@shittydeath

The new Blu-ray of REAR WINDOW is truly eye-popping but you may recoil at the sight of Grace Kelly's rather hairy forearms.

4:23am Sun Sep 09

REAR WINDOW - BD50 - R0 - Checkdisc date 27th July 2012
Length 01:52:25 / VC-1 / DTS-HD MA 2 Ch. 48kHz / Confirmed AR 1.66:1

These are my rough viewing notes about the technical quality of the *UK* BD which I am reviewing:

Upshot: Will this impress the average punter? Very much. Will this impress the discerning enthusiast? It should do. It’s really terrific.

According to Robert Harris, the film’s restorer, REAR WINDOW was shot on an early version of Eastman Color 5248 negative stock and originally printed via Eastman Color direct positive. Separation masters were Eastman 5216, the earliest of the separation stocks, and for the 1961-2 reissue, prints were produced via dye transfer method which tended to an overall beige look.

I have no idea how this film looked when it premičred, or at the 1960s reissue, nor have I ever seen it projected. I therefore have no idea how the colours or the grain of this great film ought to look on Blu-ray.

Having watched the entire Blu-ray, all I can say is that it’s extremely impressive. The detail is incredible, the colours strong, beautiful, and consistent. Grain is very fine and looks like it’s being suppressed by DVNR in some shots, but I detect a more sensible approach here. It’s used on some shots more than others and is not really a problem, but I have no idea what they were wrestling with.

It feels like a lot of work has gone into it, with difficult materials (the grain structure of these early stocks was apparently quite large, but that’s not apparent at all on the Blu-ray), and the result is impressive.

I spotted four very brief noticeably dupey shots at 00:29:44 & 00:29:59 of Lisa, at 00:54:33 of Jeff, and a quick shot of Doyle at the end 01:50:30. All four are poor quality and quite jarring because 99.9% of the rest of the film looks so stunning.

This disc was a pleasure and a treat. I’ll give it 8.5/10 in my own little marking system.

ROPE - BD50 - R0 - Checkdisc date 30th July 2012
Length 01:20:41 / AVC / DTS-HD MA 2 Ch. 48kHz / Confirmed AR 1.37:1

These are my rough viewing notes about the technical quality of the *UK* BD which I am reviewing:

Upshot: Quite a fine viewing experience. A pleasurable and handsome Blu-ray for Hitchcock’s first colour film (1948).

What is immediately apparent (even from the offputting motion menu screen, which has clips from the film) is that we have excellent detail and very fine grain. No noticeable evidence of excessive processing/DVNR.

Colours definitely have a unique 40s/50s “chestnutty” characteristic, slightly drained, tending towards browns and blues, but lit candles look particularly nice, the neon lighting that leaks into the room at the end looked great, and the skin tones don’t look as deathly as I remembered from previous viewings (thankfully colours do not look artificially ramped).

The opening title sequence is pinsharp. I was expecting softness here, but it looked tight from the off, and stayed pinsharp. Of course, there are hardly any transitions in the film, so it’s all like this.

There is light, almost unnoticeable, occasional sparkle. The only other problems are minor brightness fluctuations in some areas, causing a slight flutter, which is hard to correct, and must be inherent in the surviving film elements, which are otherwise quite clean. I looked briefly at the old DVD which seemed to have more damage than this Blu-ray.

No apparent major problems. An enjoyable 7.5/10.

(Here’s how I see the marking system. Less than 5 is pretty problematic. 5 is very average. 6 is slightly disappointing but good. 7 or above is great. 9s are barnstorming. I don’t intend to give 10s.)

Thank you. I'm going at full tilt. I received 7 x Blu-rays on Friday, spent 45 minutes with each one on the first day, got the word out about VERTIGO's lack of mono problem ( http://enthusiasm.org/post/31062742832 ), and the FRENZY credits problem that same night ( http://enthusiasm.org/post/31104514441 ). Saturday I viewed SHADOW OF A DOUBT ( http://enthusiasm.org/post/31153014639 ) and REAR WINDOW ( http://enthusiasm.org/post/31183475187 ) in full. Sunday I viewed ROPE ( http://enthusiasm.org/post/31250496642 ) and FRENZY in full. Writing up FRENZY notes at the moment.

Rough technical scores so far are:

SHADOW OF A DOUBT - 7/10
REAR WINDOW - 8.5/10
ROPE - 7.5/10

These three are safe.

Problem discs so far are definitely FRENZY (amateurish (and unnecessary?) re-rendering of opening title sequence replete with many errors; and the film itself has been DVNRed *smooth*) and FAMILY PLOT (some very heavy handed processing work has been carried out, it's a terrible Blu-ray, all over the shop, and a mess).

I briefly showed two non-industry classic film buff friends FRENZY and FAMILY PLOT tonight, without any explanation beforehand, to gauge their response – and they were seriously unimpressed. They thought FRENZY was waxy and scrubbed clean, and they didn't know what the hell was up with FAMILY PLOT ("How could someone think that's acceptable? It doesn't look anything like film." one said). They were super impressed with SHADOW, REAR, ROPE, and VERTIGO. We ran out of time and didn't look again at THE BIRDS.

Monday is my birthday but I'm crashing forward regardless with THE BIRDS and VERTIGO (what a treat!) – that is, unless the remaining 7 x Blu-rays arrive (they weren't ready until Friday apparently, and have been despatched). If the remaining 7 arrive, I'll spend 45 minutes with each one like I did on Friday, do my best to report first impressions as plainly and factually as I'm able, and cover VERTIGO and THE BIRDS on Tuesday.

Hoping other folk receive discs on Monday so they can take the pressure off a bit!

FRENZY - BD50 - R0 - Checkdisc date 30th July 2012
Length 01:55:52 / VC-1 / DTS-HD MA 2 Ch. 48kHz / Confirmed AR 1.85:1

Upshot: A completely re-rendered opening credit sequence for this new HD master introduces typographical inconsistencies, wrong fonts, typos, and multiple errors in crew members’ names. Parts of the film are slathered in noticeable DVNR which causes undesirable effects. I can’t recommend this disc. Dear Universal, when the credits get fixed (which hopefully involves simply putting the original credits back, regardless of softness or damage), please dial back the DVNR across the whole film too.

Why would Universal need to re-render the credit sequence? My guess is that they found clean, textless, undamaged footage of the opening helicopter shot and decided to try and recreate all the text to overlay it in order to save time cleaning up the actual, original opening credits. Bad practice, lazy, revisionist, disrespectful, fraught with potential catastrophe which has indeed backfired through sloppy execution. They’ve used unintelligent apostrophes and quote marks which smack of desktop publishing (post-1985) rather than a 35mm film from 1972; they’ve misspelt “fictitious” as “ficticious” and mucked up two crew members’ names (SEE HERE )

“Do a few misspellings really matter that much?” – Yes they do. “Nobody would really notice would they?” – That’s not the point. Think how insulting it is to these crewmembers, their families, descendants. This HD master of FRENZY will now become the master that everyone will see for decades on TV, on iTunes, in DCP, and on this bad disc.

We’re not seeing the film as released in 1972 and signed off by Hitchcock, we’re seeing an approximation of the opening titles, the text of which looks like a PS3 videogame, completely static, with digital fades between each piece of text. All done in a vain attempt to make the opening credits look a little better than they probably do, and to save cleaning up the original.

“How bad is the DVNR? Is it really a huge problem?” First impressions are that the film looks a bit too clean and smooth. In static shots, suspiciously inactive parts of the screen are paralysed by DVNR. In motion, resolution suffers as the DVNR realises it doesn’t have an algorithm to deal with this much movement. On much closer inspection, for example, a fascinating shot where Hitchcock locks the camera off on a doorway for TWENTY SECONDS with nothing happening in the frame (it’s at 00:36:50 and lasts until 00:37:12) the DVNR has the film grain in such a death lock that I genuinely thought I’d sat on the remote control and activated the pause button. It’s so unnatural and unfilmlike that it pulls the viewer out of the film. DVNR should be used sparingly, it should not be noticed, and should not cause any untoward effects. At times, parts of the film are soaked in DVNR which causes unwanted, unnecessary, and jarring effects.

If the credits were totally original, I’d give this disc a 4 (for the DVNR). It doesn’t matter if the original credits are soft and have a little damage. They should not be rebuilt. If the credits were totally original, and the DVNR was dialled back so that it didn’t freeze portions of the screen, I’d probably give it a 6 or 7.

As it stands, I think the decision to redo the opening titles was extremely cack-handed, and the re-rendering was executed in a similarly cack-handed manner befitting that of a one-man-band DVD label specializing in VHS>DVD rips, circa 1999. This is not the same Universal that made other great discs in this box set.

I give this Blu-ray 3/10 based on its technical merit.

* cack-hand·ed (kkhndd)

adj. Chiefly British
1. Left-handed.
2. Awkward; clumsy.
3. The new 2012 Blu-ray opening titles for Alfred Hitchcock’s FRENZY.


[from dialect cack excrement, from the fact that clumsy people usually make a mess; via Middle Low German or Middle Dutch from Latin cacāre to defecate]

The remaining 7 x *UK* Blu-rays are now in my grubby mitts. First up:

THE MAN WHO KNEW TOO MUCH
Confirmed AR: 1.85:1, AVC encode, feature length 02:00:18

Colours are strong, not faded. The resolution is superb. Noticeable damage in places, which is a slight shame, but first impressions are "phew".

More details with full notes later.

MARNIE quick look next...

MARNIE's not good I'm afraid. These are my MARNIE BD tweets (about the *UK* BD), excuse the 140 character limit:

I'm talking about the *UK* Blu-rays here, so I won't be clarifying that each time! MARNIE. Confirmed AR 1.85:1 on this BD. Credits original!

I'm pretty disappointed. It has a look I haven't seen yet from this set. Very noisy. I think the noise was grain in a past life.

What never comes across from grabs at internet review sites is how smthng looks in motion. How the grain resolves and how processing reacts.

Let's just say the Telecine Colourist on this one has dialled in the "Georges Seurat" setting (this is a detail): http://pbs.twimg.com/media/A2iaywnCcAEoLx-.jpg:large

I know it's a phone photograph of my television, and I know it's an exaggerated detail, but...

...so is this. Same phone, same TV, also a detail (from THE MAN WHO KNEW TOO MUCH): http://pbs.twimg.com/media/A2ibWPlCIAAjKO2.jpg:large

Whatever this MARNIE processing is (it's certainly not "smoothing") it succeeds in creating a gauze over the image and when Hitch pans, or there's any fast movement, the gauze gives us a horrible moiré effect. Worst on textures and patterns.

Yes, it's like bad colour printing on crockery — rather than anything to do with celluloid.

Remember ye olde analogue TV? When it was stormy outside and the TV reception got a little "snowy"? It's like that. Need to turn the aerial.

I'm continuing to watch MARNIE in the vain hope that someone turns the aerial and this gets better or something. I don't think it's going to.

If you could buy a guitar FX pedal for your TV called "1080p fuzz", you could play your old (US 1.85:1) MARNIE DVD through it, and get this.

Skipping chapters forward now on MARNIE to see if the picture quality changes any...

Wasn't expecting this.. the MARNIE fuzz that I've described 80% GOES AWAY at the start of Chapter 18 (01:55:55). The last 15 mins look okish.

So, why do chapters 1-17 have the 1080p Fuzz pedal switched on and it's switched off at the beginning of chapter 18? Something quite wrong.

Quick tweets about TOPAZ (UK BD):
TOPAZ - BD50 - R0 - Checkdisc date 25th July 2012 - seems to be US version? (USHE)
Length 02:22:09 / VC-1 / DTS-HD MA 2 Ch. 48kHz / Confirmed AR 1.85:1
I actually think this is the US BD. It has different menus to all the other discs I've reviewed (it has text menus, the other discs have textless icons). There is no Universal Centenary trailer, and the thing that really tips it is the fact that there are FBI / CIA / and MPAA screens (none of the other BDs so far have had these). [SEE LAST TWO POINTS]
----
Very suspicious of all the opening credits and opening titlecards of TOPAZ: http://pbs.twimg.com/media/A2i_W-lCMAA8JQ2.jpg:large
They're pure white, rock solid, not slightly transparent, have no grain, and... er.. slightly pixellated edges.
But they have not been retyped. Pretty sure they've been Magic Wanded in Photoshop. So nothing could go wrong, unless they missed a bit
TOPAZ BD looks just as you'd hope/expect. Normal, good, no major probs. Phew. I've only seen the first 15 mins tho.
Hopefully someone doesn't stomp on that "1080p fuzzbox" around chapter 10... Moving on to THE TROUBLE WITH HARRY...
----
Hmmm.... at the end of the film it says it's authored by Deluxe Digital (like all the other UK discs I've got). Perhaps all the US BDs were authored in the UK????? Would be great if a US reviewer could see if there is a Deluxe Digital logo at the very end of the feature on any US BD.
Another hmmm... my TOPAZ BD is the only disc that says 'USHE" (Universal Studios Home Entertainment) at the very top on the bodyprint. All the other discs I have say "UNIVERSAL PICTURES INT'L". There is a chance I have been sent the wrong territory disc. Either that or the UK are getting the US disc?