Looks like Bram Stoker's Dracula is coming to BD this fall...
10-07-07, 11:37 AM
#227
Suspended
Originally Posted by indiansbsa
So Green is not Drac's color. Hmm. How about this. Red represents Dracula alone, green represents Dracula with Mina. Outside of the green in the "you have never loved" scene, see the green mist later in the movie, the green light on Dracula while hanging from the Abbey when the vampire hunters came for him, just to name a few places to spot the new green motif with Dracula. Seems perfectly plausible to me that these color changes were made and/or restored from the master print for a damn good reason.
Last edited by baracine; 10-07-07 at 12:31 PM.
10-07-07, 11:39 AM
#228
Suspended
Originally Posted by Shannon Nutt
But that's not the argument we're getting...what we are getting are statements that the movie has been changed back to the way it ORIGINALLY appeared in theaters and anyone who disputes that this new version is the way the original theatrical prints looked is simply "remembering wrong".
To which I reply:
BTW, god bless Roger Ebert...here's a look at the original review of DRACULA, along with some clips from the original film - note the blue-lit bride sequence and how Ebert gives the movie thumbs-up because of its visual look:
http://bventertainment.go.com/tv/bue...subsec=dracula
To which I reply:
Spoiler:
BTW, god bless Roger Ebert...here's a look at the original review of DRACULA, along with some clips from the original film - note the blue-lit bride sequence and how Ebert gives the movie thumbs-up because of its visual look:
http://bventertainment.go.com/tv/bue...subsec=dracula
The man has covered all his bases:
Bram Stoker's Dracula does not fully replicate the film image, and personally I don't care. (From: http://www.hometheaterforum.com/htf/...2&postcount=22 )
To Dave Mack...
1. The earlier SD and laserdisc releases were wrong. They were poorly mastered in HD, which is why we have a new master. Why was the Criterion laserdisc emblazoned with an "Approved" logo? Think studio politics.
2. The shots used in the documentary do not match. They are not supposed to match. They are there to do two things - allow a visual discussion of the fx, and to better match the rest of the documentary.
THE FOLLOWING IS NOT TO DAVE MACK, HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH DAVE MACK, AND SHOULD ONLY BE READ BY DAVE MACK AT HIS PERIL:
As far as what something looked like when it played at one's local cinema in 1992...
One more time...
Local cinemas don't matter. They generally provide a visually corrupt image in terms of color, density, focus and content. On top of that, they generally run poor quality prints. Local cinemas are the worst places to attempt to judge film.
As to the Answer Print, it would be on LPP stock, and should not have changed, especially as vaulted.
Lastly, and for the very last time. Cease and desist from making comparisons to earlier versions which are a meaningless "reference" and a waste of one's time.
RAH
(From: http://www.hometheaterforum.com/htf/...2&postcount=49 )
1. The earlier SD and laserdisc releases were wrong. They were poorly mastered in HD, which is why we have a new master. Why was the Criterion laserdisc emblazoned with an "Approved" logo? Think studio politics.
2. The shots used in the documentary do not match. They are not supposed to match. They are there to do two things - allow a visual discussion of the fx, and to better match the rest of the documentary.
THE FOLLOWING IS NOT TO DAVE MACK, HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH DAVE MACK, AND SHOULD ONLY BE READ BY DAVE MACK AT HIS PERIL:
As far as what something looked like when it played at one's local cinema in 1992...
One more time...
Local cinemas don't matter. They generally provide a visually corrupt image in terms of color, density, focus and content. On top of that, they generally run poor quality prints. Local cinemas are the worst places to attempt to judge film.
As to the Answer Print, it would be on LPP stock, and should not have changed, especially as vaulted.
Lastly, and for the very last time. Cease and desist from making comparisons to earlier versions which are a meaningless "reference" and a waste of one's time.
RAH
(From: http://www.hometheaterforum.com/htf/...2&postcount=49 )
Last edited by baracine; 10-07-07 at 12:30 PM.
10-07-07, 12:45 PM
#229
DVD Talk Gold Edition
Originally Posted by baracine
Here are two other stills from the same batch: 
Originally Posted by baracine
The man is spouting more gibberish than a Republican senator caught with his pants down in an airport men's room.
10-07-07, 01:04 PM
#230
Suspended
Originally Posted by Burnt Thru
it's noticable that in neither of these photos does lucy look blue. she's wearing a white dress as in the new transfer.
pointless insults asside, robert harris is entirely correct. forgetting for a second that nobody here can really remember what a film looked like in detail many years later, despite what they might like to believe... local cinemas are not a good place to view a film if you are looking to provide a definative view of that movie. the prints are often damaged and poorly handled and the equipment is genereally not properly calibrated.
And what Harris says is that the original print is no reference, the original theatrical run is no reference, your memory of the original run is no reference, the multiple video incarnations are no reference... The only reference, according to Harris, is the answer print, which he has probably never seen, and his word for it that the video authors did a great job following that answer print.
Last edited by baracine; 10-07-07 at 01:28 PM.
10-07-07, 02:30 PM
#231
Member
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 96
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Local cinemas are the worst places to attempt to judge film.
10-07-07, 04:37 PM
#232
Banned by request
Originally Posted by Shannon Nutt
But that's not the argument we're getting...what we are getting are statements that the movie has been changed back to the way it ORIGINALLY appeared in theaters and anyone who disputes that this new version is the way the original theatrical prints looked is simply "remembering wrong".
To which I reply:
To which I reply:
Spoiler:
10-07-07, 06:23 PM
#233
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 9,334
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I said it before Francis Ford Coppola had enough pull in 1993 to tell somebody that the prints going to theaters were not his vision of the movie.
If it was an issue, he would have the prints pulled. What they did to this movie is turn it into somekind of Underworld look.
Give me back the colors please or at least put a disclaimer on the back of this box, that this movie is not what you saw in theaters.
If it was an issue, he would have the prints pulled. What they did to this movie is turn it into somekind of Underworld look.
Give me back the colors please or at least put a disclaimer on the back of this box, that this movie is not what you saw in theaters.
10-07-07, 06:23 PM
#234
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 9,334
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
it's noticable that in neither of these photos does lucy look blue. she's wearing a white dress as in the new transfer.
10-07-07, 09:44 PM
#236
Suspended
Originally Posted by bunkaroo
I looked at the Ebert video, and the bride scene doesn't look as blue on there as it does on the SB DVD. Just my opinion.
10-07-07, 10:06 PM
#237
DVD Talk Legend
Originally Posted by baracine
The screen caps posted by Davy Mack are in reality photographs of his TV monitor. They exaggerate the colour saturation. On my rear projection TV, in non-torch mode, the same scene from the Superbit edition is much more subdued but the blue is still the overriding colour.
I'm not stating anything about what's right or wrong. I'm simply noting my observations.
11-26-07, 06:44 PM
#238
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 576
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by baracine
The screen caps posted by Davy Mack are in reality photographs of his TV monitor. They exaggerate the colour saturation. On my rear projection TV, in non-torch mode, the same scene from the Superbit edition is much more subdued but the blue is still the overriding colour.
VERY dramatic difference in color.
Here you can clearly see the crushed blacks in this scene.
Here are xylon's shots made a bit smaller...
Just IMHO, the BD looks unnatural, processed, digital, flat and just bad.
I have a light cannon of a PJ, a mits hc3000 and turning up the "brightness" here, even all the way does not reveal the writing, it's just gone.
And what was confirmed was that a "REP" from Zoetrope relayed Coppolla's wishes for the tranfer to the people doing it. AFAIK, he himself was NOT there and didn't "personally" supervise it.
More caps here...
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...=925329&page=7
Last edited by Davy Mack; 11-26-07 at 06:50 PM.
09-15-14, 11:02 PM
#249
DVD Talk Ultimate Edition
Re: Looks like Bram Stoker's Dracula is coming to BD this fall...
My reply from last night seems to have been lost. So to keep it short.
I finally saw the blu-ray release of this film after avoiding it for years based on the supposed bad transfer. Don't let the rumors that people believe about this transfer being terrible keep you from viewing it yourself. Their is color in the film: blues,reds,orange/yellow, everything 'pops' when appropriate. It looks far more film like than the past dvd releases which people seem to prefer. So the color was not completely drained from the film, much to my surprise. It's an eye candy visual spectacle and actually made me a fan of the film again after being underwhelmed by the past dvd release and thinking maybe it's just a change of taste since I was a kid. But nope, the film's still an amazing visual piece and one of a kind.
I finally saw the blu-ray release of this film after avoiding it for years based on the supposed bad transfer. Don't let the rumors that people believe about this transfer being terrible keep you from viewing it yourself. Their is color in the film: blues,reds,orange/yellow, everything 'pops' when appropriate. It looks far more film like than the past dvd releases which people seem to prefer. So the color was not completely drained from the film, much to my surprise. It's an eye candy visual spectacle and actually made me a fan of the film again after being underwhelmed by the past dvd release and thinking maybe it's just a change of taste since I was a kid. But nope, the film's still an amazing visual piece and one of a kind.
09-15-14, 11:06 PM
#250
Moderator
Re: Looks like Bram Stoker's Dracula is coming to BD this fall...
My reply from last night seems to have been lost. So to keep it short.
I finally saw the blu-ray release of this film after avoiding it for years based on the supposed bad transfer. Don't let the rumors that people believe about this transfer being terrible keep you from viewing it yourself. Their is color in the film: blues,reds,orange/yellow, everything 'pops' when appropriate. It looks far more film like than the past dvd releases which people seem to prefer. So the color was not completely drained from the film, much to my surprise. It's an eye candy visual spectacle and actually made me a fan of the film again after being underwhelmed by the past dvd release and thinking maybe it's just a change of taste since I was a kid. But nope, the film's still an amazing visual piece and one of a kind.
I finally saw the blu-ray release of this film after avoiding it for years based on the supposed bad transfer. Don't let the rumors that people believe about this transfer being terrible keep you from viewing it yourself. Their is color in the film: blues,reds,orange/yellow, everything 'pops' when appropriate. It looks far more film like than the past dvd releases which people seem to prefer. So the color was not completely drained from the film, much to my surprise. It's an eye candy visual spectacle and actually made me a fan of the film again after being underwhelmed by the past dvd release and thinking maybe it's just a change of taste since I was a kid. But nope, the film's still an amazing visual piece and one of a kind.