captainsolo

That has a lot more info than usual for these kinds of theories. Plus the majority of them come from the trailers and teasers. They make sense for the most part, even I had thought they were doing something with Peter's parents and having some inbred genetic thing that gets activated. That's what one of the trailers sounded like.

Dial M for Murder

I used to think this was a great movie. It's impeccably staged for 3D, and still the only good 3D film. The new Blu-ray release of the polarized 3D version should be awesome. The big flaw is that the film is bound by its stage play origins. Hitchcock working on one confined set is no problem, but being confined by the story is a whole other matter. Ray Milland essentially carries the film along with John Williams as the Police inspector. Fantastically made if a bit stagy at times.

3.5 balls out of 4 over-wound watches. Though why any sane man would want to kill Grace Kelly is beyond me...

With Hammer there have always been rumors of foreign prints that had the bits cut by the British and US censors intact, primarily in Japan. With Dracula, the rumors were true. There's an extension of the seduction of Mina, but most importantly in the ending as has been evidenced by still for decades...Christopher Lee reaches up to his own face and the skin comes off down all the way to his chin. This would be in the sequence before the dummy is shown and is actually Lee in makeup and effects. I was fascinated by stills of this as a kid, because I thought it was such a fantastic image...never once did I think it would ever turn up.

http://www.hammerfilms.com/news/article/newsid/314/dracula-resurrected

Plus, the resurrected studio has been doing work on their titles for Blu-ray releases. Several have been done, and now Curse of Frankenstein has had the uncut shot of the eyeballs restored in a 4K scan from original IPs. The Blu-ray release is set to have both 1.66:1 and the full Academy camera aperture as a bonus version. Dracula and The Mummy are upcoming, with Dracula having the lost parts restored. There is still debate on the correct color tone and saturation of Drac, between the 2007 BFI restoration and the US editions.

In any case the awful WB DVDs here in the States will finally be rectified. the color is crap and the framing too tight in many places.

I shouldn't have been held back from seeing monster movies as a kid...;) Back to Universal-land...

msycamore said:

Jonno said:

What's particularly frustrating is how beautiful the restored (as opposed to altered) footage frequently is, particularly on the BD. Sadly I think this might be too big a repair job even for an Adywan or a Harmy...

Except the resolution and clarity of the footage, personally I'm not that fond of how it looks as it's sometimes so far removed from the original, the raw documentary style of the original is gone, degrained, high contrast look with skintones that are often ash gray. But I agree that some scenes look very good though, it's just that you know the original could look even better if it was restored, that's what makes it even more frustrating.

The original version was quite grainy and even though the film is highly stylized in its photography, except for the limbo prison sequence which was handled by Haskell Wexler at a TV studio in LA, it was shot entirely on locations and used natural lighting as much as possible, the actors didn't even wear makeup.

Lucas in American Cinematographer, October 1971:

"I was well aware that there would be those in the audience who would be shocked by the graininess at first, but I was sure that after the first minute or two they would get used to the grain and simply accept it as part of the stylistic concept, the documentary approach."

I definitely recommend the article if you guys haven't read it, cannot find it at the moment but the main parts of it can be read here: http://books.google.se/books?id=P2P7pwHeZSkC&pg=PA8&lpg=PA8&dq=THX+1138+American+Cinematographer&source=bl&ots=tIkANVWelz&sig=WXEwjpn7LkMhW2DgCYMoPUok2zs&hl=sv&sa=X&ei=gp36T7utHM7R4QTA4pCVBw&sqi=2&ved=0CFMQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=THX%201138%20American%20Cinematographer&f=false

Exactly. The original was photographed in Techniscope, which despite it's bad reputation as a cheap poor-man's Cinemascope and increased grain structure is (Along with VistaVision for the opposite reasons) IMO the best film widescreen process devised. The graininess becomes a character and the process has a specific grittier color palette available. Combine this with the fact that anamorphic lenses were unnecessary and you could do just about anything with the camera. This is how Sergio Leone was able to get his famed closeups so tightly, because the camera was using plain old spherical lenses and he realized what he could start doing. It allowed for a huge increase in creativity, and the films made in this process are some of the most cinematographically inventive ever made.

The new HD film is not a Techniscope movie. They tried to erase all signs of Techniscope, film grain, color, browns, and parts of the original concept. And what the heck is that stupid plastic lobster bug thing SEN sees in the subway? You tell me GL.

Here: http://monsterkidclassichorrorforum.yuku.com/topic/44296/Universal-Horrors-Blu-Ray-Collection-combined-discussion-#.T_sk1PW2aEQ

I always mean to join over there, but then forget and lurk later. This is where the real monster lore is dug up, and the place where it was first announced that the uncut ending to the Hammer Dracula had been found in Japan.

Hopefully these aren't mucked up too badly. It may be simply a case of an overbrightened Drac, but with them doing individual parts of the frame it might be impossible to fix.

I love that timelapse, can almost hear Jimmy saying something like: "In three minutes they did waht took me two months a chair and a plastic cocoon."

Damn, this is sad. He always had such a great twinkle in his eyes, no matter the character. RIP

Give 'em hell Pike!

zombie84 said:

The Kingdom of Heaven BD may lack the overture and intermission, but the picture quality makes up for it. The only reason the DVD had those interludes was because the DVD format itself made them split the film into two discs. Without that restriction, there is no need. Although I do enjoy the break. But I would never say that the DVD is better, simply because of the superior audio and video of the BD.

Yep. I still am unsure as to whether I like the roadshow elements or not, but I did buy the DVD version used for the exhaustive making of which is not included on the Blu-ray. (which needs a re-do eventually as it uses an older MPEG-2 encode)

Spartacus definitely. Even Robert Harris cried foul on that disc.

I'd also add all discs with lossy audio or simply audio ported from the DVDs. Why not give the higher resolution audio we pay for?

GODDAMMIT NILES!-One of my favorite quotes that was never actually said.

Rope

One of The Master's finest and most overlooked. Still genuinely interesting and gripping after 40 odd views and with a haunting use of 40's Technicolor. 8 ten minute takes combined to make a seamless observation all with Hitch's insatiable prowling camera eye. Except we are now the eye for the entire film. Topped off by a great sly performance from John Dall (a great underrated American actor) and one of Jimmy Stewart's finest roles as the sharp witted Rupert Cadell. (That end speech still gives me goosebumps-compare that up to anything in screen acting from the past 30 years.) A great movie that deserves wider recognition as one of the great Hitchcock masterpieces.

4 balls out of 4 men who live alone together in the 40's and have such odd remarks to one another. ;)

Rear Window

Slick, smart, sly, technically brilliant, witty, human, a cranky Jimmy Stewart, Thelma Ritter, and the single greatest entrance of any woman in cinema. (The film should be subtitled what we mentally scream for the movie: Wake up Jimmy! Are you an idiot or something!) The jazzy score that plays over the opening titles is exactly the tone of the film. A shame that the restoration is never presented well on disc, can't wait for the Blu-ray to hopefully improve. Who here hasn't quoted Jeff in their best bad Jimmy voice when sitting in a dark room in front of a window? "Look ovah therrr, ya see? It's the onla windaa with tha lights ouuutt. Thorwaalld's gotta bee in therrrrr, and onla he wouldn't carr about the dooogg."

4 balls out of 4 wedding rings and flash bulbs.

The Trouble with Harry

A great simple movie that attempts to prove Americans are not stupid. It's a British dark comedy set amongst the beautiful autumn locale of Vermont, shot in stunning VistaVision (and one of the great onscreen landscapes) and a nice place where a young boy can walk amongst such beauty and find a corpse. Touching film that has characters who are more real than is usual which makes it a very fond memory. A title that begs for high definition, as the DVD can't hold a candle to the print I saw. The first Hitch-Barnard Herrmann collaboration.

4 balls out of 4 funerals.

To Catch a Thief

It's not the greatest story, not very complicated or dramatic, but it isn't meant to be. What it is is a celebration of all the finer things in life, a slice of decedent cake that only The Master could conceive of. Cary Grant+Grace Kelly+The French Rivera+VistaVision=sumptuous heaven. A visual feast in VistaVision, though the great Blu-ray is merely from the DVD master. I still have my older disc with pumped up color that I can't help but like.

A lightweight 4 balls out of 4 cat burglars.

You can't tell that I've always had a thing for VistaVision, can you?

It was exactly this, and delivered by Edward Van Sloan's Dr. Van Helsing, much like his intro to Frankenstein a few months later. This is why the film ends so abruptly and awkwardly cut/fades to the End card Universal globe.

I wouldn't stay away from the box set, as it's likely the best these are ever going to look on home video at this stage. I'm just worried that there won't be enough care to accurately present these classic films. It's not like they haven't had multiple opportunities to get it right before. But their "restoration" of Drac has me a bit worried. It's a bit like their in-house work on Jaws which looks to remove all filmlike aspects and present an image that in hardly resembles the film as shot in 1975.

However, Bride of Frankenstein received a full scale restoration some time ago and from reports the 35mm prints struck are jaw dropping. That will be the big draw from me. And depending on how well this sells, Universal might be convinced to release a few more of the sequels. They weren't going to ever release any until now.

If unconvinced check out some of the existing HD versions floating around from HDTV and PS3 store etc. They seem to be just the full HD versions of old masters for the DVDs, but the increased detail does work wonders. But it still doesn't match up to a print. Two years ago I saw two from the studio archive and was shocked to see the good condition they were in. Frankenstein Meets the Wolfman I could maybe understand escaping the wrath of over-popularity, but The Mummy looked almost brand new. 1932 and clean as a whistle.

You're not. I think I might hold a mock midnight premiere when this is done. ;)

msycamore said:

I must admit I've never seen the 2004 DVD version more than once in its entirety but when I'm now going through it side-by-side with the real director's cut to make adjustments to the aspect ratio I'm amazed by the high level of differences in it, the amount of digital manipulation is insane, the Special Editions of the Star Wars trilogy don't even come close to the tinkering that's been done on this.

I'm still amused by the title "The George Lucas Director's Cut", should that title suggest someone else was the director of the film earlier but it's now George Lucas who is the director? I mean wouldn't calling it "Director's Cut" be enough. Either it is a director's cut or it's not, maybe Lucas are trying to tell us that the young director is now replaced by an older much different Lucas. The title is so stupid on so many levels I cannot find words for it. :)

Anyway, the amount of warping on the print used for the Laserdisc makes it next to impossible to overlay it and match the DVD transfer, in doing so, I resized the '04 DVD from 720x480 to 704x480 so that I could make adjustments more accurately but it will never be perfect, but it will be much more accurate than just a straight resize to 16:9.

I was shocked to hear about the DVD release back in '04, because I only was able to see the film staying up very late one night in the 90's to catch it on TCM. (On a weeknight before school, which took much arguing with parents to do) I bought the DVD and was surprised to see just how "clean" it looked. The white everywhere just seemed to be too white and stark and the changes were not subtle. Then I found the angrysun LD transfer and realized the extent of how much we were duped. It is much much much worse than the SE, because you don't realize how much has actually been changed. And the changes ruin the entire meaning of the film to boot. I watched the DVD once and have wanted to junk it ever since.

IDK what freaking print source they used for the LD, but you're quite right it is quite poor. You'd think it would be easy to pull a clean print as it's not like THX was ever a huge rental and they did make a director's cut with the few minutes put back in afterwards.

In any case, Techniscope does not look like the DVD. I've seen original Techniscope prints projected and they have a distinctive look to them that underlines the inherent grittiness in THX's world.

Freaking CGI monkeys. I'm surprised he didn't just "put the freaks up front".

ray_afraid said:

The Aluminum Falcon said:

Was it always in error of speed for the English version? Like from 1931, or was that wear and tear?

 

I dunno about that... but either way it's a "fix" I don't mind as I'm sure it wasn't supposed to be that way ever. Of course, if it was that way in it's original form, one could say that they are making changes. But I'd call it restoration.

Probably happened in one of the numerous re-printings made from the negative, done throughout the years for both theaters and TV. Nothing survived of the original film, and the best available materials are pretty much the stuff made for TV reprintings in the 50's. Dracula is probably the best example for a popular film destroyed by its popularity. Just horribly treated-horribly.

Saw that video and pretty much flipped...there's a huge thread over at the classic horror film board that goes into detail but I noticed the "fixed" title cue is actually a different recording, as was on the Spanish edition. All they needed to do was to pull the music on the opening titles of The Mummy, which utilizes the exact same Swan Lake recording as Dracula!!!

The image will likely be over-manipulated as it was on the last 2008 Legacy DVD release, which had the image overblown with brightness and contrast tweaks so that no shadow or darkness remained at all. What I'd like to know is what source was utilized. All I know that Universal has is some fine grain print stuck for TV broadcast prints in the 50's. And the fact that they're just printing the audio onto another 35mm print shows that they aren't going from the original Vitaphone sound discs that have been floating around for years. (This is where the restored "Now I know what it feels like to be God" dialogue came from on the '04 Legacy DVD of Frankenstein-from a collector's disc copy.)

And why is it necessary to de-noise and de-hiss the film? Have they never seen Dracula? The Vitaphone process was not great for sound quality, so the inherent noise should not be erased as it contains valuable dynamic range. But they will do this likely to provide a "cleaner" track. Damn it, the hiss has become part of the film's legacy-just watch any condition copy of Dracula on a big sound system with the sound cranked in a very dark room...and tell me you aren't a bit creeped out.

At least there isn't going to be a 5.1 remix...but I can easily foretell that this box set is going to give me some massive headaches. Universal hardly wanted to do this at all, so they chose the big titles as a test run. They think people won't buy arguably the most famous Universal franchise in HD. Hmph. You'd think they'd finally bite the bullet after all these years and do full scale nitrate transfers with full attempts made to present the films uncut and with the missing bits intact, such as the original ending to Dracula of which the studio has the footage. (but no audio track.)

Looks beautiful. Add me to those saying "why can't we see quality of this magnitude on the OT".

How well does that usb video capture device work?

chinakat said:

Guidelines:

1) Choose a movie that you want the future filmmakers to use as an inspiration.

This is an impossible task. However going by that guideline it would be one of these:

Citizen Kane

Lawrence of Arabia

Dr. Strangelove

Vertigo

Shadow of a Doubt

Classic, brilliant little movie full of Hitch's fascinated humor about the seemingly innocent and perfect being infected and tarnished with evil. However the small town Americana feel has always been a bit too much for me. I've never been able to enjoy it as much as his other films, and while I don't deny its greatness, this combined with some of the odd quirks of the plot have always been a negative.

4 balls out of 4, though it is nowhere near Hitch's best.

Spellbound

Ridiculous mandate to adapt a trashy book into a movie about psychoanalysis. Hitch and Ben Hecht manage to cram in every possible story element to make it work, and they succeed. Gorgeous to look at and unbelievably interesting.

4 balls out of 4.

Notorious

If there is one film you can point to and say: "this is how you make movies", it is Notorious. Sheer perfection on every conceivable level of storytelling and filmmaking, and Hitchcock's pinnacle in his B&W period. The cinematography is stunning, Ingrid Bergman is ravishing, Cary Grant is at his coldest and most debonair (and the true film forerunner of James Bond) and Claude Rains walks away with the film. Again.

The Criterion DVD is the best way to see the film, as it was struck from the nitrate OCN, IP and a fine grain master. It has more fine detail than the MGM disc or Blu-ray with great 1.0 mono. My favorite classic era DVD mastering period.

4 balls out of 4. Perfect. Highest recommendation. One of the best films ever made.

Oh yes, it is very possible and indeed done all over now. Most recently I volunteered for a film festival I've worked with for years and the theater they are allowed to host in upgraded to Sony 4K projectors. (these are huge BTW) I had wondered what formats they would use, and then literally saw several store bought Blu-ray players brought in, connected and used for the duration for both DVD and Blu-ray. The image seemed fine with Blu, and as Zombie pointed out, the difference between 1080p and 2K is very very slight.

This has perplexed me as to why people opt for 2K projection. It is really no better than staying at home, where you have a more looked after transfer and audio presentation, plus it costs less and you can have a better experience than in a theater which does not care to present properly.

zombie84 said:

Hamill is like Caesar Romero, a classic, manic Joker, but one that would not translate well to a serious live-action film. He would be a better fit than Romero, who was a product of his time to some degree, but I can't see him playing the role outside of animation where you can get away with an over the top performance like that. Because even Jack Nicholson had some subtlty, and he was a much better actor in the first place (not to diss Hamill--I love the guy).

I don't know if using the animated series cast would ever work physically, but I've always found there to be more subtlety in their performances than in any of the live-action films. (Though they are limited to just 22 minute plotlines.) Hamill is about the only person that can pull off both the murderous psychopath and the loony clown and slip in and out of both.

zombie84 said:

When I was in film school, we had to take acting lessons as part of our directing exercises. And one of the things we learned about was what is known as "self-directing." This can be a problem for some directors, which is why we were learning about it, because sometimes a cast member will just ignore your direction and make their own choices. Well, this is also a skill that actors can use to get themselves out of trouble when your director doesn't know what he or she is doing--and, like real directing, it's an acquired skill that takes years of experience to do well.

No surprise that all the older actors faired pretty well. Christopher Lee and Ian McDiarmid are old enough to direct themselves when George Lucas just stands there and says "read these crappy lines faster and more intense." But the younger cast--they have no clue. They just do the work and listen to what George says, because they trust him and don't know how to direct themselves. So, if you look at the prequels, it's mainly the over-40-years-old actors  that managed to turn in something not too embarassing.

You're right, they really have no clue-on both sides of the camera. People cannot think for themselves these days. Just look at poor Christopher Lee and the sheer amount of terrible films he's been in over the years. Yet, even in the worst of them, even being overdubbed by someone else, he maintains such a regal and fascinating presence that it works. Always. If AOTC had simply stopped it's story right at Dooku first confronting Obi-Wan and continued seriously from that point, it would have been saved on every level. Or following Dooku leading his Separatist movement while actually going into the political reasons behind their breakaway...but oh wait that requires actual thought and drama.

It's a really interesting alternative for getting something closer to 70mm 6 track magnetic audio into conventional 35mm theaters. The thing is that they didn't think about the large noise associated with multiple optical tracks with no hiss reduction. Thus it was only used and abandoned for Popeye and Dragonslayer with them being reconditioned for Dolby Stereo. It must have had some kind of Paramount association, thus Raiders would be planned and mixed for the new format  but converted to Dolby Stereo for the main 35mm release.

I just saw that press release and popped over here. That lddb quote is gold, and something that I've never heard of before. 4 optical tracks, or three with stereo surround matrixed sounds like an odd way to do things theatrically. That would answer why the film was mixed for stereo surround and then converted to Dolby Stereo.

Now I wonder what the '92 LD used if it's different.

Everything gets a Digital intermediate anyway. Oftentimes the 35mm print you'll be watching had a digital transfer and was then printed back to film or was all digital and had some prints struck from a DI. I still prefer a print in this case but there's never anything that truly comes across better as it was originally digital.

I take that back, The American looked stunning in 35mm theatrically and likely came from a DI.

I prefer a battered 35mm print of a movie in a second run theater than a digital presentation, not just because I'm a film geek, but also because I can't find a decent presenting theater anywhere around, especially for sound.

Speaking of which, TDKR is getting a handful of 15perf/70mm film prints made for IMAX theaters that are willing. Here's the list: http://www.thedarkknightrises.com/imax.html

Though I wasn't a fan of TDK, I am beyond psyched to see one of these prints!!

walkingdork said:

Hotaru no haka AKA Grave of the Fireflies [1988] by Isao Takahata (Ghibli Studio)

 

Story about a Japanese boy taking care of his little sister during the American air raids on Japan during WWII. I cried.

5/5 Fruit Drops

Everybody cries during that. I did and I don't tear up very much. Genuinely emotional. If there was ever a movie to point to to say that animation is art.

Saboteur (1942)

I love this movie. I love every single jam-packed inventive second of this gleefully B-grade wrong man thriller. Everything being on a lower scale helps the story seem more realistic, especially the use of non major stars in the lead roles. Liberal borrowing from the structure of his own 39 Steps allows Hitchcock to run rampant with a simply enjoyable great movie. No, it's not as good as Foreign Correspondent or The 39 Steps. But it is a chance for Hitchcock to get away from the controlling Selznick and his lavish overdone extravaganzas. What this film really is is the link between the British Hitchcock period and Foreign Correspondent with the Americana of Shadow of a Doubt.

4 balls out of 4. Classic but largely forgotten today.

Definitely go! Even though the Final Cut irks me a bit with the color timing it knocked me to the floor! And hopefully you go somewhere where they aren't afraid to crank the amps.

http://www.blu-ray.com/movies/Blade-Runner-Blu-ray/45541/#Overview

This is the upcoming 30th Anniversary Blu-ray set due in October. Looks like they've squeezed everything onto 3 Blu discs and it is supposed to have all 5 cuts and everything from the UCE. Plus the codec listed is MPEG4 which would be an improvement over the old VC-1 encode of the original discs. I always hated that the BR set was all single layer with TrueHD instead of maximizing the capacity of the disc.

bkev, I'd assume that they simply used whatever master they had readily available. Probably their work master which was a different and improved scan of the DC. Most docs and materials will simply use the most available video master, and quite a few are 4:3 interlaced bits from LD masters.

If only there had been an actual copy made from 35mm elements at the time...we could finally see what this edition truly looked like again.