc Dawn of the Dead is released Anchor Bay does it in 1.33:1.

[ctyner]

Plexzol87: Are you unhappy with your DVDs of Evil Dead II and Army of Darkness? Those are matted, after all.

[zombi3]

At least with Evil Dead 2 and Army of Darkness, you have the option of watching it open matte.

Evil Dead II and AOD were intended for theatrical showings of 1.85:1, whereas ED1 was NOT. It was always composed at 1.33:1. The new 1.85:1 transfer moves the frame up and down per shot, in order to avoid cropping people's heads and eyes, etc.

[ctyner]

It was always composed at 1.33:1

Raimi composed for 1.66:1. He always intended for the film to be shown theatrically, and 1.37:1 was as dead an aspect ratio for theatrical exhibition twenty years ago as it is now. The premiere exposed the full frame, but all other screenings during its initial run were matted (most in the U.S. were likely overmatted, actually). This was confirmed in The Evil Dead Companion (page 82), which was meticulously researched and greatly benefitted from extensive contribution from Raimi and crew. Bruce's commentary on the Elite disc also makes mention of how they knew before production had wrapped that the film would be matted for theatrical release.

Originally posted by HellbillyDeluxe
I always prefer 16:9 widescreen. Why? cuz I own a freakin monster:

SD-T50W1/SL 50" 16:9 PROJECTOR

1,240 (W) x 615 (D) x 1,215 (H) mm
Weight: 90kg

That's why

Yeah, I can fully understand people with WS sets wanting anamorphic transfers, but here is what they should do (although very few people other than the French actually bother doing this with DVD transfers)
- Master is in pillarboxed anamorphic 1.66:1 aspect ratio, with 4:3 encoding built in.

From what I can tell, from discussions and books, 1.66:1 was the ratio it was intended to be shown in theatrically. If you do it at full res, pillar boxed, the black bars on the side are very very minor, and usually in the overscan area on most setups. But in 4:3 mode you still loose a bit from the full frame 4:3.

I really do have a problem with 1.85:1 though, even with the <i>I have a widescreen TV</i> argument in mind. 16:9 equates to 1.78:1, so they have matted it down even further than 16:9, cutting off even more picture info unnecessarily. Why? 'Coz it's cooooooool....