Supermallet

Oh, please. Halloween had a few night shots there weren't as blue as on the 1999 remaster, that's a far cry from the recoloring done here.

bunkaroo

I see the DVD got 4.5/5 for PQ in the recently posted review here. Wouldn't the DVD have the same problems as the Blu-Ray?

Also, I'm assuming the reviewer's Sylvania 19" TV listed in his equipment list is a joke, correct? Otherwise, .

hauntnut

Judging from the screenshots the reviewer included from the DVD, it still looks as if the transfer is much darker when compared to previous DVD editions. As for the colors, I would very much like to see some shots from the DVD pertaining to some of the scenes that have been causing some controversy on this board as of late. When I pick up my rental copy, I'll try to get some on here.

Davy Mack

let us know what you think!
I am actually considering renting the new dvd to see how it compares.

DVD Polizei

DVD shouldn't have the same characteristics. Which is why I am more than interested in getting an SD DVD copy.

Not sure about the 19" television, but he has done around 300 reviews, so you might want to read some previous reviews of his with movies you've seen personally.

bunkaroo

I have looked at a lot of his reviews - there are a lot of theatrical reviews in that count.

I'm just saying if those specs are true, the video rating doesn't really mean much to those who own displays larger than 42".

I'm getting the BD so I won't be bothering with the SD of this release.

hauntnut

I was looking at the screenshots that were included in the review, and they seem to look darker...







The image from the scene between Dracula and Mina in the restaurant looks especially darker than the previous DVDs, and the image of Harker on the train with the red sky in the background is as well.

DVD Polizei

Oh, I agree. I was just giving him the benefit of the doubt. I was thinking maybe after reading a few other reviews, you'd know where he was coming from.

Davy Mack

OK. NOW we're starting to get somewhere!

I have a thread going at HTF where someone pasted in paidgeeks response to this whole potential debacle.


"There are a few things that those critical of the latest Dracula transfer should know.

1. The new transfer was supervised. This means that a representative from Zoetrope was charged we checking the color correction to make sure it met with the intentions of Mr. Coppola.

2. The new transfer and color correction were not done hastily. This title was carefully planned for BD and we were given the full cooperation of Zoetrope to get it done right.

3. The masters used for the DVD versions of this title were not endorsed by Mr. Coppola, the BD version is. The color correction on the DVD releases was not what Mr. Coppola wanted, regardless of the fact that the elevated brightness in some scenes on the DVD can reveal something not seen on the BD.

4. The answer print of the film is darker than the Blu-ray (answer prints are the approved color timed result that release prints are supposed to match).

5. Mr. Coppola intentionally shunned digital special effects techniques on this film in order to get a result that had the look of the classic horror films. The optical effects lead to some dirt and softening of the master.

A great deal of time and effort went into the remastering of this film, so it is more than a little disappointing that fans would not just second guess the wishes of the person that made the film, but would judge some of the work as careless or incorrect? From what I have read on the forum, the issue seems to stem from the darkening or color adjustment of a few scenes that leaves the viewer with less discernable picture information than was visible on the earlier unapproved release. If your display is properly calibrated, then rest assured that there is information in the video on most titles that you are not seeing. It is your choice if you want to turn up brightness to reveal some dark detail that is not necessarily supposed to be revealed.

I suspect that if we originally released a Dracula with a darker image, then released the Blu-ray with a brighter one, then perhaps these issues would not have been raised. Just remember that the film is supposed to set a mood and tell a story, not dazzle you with the picture details in the shots with a darkened room.
__________________
SPE Blu-ray insider "



Fine. So ok. Never mind that the new transfer looks too dark, flat, washed out with SDdvd level detail. Never mind that.
I still thought well, how come all these years if the DVDs were SO WAY off the mark from the film hadn't anyone ever brought it up?!?!?

So, after I asked this...




a fellow HTF member who has the COPPOLLA APPROVED TRANSFER laserdisc decided to see how it looked in the infamous Dracula is green in the BD but bluish white in the DVD shot and guess what he saw...







One more time...?



EXACTLY.

So? What gives..?!?!?
Is this what Coppolla wanted?

I agree, it is possible.
But that's exactly what Lucas has always said, Star Wars, despite all the work and effort that these amazingly talented artists did was not what he wanted. So, the redux.
Now this. Granted it's not nearly as dramatic but when you change the colors in a scene from blue to green, that's a pretty noticeable change. It's also jarring to everyone who got used to and watched the earlier version first for years.
I would expect a bit more of an explanation then both transfers had Coppolla's approval yet end up looking dramatically different.
Well, then I will just state that I preferred Coppolla's ORIGINAL approved version of the film. Many others probably feel the same.
So if indeed Coppolla himself was involved, ( and I have a feeling he really wasn't very hands on as his wine business takes up most of his time as he even admits in his new commentary track) this is what he wants it to look like NOW.
Fine. Many artists redo, alter their work. But for paidgeek to say that the dvds didn't look right and the BD does when it seems maybe after all this spin, the dvds might look ALOT more like the LD which he DID approve strikes me as a bit odd. This does not compute.

And yes, he can do whatever he wants. It IS his film.
Fine. But it's now DIFFERENT looking. ALOT different looking. So just admit that and don't try and spin it like, "Oh, the DVDs were WAY off and this is the correct way it SHOULD look."
Well, then what happened to the "COPPOLLA APPROVED LASERDISC" transfer? That was wrong too? And the theatrical prints? As I said before. I saw it at a revival at MOMA (35mm print) and it certainly didn't have scenes so desaturated that they almost looked black and white!
And bottom line. It doesn't matter HOW much time and effort they put to this re-envisioning, the end result looks BAD. Virtually everybody has said so who has seen the BD disc. Including highdefdigest and Chad at Hometheaterspot.
Isn't it MAYBE just possible that this was done poorly? Isn't it? Just because they spent time and effort on it and it's in HD doesn't mean they did a fabulous job. Bad transfers happen all the time. And fine. Maybe it's just a bad transfer. But these spin efforts really do just desperately sound like spin because maybe, just maybe after the whole The fifth element on BD fiasco where they had to redo the transfer and offer an exchange, they just don't want to go through that again or spend the dough.
If Coppolla personally supervised this, it would be admitted. Hell, they'd use that in the press release and it would be mentioned on the packaging. It's not. A representative from Zoetrope means nothing.

DVD Polizei

Well, it is his film. But who's money allows him to make these films. It sure isn't the Film Fairy.

Obviously, there is some serious indifference towards fans and HD fans especially.

Supermallet

If you listen to the commentary, Coppola mentions several times that he hasn't seen the film in years prior to this release, and makes no mentions of the colors at all. Now, it's possible he supervised a new color scheme after he recorded the commentary, but you'd think he'd mention something about it if he had it in his head.

Davy Mack

Coppolla says in the commentary that it was 2006. So if he recorded it then, it was before the new transfer was done.

Davy Mack

more interesting stuff from HTF...




Yep, that's what I thought earlier. So why the conflicting info? Ron wrote...
"This transfer was completed last year and was overseen by a
representative of Zoetrope along with Sony's best transfer people."

Stating a representative from Zoetrope was involved but TOP Sony guys did the BD..?!?!? That doesn't sound like it was done in house at Zoetrope. It also doesn't sound like Coppolla himself was involved. A representative conveying the wishes of Coppolla in regards to the new transfer? Oooof. ALOT of room here for error IMHO. Especially if the LD tranfer actually WAS supervised by Coppolla and not just a "representative". Guess what? They look VERY different. So? Which one is more accurate? A tranfer ACTUALLY supervised by Coppolla at a time much closer to the making of the film? Or a new transfer done 15 years later that "a representative from Zoetrope helped oversee...?" hmmmmm..... Doesn't take much thinking here.
As far as I know, since it has NOT been stated that Coppolla himself approved the new BD transfer, only a "representative" from a company that is not even his primary business anymore, (by his own admission on the commentary!) then all I can conclude is until I hear different, the only known, accurate approved transfer of "Bram Stoker's Dracula" is the Criterion Laserdisc.
If it looks THAT much different from the new BD transfer (and now more and more looks like it more closely resembles the DVD transfers) then I'm sorry, the BD is NOT the definitive version in my opinion.

On one hand, approved by Coppolla transfer. LD

Other hand, new BD "overseen" by a rep from Zoetrope. By most accounts, looks pretty bad and different from the film that most remember.

pro-bassoonist

The statement I quoted earlier explicitly notes that the BD transfer was endorsed by Coppola. (In fact, my take on this transfer is that it was later on "matched" by the Zoe- techman, NOT BEFORE, the endorsement. Hence, Paidgeek's official statement).

This led to the following official statement which is now at Blu-Ray.com's main news section:

With only a few days left until the much anticipated Blu-ray release of 'Bram Stoker's Dracula', the title is already causing confusion amongst the few lucky enough to get advanced copies. Early reviews have been mixed, and the web forums have erupted in consumer backlash, claiming Sony has destroyed the transfer. Thankfully, one of our Insiders was able to get the real story: this Blu-ray release reflects the wishes of director Francis Ford Coppola.

The divide between those who thought the presentation was absolutely stunning and those who think its an utter abomination is blatantly clear. Those who have indicated they like the presentation are viewing the title on its own merits. Those who have criticized the transfer are comparing it to the Superbit DVD release, and are missing some crucial information about development of this Blu-ray.

* The masters used for the Superbit DVD release were not approved by Mr. Coppola, while the Blu-ray masters were
* The color correction on the DVD was not done by direction of Mr. Coppola
* For the latest master, a representative from Zoetrope was charged with checking the color correction to match the wishes of Mr. Coppola
* The Blu-ray release was not accomplished quickly; it was carefully planned with full cooperation of Zoetrope

So when you sit down to watch this Blu-ray on Tuesday, remember that you are watching the absolute best video release of 'Bram Stoker's Dracula' ever created, and that it is exactly as the director intended. Any comparisons to previous video releases are invalid, as this release was approved by Mr. Coppola and his team at Zoetrope.

We thank Sony Pictures for the extensive amount of work they do, and continue to do, in order to ensure that Blu-ray owners receive the absolute best versions of classic films on Blu-ray. They have gone to great lengths to get director participation on high-profile Blu-ray releases, and we applaud them for all their hard work.

Also, thanks must go out to our Insiders, who constantly provide us with important information regarding current and upcoming releases. Without your support, we would truly be in the dark.

Pro-B

DVD Polizei

If Coppolla has approved it, then so be it.

Just curious. Is there ANYONE who enjoyed this transfer?

pro-bassoonist

I don't think there are too many people who have actually seen this transfer yet. Aside from a few reviewers and perhaps a few lucky "beat the street date" owners...I would say people are just reading what has been discussed on-line. After all the disc comes out this Tuesday.

Pro-B

Davy Mack

Ok. Thanks to Dave at horrodvds.com, I used one of his LD screenshots to compare with.

http://www.horrordvds.com/modules.ph...article&id=224


Ok. I went upstairs and took better more balanced, less blown out screenshots.

The Bd of the vamp girl closeup...






The SB dvd






and the screenshot from the Coppolla approved LD transfer...



now which, the BD or the SB dvd more closely resembles the Laserdisc screenshot? And the Laserdisc transfer was approved by Coppolla. The BD had a "representative from zoetrope relay Coppolla's wishes..."

Davy Mack

and to show you how close in PQ detail the SBdvd is to the BD, (when the BD REALLY should have had ALOT more detail...


the SB dvd




the BD

Davy Mack

Even the Criterion Laserdisc that was personally supervised by and approved by Coppolla? Back when it was only a few years after he made the film?

Davy Mack

Ok, first off. That's written by Josh. Beatboy as many know him. Nice guy and all and he does have some leads and gets discs early but he is NOT an officially declared "insider" like paidgeek is.

Paidgeek ACTUALLY said this...



1. The new transfer was supervised. This means that a representative from Zoetrope was charged we checking the color correction to make sure it met with the intentions of Mr. Coppola.

2. The new transfer and color correction were not done hastily. This title was carefully planned for BD and we were given the full cooperation of Zoetrope to get it done right.

3. The masters used for the DVD versions of this title were not endorsed by Mr. Coppola, the BD version is. The color correction on the DVD releases was not what Mr. Coppola wanted, regardless of the fact that the elevated brightness in some scenes on the DVD can reveal something not seen on the BD.

4. The answer print of the film is darker than the Blu-ray (answer prints are the approved color timed result that release prints are supposed to match).

5. Mr. Coppola intentionally shunned digital special effects techniques on this film in order to get a result that had the look of the classic horror films. The optical effects lead to some dirt and softening of the master.

A great deal of time and effort went into the remastering of this film, so it is more than a little disappointing that fans would not just second guess the wishes of the person that made the film, but would judge some of the work as careless or incorrect? From what I have read on the forum, the issue seems to stem from the darkening or color adjustment of a few scenes that leaves the viewer with less discernable picture information than was visible on the earlier unapproved release. If your display is properly calibrated, then rest assured that there is information in the video on most titles that you are not seeing. It is your choice if you want to turn up brightness to reveal some dark detail that is not necessarily supposed to be revealed.

I suspect that if we originally released a Dracula with a darker image, then released the Blu-ray with a brighter one, then perhaps these issues would not have been raised. Just remember that the film is supposed to set a mood and tell a story, not dazzle you with the picture details in the shots with a darkened room.
__________________
SPE Blu-ray insider "

So this is a bit contradictory

In one version, Coppolla HIMSELF approved the BD master.
In the other version, a "representative from Zoetrope..." was charged with checking the master to make sure it met with Coppolla's wishes. That's not the same.
They can't BOTH be correct.
Looks like Josh, as much as I DO like they guy, embellished what paideek said

Davy Mack

and so far 5 critics have chimed in and they have ALL given it mediocre to bad reviews for both PQ AND AQ. The best was Chad at hometheaterspot.com who gave it a 3 out of 5 for PQ. Not exactly a homerun. And so far, I'd say about 9 out of 10 people who got the disc early said it looked from "disappointing" to "terrible"

pro-bassoonist

Davy:

With all due respect I don't think you separate master from transfer. Read carefully what the quotes above highlight:

1. The BD master was approved by Coppola.

2. The Zoe technician was sent to make sure that the transfer reflects Coppola's intent (that would mean the approved master).

3. None of the previous DVD releases were in sync with Coppola's intent.

Ciao,
Pro-B

Davy Mack

so then the actual transfer went way off and some colors dramatically changed?
If not, how come this looks VERY different from the LD? It's changed, no matter how anyone tries to spin it. Some people shelled out over $100 for the criterion LD set and part of the appeal was because the transfer was supervised and approved by Coppolla. So if this is indeed correct, the LD is wrong? Criterion? With his name actually on it whereas here it's nowehere to be seen, just a "insider said..."


The bottom line is this. There are now 2 distinct and different looking "approved transfers". Which one is the real deal...? How can they BOTH be? Either the new one is, it's the new "preferred look" or the old one actually sporting Coppolla's name on the packaging is.

or just say, "this is how we want the film to look NOW"
Fine. Some preferred the older approved "look"

chanster

I put my faith in Criterion more than Sony. Especially since they have been in damage control and issuing press releases that mislead the consumer as to Mr. Coppola's involvement in this disc.

Endorsments can be just bought off. Personally supervising is something completly different.

Rusty James

I am one of those people. As I posted in AVS, this is the first HD disc I've watched that I would not have been able to pick out of an SD lineup. The image on my calibrated set isn't nearly as dark as Davy's grabs, but the transfer is muddy and soft and unappealing, and the colors aren't just muted: They are drab and faded, as if an old print had been used. It is very reminiscent of the notorious first pressing of The Fifth Element.

As for all the Coppola involvement discussion: Let's not forget Coppola has spent the better part of the last two years overseas filming his new movie, Youth Without Youth (which comes out in Dec.) and is currently in South America shooting the one after that. So I doubt very seriously he had hands-on involvement with this transfer. Having a representative from Zoetrope ensure his wishes were met is NOT the same thing.