This Island Earth and The Deadly Mantis ? (1 Viewer)

[John Sparks]

I just emailed them asking why they are doing that and why they did it for the A&B later titles. I know they won't respond, but I tried.

 

[Daniel Bakken]

This Island Earth needs a special edition treatment, not a dumpy rerelease that didn't look as good as my LD. I'm still hopeful that the info isn't correct, and we'll get a real anamorphic widescreen release. Anyone know if the 1.33 version is open or p&s?

 

[Jack Theakston]

Open.

 

[Eric Huffstutler]

If what Jack says is true and the movie is Open matte rather than P&S, then we have no room to complain since we will be getting more picture rather than less. Our concern then is to focus on print quality and extras.

Eric

 

[GregK]

Jack has also posted reference scans from an original(!) Technicolor print, and offers three different aspect ratios to view. A "must-see" comparison, and can be viewed by going to Post 29 via this previous HTF thread- http://www.hometheaterforum.com/htf/...9&postcount=29

 

[Peter Apruzzese]

You're getting "more" picture, but not the "right" picture, with open-matte. There's plenty of room for complaints, either we want OAR or we don't.

 

[Eric Huffstutler]

Peter, I prefer OAR also but more so when it concerns P&S. I doubt you will hear as many complaints from people who know that the movie hasn't been hacked up using P&S as opposed to seeing it Open Matte. At least with Open you get the same picture as 1:85 (or whatever) but more picture as a bonus. What you will see is how it was filmed minus the screen reduction (matte) done for theater viewing.

Put some black strips of paper at the top and bottom of your screen if you want it OAR

 

[Jack Theakston]

I'm going to bite my fingers and disregard that last post.

Aside from a widescreen presentation, it would be nice to see a new release with THIS ISLAND EARTH's original, Perspecta Stereo sound mix included as an option (with an original mono, of course). It's quite effective, and Universal (unknowingly) has it right on their optical track negative!

 

[Eric Huffstutler]

Jack... don't bite it off

I am only thinking logically here and may not be the opinion of others. Which would you rather have... a 1:33 film that has been matted to 1:85 and loose some of the picture on the top and bottom or a film that was matted to simulate 1:85 (the above) and that matte removed to give you more of the picture hidden under it on the top and bottom? That is what I am thinking. It's not the same as a P&S

Eric

 

[Steve Christou]

I'm with Eric here, unmatted is far preferable to P&S but doesn't excuse the fact studios could just as easily present the film in it's correct ratio. I remember watching a lot of unmatted films on video back in the 80's, and didn't they look funny? Especially memorable were the Death Wish films, the mike was visible in practically every shot, I didn't know about matting back then so I used to wonder why the filmmakers didn't care that I can see the microphone right there wavering above Charlie Bronson's head clear as day, following him about in some scenes. Reminded me of a skit in Kentucky Fried Movie.

But asking for an anamorphic This Island Earth may be pushing our luck though, if dvd companies didn't think it was worth it for the original unaltered Star Wars trilogy what chance a 50 year old sci-fi film ridiculed on MST3K?

 

[Peter Apruzzese]

I'd rather have a film that was designed to be shown at 1.85 released on DVD in the OAR with anamorphic enhancement; the best of both worlds: the correct image and the extra resolution of the enhancement process.

What they could do is to release it both ways on the same disc, that way the "more picture" crowd is happy and the "correct picture, with extra resolution" crowd is happy.

 

[Eric Huffstutler]

Peter, OK... educate me. I am under the assumption "anamorphic" was a term that is used to define a transfer taken one generation closer, if not from the original source elements, meaning finer grain and clearer picture - not an "enhancement"?

That the "enhancements" comes in with edge enhancement that many dislike?

 

[Peter Apruzzese]

No, "anamorphic" enhancemnt is not "edge enhancement". "Anamorphic enhancement", or more correctly "enhanced for widescreen" (as Warner designates it) is a process whereby the DVD can provide 30% *greater* resolution on a widescreen TV than a non-enhanced (simple letterbox)transfer.

Read here: http://www.thedigitalbits.com/officialfaq.html#3.5 for more technical information.

 

[Eric Huffstutler]

Peter... ahhhh, I wonder how many others out there are thinking like me about anamorphic? I know what you are saying about the 16x9 "enhancement" but what about a film that is 1:33 anamorphic?

 

[Peter Apruzzese]

There would be no reason to "widescreen-enhance" a 1.33 movie, which is why they don't do it.

 

[Jack Theakston]

Yes, Pete's point is valid. In a 16x9 transfer (even if it is matted down to the CORRECT aspect ratio of 2:1), you will still find more resolution detail than a full-frame transfer.

If I went to a movie theater in 1955, I'm sure I wouldn't have seen this film presented full frame. Why that should be any different at my home is beyond me.

 

[Steve Christou]

Well it's been playing full frame in everyone's home for decades so I don't know why it would be so strange now.

I'm kidding of course, though sometimes you never can tell. According to this ancient Variety review dated March 1955 the ratio for This Island Earth was 2:1, that's wider than Conquest of Space released the same year at 1:85. So hopefully when it's rereleased on DVD it'll be in it's "optimum" ratio, otherwise some of us poor sods we'll have to zoom in and try to approximate that original cinema presentation in our ahem 'screening' rooms.

Or worse case scenario, close the curtains, lock the doors, sit back and watch the film unmatted and spot things human eyes were never meant to see.

 

[Jack Theakston]

My reiteration only stems from something in the back of my head that says, "the squeaky wheel gets the grease!" I'm bring these things up because it seems like no one at Universal is aware of these things.

Yes, we HAVE seen THIS ISLAND EARTH in full frame for years. That's why people are having a hard time getting past the fact that this might be a better movie when shown the way it should be. Presented properly on home video, perhaps the film may be reaccessed by the public.

 

[Jack Theakston]

http://www.thephotoplayer.com/thisislandearth.jpg

 

[Steve Christou]

That's it Jack. My review was in a book I bought ages ago called Variety's Complete Science Fiction Reviews. Fascinating book, each review is unedited and exactly how it appeared in that issue of Variety, while at their website many of their old archived movie reviews have been cut down to a paragraph or two.

So, hopefully, fingers crossed, This Island Earth will be released in it's proper ratio, it'll make a change to see it as audiences did 51 years ago instead of the usual 1.33 I'm used to.