The official BLADE RUNNER SE thread. (Check out page 8 and #790.) (1 Viewer)

[Will_B]

StevePA you have the Zen edition.

 

[Joe D]

I got the 4 disc Blade Runner set in SD this week and I popped it in my player because I wanted to check out the transfer. I hadn't expected to watch the whole thing, but the transfer quality and the colors just blew me away so much that I watched the whole thing.

 

[Lord Dalek]

...unless, as I've stated before, you have my SD briefcase edition, which has the sticker, and no number whatsoever on it...nothing, nada, just a blank hologram Blade Runner sticker, and nothing else

....
COLLECTOR'S ITEM!

 

[JamesTLewis]

Watched the final cut saturday and Dangerous Days today.
Staggering. Amazing.
It really is Final.
To think that all those reels were going to be junked!
Facinating to see Jerry Perenchio... I wonder if it really was him holding things up all these years.. But as Charlie said.. those 5 years gave the tech time to catch up with what they now wanted to do...
so it all worked out wonderfully in the end.

 

[Stephen_J_H]

I was watching the DC on Friday night and was thoroughly amazed by the sharpness and presence of natural film grain. I used the zoom function on my DVD player just to get a closer look and it holds up beautifully. No EE and beautiful, natural film grain. Wow! I can't wait to watch the Final Cut this weekend.

 

[Lord Dalek]

^hmmm, I thought I saw some light aliasing on the Archive Editions due to some very light vertical edge enhancement

 

[Mark_Mc]

I already own the SD 5-disc edition, but I saw a digital presentation of the Final Cut last week at a local cinema.
WOW. I've never seen BR on the big screen before, and this presentation was better than I could have hoped - the detail, colour, everything was just staggering quality.
I've watched all the documentaries on the discs, and I'm currently re-reading my old copy of Future Noir, which I havn't looked at in years. The story of this film, before a frame had even been shot, is fascinating - reading the book I lost count of the times i was shaking my head at some of the events that occured.
I was too young to Blade Runner on its original release, and I've only ever seen the 92 DC and the Final Cut, so will have to sit down and watch the US or International Cut, and the Workprint soon, to check out differences.
Thanks, Charlie, for your years' of hard work!

 

[Yee-Ming]

Facinating to see Jerry Perenchio... I wonder if it really was him holding things up all these years.. But as Charlie said.. those 5 years gave the tech time to catch up with what they now wanted to do...
so it all worked out wonderfully in the end.

I had the same thoughts when watching Dangerous Days (BTW, big huge to Charlie for what must surely be the documentary of the year!). I note that DD glossed over the legal hellhole that BR had been stuck in, and I certainly understand why it's not raised -- in an sense, now that the ultimate BR set has indeed been released, it's moot and the set will stand for a long time, but it would be interesting to know the details. Of course, it could simply be something as mundane as the percentages, e.g. Perenchio/Yorkin were only prepared to let WB have x%, WB wanted more.
Just as we're all curious as to what Charlie had to cut out of the Alien3 making of documentary. At least in Kingdom of Heaven Ridley and the producers did discuss how they basically 'bamboozled' the studio by shooting all the footage the needed for the full-length version Ridley wanted to make, edited the theatrical cut the studio wanted but knowing full well they could revisit it with the proper intended cut as a "director's cut" on DVD.
Geez Charlie, don't you ever work on uncontroversial movies?

 

[JediFonger]

having the BD set as well as seeing on the big screen, i still prefer the big screen.
since this is warner... could u have imagined BR on the IMAX!?!?!?!!?!??!!??! that would have ROCKED BIG TIME!

 

[Charles de Lauzirika]

Geez Charlie, don't you ever work on uncontroversial movies?

But those are the best kind!

 

[oscar_merkx]

what is your next controversial project ?

 

[mike kaminski]

Charlie, have you anything to say about the percieved sound mix issues in the DC on disk three? We're all still in the dark as to what your view on this is.

 

[Dharmesh C]

When I watched the Final Cut for the first time on Christmas Day: The opening imagery blew me away. The depth of the bass gave me the shivers. That synergy of vision and sound is something I've rarely witnessed.

 

[Charles de Lauzirika]

Charlie, have you anything to say about the percieved sound mix issues in the DC on disk three?

Lots, but nothing I can share right now. However, it should be noted that the 2.0 track is correct, so the 1992 Director's Cut is still preserved in the set.

 

[mike kaminski]

Lots, but nothing I can share right now. However, it should be noted that the 2.0 track is correct, so the 1992 Director's Cut is still preserved in the set.

True, we can watch the proper DC in 2.0., so we're none worse off than the previous release at least.
Please share your thoughts on the 5.1 mix issues when you can though, there are a lot of people wondering whats going on (well, maybe not a lot--but some of us!).

 

[cafink]

Am I to assume, then, that both previous DVD releases of the 1992 Director's Cut contained only a 2.0 soundtrack, and no a 5.1 track?

 

[Lord Dalek]

Am I to assume, then, that both previous DVD releases of the 1992 Director's Cut contained only a 2.0 soundtrack, and no a 5.1 track?

Yup.The materials simply didn't exist to do a 5.1 mix of the DC since the film was only issued in 35mm and came at a time when Dolby Digital mixes were fairly rare.

 

[mike kaminski]

Yup.The materials simply didn't exist to do a 5.1 mix of the DC since the film was only issued in 35mm and came at a time when Dolby Digital mixes were fairly rare.

It would probably be a four-track stereo matrix though. Is the DVD 2.0 mix a surround matrix?

 

[Stephen_J_H]

Yes. It's identical to the track used on the DC only release from 2006.

 

[Roy Batty]

Somewhat off-topic, but, does anybody know why Paul Sammon's revised and expanded edition of his FUTURE NOIR has been published in the UK but not in the USA?