|
Don't buy Texas Chainsaw Masscre Special Edition!
I just bought the Texas Chainsaw Massacre Special Edition that came out today and it looks worse than the previous version that came out on dvd. It says that it has a new digital transfer supervised by the director, but it looks worse than the one with Leatherface on the cover. Don't buy it! I am going to write the company and ask them why it looks worse.
|
But it has a picture of ground beef on the front!
|
How many threads are we gonna get about this DVD.
|
has anyone here ever seen this movie when it first came out in the theater????
I have and belive me the video on this is the best its gonna get in my opinion? Pic quality was never that great to begin with. I still dont see anything wrong wth the first version DVD. The pic looked great to me and has a ton of extras |
Don't go in the water!!!
|
I had a chance to see the film in a theater once, and Deke is exactly right..
Most of the appeal and what makes the film work, is the gritty look of the film.. Polishing it up, taking out blemishes, blah blah blah, is not gonna help, but take away from the film. I haven't seen the new version, but i think the old pioneer version was fine.. next we'll hear that it should have DTS sound...ehhhhhhh |
already decided to stick with my old dvd, even as the ground meat was sooooo tempting :rolleyes:
|
This isn't Attack of the Clones, and it was never meant to look or sound like it. This was a low budge flick and whether the gritty look of the movie was intentional or the nature of the medium, it's ridiculous to want a clean, crisp release when it wasn't ever shown like that in the first place.
You might as well demand Kevin Smith release a remastered and colorized version of Clerks with DTS 5.1 |
I demand that Kevin Smith release a remastered and colorized version of Clerks! With DTS 5.1! :D
|
I had a chance to see the film in a theater once, and Deke is exactly right.. Most of the appeal and what makes the film work, is the gritty look of the film.. Polishing it up, taking out blemishes, blah blah blah, is not gonna help, but take away from the film. I haven't seen the new version, but i think the old pioneer version was fine.. And I suspect that some of you simply don't know the history of the original transfer, how the incorrect work print was used, etc. I believe The Digital Bits describes this in some detail in their review, and of course it's been discussed frequently here. I think the original transfer is plenty good enough to enjoy this film, even though the restored print wasn't used (by complete accident, apparently). But don't kid yourself by thinking "this is the way Toby intended it to look". It isn't. At least, not quite. |
Guys, it's the same damn dvd as the earlier one with different packaging. Non-anamorphic, "early dvd" transfer.
It could look plenty better. |
I'll hang on to my laserdisc from Elite which still has the superior picture over all the dvd versions.
|
Originally posted by Richard Malloy Hooper did not intentionally "distress" the film, like Merhige did in "Begotten", for example. These assertions otherwise are bogus, and have nothing to do with the way Hooper intended the film to look. And I suspect that some of you simply don't know the history of the original transfer, how the incorrect work print was used, etc. I believe The Digital Bits describes this in some detail in their review, and of course it's been discussed frequently here. I think the original transfer is plenty good enough to enjoy this film, even though the restored print wasn't used (by complete accident, apparently). But don't kid yourself by thinking "this is the way Toby intended it to look". It isn't. At least, not quite. The first Pioneer dvd release was ok in my book. |
Originally posted by Deke Rivers my point is if there is an alleged better print out there then it hasnt seen the light of day in the theater or on video so why fret over it? The first Pioneer dvd release was ok in my book. |
already decided to stick with my old dvd, even as the ground meat was sooooo tempting |
Originally posted by insanecollector Ditto! Though the plastic slip cover looked a little weak. |
Originally posted by ChrisHicks screwed mine up trying to remove a stupid CC security sticker. Me too. I spent like 10 minutes at work trying to get if off, and once I did there was goop everywhere. So my sleeve is pretty much ruined. Oh well, I bought it for the movie, not the case. But it's still pretty irritating. |
Originally posted by Richard Malloy Hooper did not intentionally "distress" the film, like Merhige did in "Begotten", for example. These assertions otherwise are bogus, and have nothing to do with the way Hooper intended the film to look. (...) I think the original transfer is plenty good enough to enjoy this film, even though the restored print wasn't used (by complete accident, apparently). But don't kid yourself by thinking "this is the way Toby intended it to look". It isn't. At least, not quite. Painstakingly restored from the original 16mm ECO negatives this SE presents Tobe Hooper's classic film as you've never seen it before! Supervised by the director, this letterboxed High Definition SuperScan (??? -me) release minimizes the film grain and gives detail and sharpness not possible with standard film to tape transfers. The film's look was redesigned to reflect Hooper's original vision of higher contrast images and color. The hot sun now casts an amber hue upon the dry Texas landscape... I don't think anyone is saying he distressed the film, just saying that this movie was not meant to look pristine. |
Wow...
Best Buy sold out, Circuit City only few left. |
Originally posted by Bronkster I demand that Kevin Smith release a remastered and colorized version of Clerks! With DTS 5.1! :D |
|
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:14 AM. |
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.