What in the hell happened to (remastered) An American Werewolf in London?! (1 Viewer)

[dpippel]

This shot shows a lot more detail. Look at her badge and jewelry.

http://caps-a-holic.com/c.php?go=1&a=0&d1=8867&d2=8866&s1=85263&s2=85249&i=4&l=0

This shot really shows off the problems with the original transfer IMO. But again, I'd love to hear from Robert about this Blu!

 

[pinknik]

This shot shows a lot more detail. Look at her badge and jewelry.

http://caps-a-holic.com/c.php?go=1&a=0&d1=8867&d2=8866&s1=85263&s2=85249&i=4&l=0

I prefer the look of the new one. The contrasty, edge enhanced look of the old disc bugged me from day one. I'll have to get the new one and see for myself in motion on my TV. The earlier disc gives a punchy, grainy illusion of detail, while the new one clearly has more actual detail. I agree that it looks slightly soft at the same time, though.

Nothing like the Patton first blu-ray, however. That didn't have any detail:

http://caps-a-holic.com/c.php?go=1&a=0&d1=1744&d2=1743&s1=16389&s2=16379&i=5&l=0

 

[pinknik]

Oh, and P.S. Mmmmm, Nurse Price.

 

[Konstantinos]

I'll have to get the new one and see for myself in motion on my TV.

I really don't understand this, which I see many people say.
(without any offence)
Maybe it's because I'm seeing screenshots and watch Blurays on the same screen?
I mean, NEVER have I seen a Bluray in motion that looks better or worse than the screenshots I have seen.
If the screenshots show no grain, then this will be evident in the Bluray in motion.
If the screenshots show nicely resolved grain, then this too will be evident in motion.

Is it just me?

 

[Worth]

I compared the new disc to the old one last night. While the new one has certainly been de-grained, I didn't find it hugely objectionable, and I'm no fan of DNR. I'd put it on par with the Bond films or even something like Jaws, which everyone else seemed to love, but I found overly scrubbed. The "grain" on the old one looks more like noise and it's been excessively sharpened. The remastered disc is certainly a step up from the old disc, with more real detail and a more natural appearance.

 

[Dave H]

I found it much worse than Jaws. This grain that has been reduced leads to trails of artifacts (blotchiness, etc.).

 

[pinknik]

I really don't understand this, which I see many people say.
(without any offence)
Maybe it's because I'm seeing screenshots and watch Blurays on the same screen?
I mean, NEVER have I seen a Bluray in motion that looks better or worse than the screenshots I have seen.
If the screenshots show no grain, then this will be evident in the Bluray in motion.
If the screenshots show nicely resolved grain, then this too will be evident in motion.

Is it just me?

No offense taken. The reason I say it, is because I saw screen caps of Pan's Labyrinth blu-rays. The American disc clearly lost some detail vs. the European in the screen caps. The American blu-ray on my TV looked just fine. Might the European blu-ray look even better on my TV? Possibly, but I didn't find the American disc objectionable enough (as a viewing experience) to sway me to buy the other disc.

I've also seen screen grabs that show instances of horrible cropping of an open matte image. When I've watched the actual movie, I realized the screen cap was just a brief moment on the screen.

So, in my experience, a screen capture doesn't tell the whole story.

I think the screen caps of the new American Werewolf disc look superior to the old disc, with the exception of possibly seeming a little soft. If I watch the disc and that issue doesn't bug me, then the disc is a win for me.

 

[TravisR]

Unlike the first AWIL disc, the new disc has the "When in Hollywood Visit Universal Studios (Ask For Babs)" card at the end of the movie. I have no clue if that was on the movie in 1981 though.

 

[ahollis]

Unlike the first AWIL disc, the new disc has the "When in Hollywood Visit Universal Studios (Ask For Babs)" card at the end of the movie. I have no clue if that was on the movie in 1981 though.

I think all John Landis films from Universal contained that end card from Animal House through Blues Brothers 2000.

 

[Worth]

I found it much worse than Jaws. This grain that has been reduced leads to trails of artifacts (blotchiness, etc.).

I didn't watch the whole thing, just scanned through selected scenes. I didn't notice any smearing or trailing, but there was a bit of blotchiness and frozen grain, especially in the opening shots with opticals. Neither disc gets it right, but overall I think the new one is still an improvement.

 

[Dave H]

As the camera pans in some of the outdoor scenes, this effect I refer to is rather evident in the skies as it's easier to see. However, I am also watching this on a large screen so it might just depend on that.

I agree, it's an improvement over the original disc for sure, but disappointing to me none the less as it does not look filmic. If this would have been treated like remastered Apollo 13 I would be thrilled.

 

[Lord Dalek]

Well this film has always looked awful on home video for some reason or another. Nice to see that grand tradition continue.

 

[John Sparks]

Got to see all the full size models for this movie at Rick Baker's Halloween Party at his warehouse back in the late 1990's...cool and they were very large!

I think until we see the newest incarnation in motion, just looking at still shots may not do justice to the new version.

I don't see how the new version can show more detail (in the still shots) but still show a fuzzy picture overall compared to the last version...which, in the examples...does look like shit!

 

[Konstantinos]

I don't see how the new version can show more detail (in the still shots)

Maybe now?
http://caps-a-holic.com/c.php?a=2&x=549&y=252&d1=8867&d2=8866&s1=85263&s2=85249&l=1&i=4&go=1

 

[John Sparks]

They're screwing with us, I tell ya!!

 

[RJ992]

Oh, and P.S. Mmmmm, Nurse Price.

Hope you caught her appearance in CAPT AMERICA: WINTER SOLDIER

 

[Nick*Z]

The new disc is vastly superior to the 'full moon' edition; the grain everyone is talking about on the old transfer was largely the result of artificial boosting. What many are referring to herein as a de-graining process is actually truer to the original film elements.

The 'grain' in the previous release was primarily compression-based and exaggerated by artificial sharpening tools, which Universal loved to apply to virtually all of its first generation Blu releases; believing that sharpness alone was a cause to label any Blu-ray 'an improvement' over the DVD release.

Uni has since gone back to rethink that flawed methodology. Have they succeeded herein? Hmmmm.

Colors on the 'restored edition' are undeniably truer to the original color spectrum; no artificial boosting, no red bias either. Contrast is subtler, black levels deeper, flesh tones more nuanced.

Movies are not really meant to be paused, then analyzed and scrutinized in freeze frame. Don't do it. You'll find too much to complain about, and not just on this release. A pointless exercise IMO.

Does this 'restored edition look good in motion - yes.
Are the colors more refined than the previous edition. Yes.
Is the grain better resolved - except in cases where optical printing of titles has been applied - yes - and even then, better than the original Blu release.

Does this release deserve our respect. Yes.

Is it perfect?
No.

Could it have been better.
Debatable.

Will we get 'perfection' from Universal.
Don't hold your breath.

But you can retire the old Blu-ray. It's a Frisbee compared to this reissue. Good stuff from a studio that, believe it or not, is trying to earn back disc collectors' trust.

 

[pinknik]

Hope you caught her appearance in CAPT AMERICA: WINTER SOLDIER

I haven't but I shall. Thanks.

 

[TravisR]

The new disc is vastly superior to the 'full moon' edition; the grain everyone is talking about on the old transfer was largely the result of artificial boosting. What many are referring to herein as a de-graining process is actually truer to the original film elements.

The 'grain' in the previous release was primarily compression-based and exaggerated by artificial sharpening tools, which Universal loved to apply to virtually all of its first generation Blu releases; believing that sharpness alone was a cause to label any Blu-ray 'an improvement' over the DVD release.

Uni has since gone back to rethink that flawed methodology. Have they succeeded herein? Hmmmm.

Colors on the 'restored edition' are undeniably truer to the original color spectrum; no artificial boosting, no red bias either. Contrast is subtler, black levels deeper, flesh tones more nuanced.

Movies are not really meant to be paused, then analyzed and scrutinized in freeze frame. Don't do it. You'll find too much to complain about, and not just on this release. A pointless exercise IMO.

Does this 'restored edition look good in motion - yes.
Are the colors more refined than the previous edition. Yes.
Is the grain better resolved - except in cases where optical printing of titles has been applied - yes - and even then, better than the original Blu release.

Does this release deserve our respect. Yes.

Is it perfect?
No.

Could it have been better.
Debatable.

Will we get 'perfection' from Universal.
Don't hold your breath.

But you can retire the old Blu-ray. It's a Frisbee compared to this reissue. Good stuff from a studio that, believe it or not, is trying to earn back disc collectors' trust.

I'm certainly no expert and I don't have a screen anywhere near the size of many here but I basically agree with Nick's assessment of the disc.

 

[Robert Crawford]

At $11.99, I just bought this release from Amazon.