WHV Press Release: The Exorcist Extended Director's Cut (Blu-ray) (1 Viewer)

[Steve Christou]

Damn. I liked that WB logo. I wish they'd kept it on the theatrical. I might not bother with this release than. It is a deal breaker for me.

 

[Powell&Pressburger]

Originally Posted by Eric Scott Richard


Bummer about the logo. It set the creepy tone for the movie the way it came toward the screen and then back.

Exactly!!!! You got it! ESP the opening chords ofthe score, very effective.

 

[Powell&Pressburger]

Originally Posted by Steve Christou


Damn. I liked that WB logo. I wish they'd kept it on the theatrical. I might not bother with this release than. It is a deal breaker for me.

From what someone stated about the logo over at blu-ray.com they seem to use the new logo but use a diff color scheme on it.... I say buy it but I really miss the logo so much. Saul Bass created that classic logo. I love that logo. Seems the suits at Warners hate it. It part of motion picture history and don't want to preserve it. Very sad.

 

[marcco00]

so the 'extended director's cut' IS 'the version you have never seen' cut under a different name?


all i want is the original version, in SD.

 

[Steve Christou]

Originally Posted by Powell&Pressburger /forum/thread/301587/whv-press-release-the-exorcist-extended-director-s-cut-blu-ray/60#post_3736029

 

[Dwayne]

i picked this up today at best buy (where they didn't receive any copies of the maltese falcon). can't wait to watch it. . .


color me surprised as well in regards to the lack of reviews.


fwiw, i prefer the original logo as well.

 

I picked this up today. It looks and sounds amazing! The new logo is the shield but smaller and over a black background. The shield is an icy silver and the design looks updated as well. The music starts before the logo appears. At the end, there are new restoration credits and then the logo appears a final time.

 

[Dwayne]

Originally Posted by Eric Scott Richard

I picked this up today. It looks and sounds amazing! The new logo is the shield but smaller and over a black background. The shield is an icy silver and the design looks updated as well. The music starts before the logo appears. At the end, there are new restoration credits and then the logo appears a final time.

Are the new restoration credits on both cuts?

 

I haven't looked, but the restoration credits are on the theatrical cut.

 

[Powell&Pressburger]

Originally Posted by Eric Scott Richard


I picked this up today. It looks and sounds amazing! The new logo is the shield but smaller and over a black background. The shield is an icy silver and the design looks updated as well. The music starts before the logo appears. At the end, there are new restoration credits and then the logo appears a final time.

The logo used is the same logo that precedes CONTACT

 

[JoshB]

I like how they included a feature on The Exorcist Locations: Georgetown Then and Now. Interested to see whats different about the area. Had WB asked for my assistance, I could have got them a few clips of Ninewah in Northern Iraq (Sinjar, near the Syrian border) where the opening of the movie was filmed. But if the are has survived almost 6000 years, i doubt little has changed

 

[Charles Smith]

The "Northern Iraq" opening certainly has a weight now that it didn't in 1973. I remember listening to Friedkin talk about the opening several years ago (might have been in the commentary), and the realization of the differences to us between then and now is incredible. Back then (to me, at any rate), "Northern Iraq" might just as well have been "Northern Mars". But what incredible shots throughout that segment. I kind of hope you're right about the likelihood of little having changed.

 

[Bryan Tuck]

Looking at the discs now. I do wish the old logo had been restored, but a lot of Warner's releases have updated logos, so it's not that big of a surprise. And the restoration credits on the theatrical cut amount to a single title card (again not unlike other "restored versions"). And also...


...the brief face-morph from possessed-Damien to normal-Damien at the end that was used on the 25th anniversary is still there.


My preference would have been not to have all that on the "theatrical" cut, but I kind of expected it, and I'm honestly not that bothered by it.


I'm not a DNR expert, but both cuts look quite good to me. I still really don't like the extended version (the extra scenes or the CGI), so I'm glad the original version (99.9% of it, anyway) is here. Seems to be a very good release.

 

[Inspector Hammer!]

No other film of my generation has the power to get under your skin and fuck you up for life like The Exorcist.

 

[Mike.B]

My copy arrived yesterday so watched the theatrical version last night; it's been a few years since I've seen it. Very good stuff. I'm not a picture quality expert, but what I saw looked great to my eyes. Plenty of grain, but still lots of detail, and no noticeable digital enhancement getting in the way.


And one small thing I was incredibly pleased with was that other than a very brief FBI warning after I loaded the disc it went straight to the menu. And then after hitting play it loaded right up. No crap trailers or other warnings thrown in there. Probably 30 seconds from closing the tray to the movie starting.


Also: very classy packaging. Big thumbs up overall from me.

 

[cineMANIAC]

I went looking for this at a couple of B&m's and nobody had the Blu-ray edition in stock. I highly doubt they were sold out - anyone else having a hard time finding it?

 

[Joe Karlosi]

The Blu of the Theatrical Version is better than the 1998 DVD IMO, but there are a lot of scenes which are grainy-looking to me, and that's something I don't like. I was able to watch much of the film last night - and when viewing my HDTV in a darkened room with more detail popping out at me, the grain pattern really distracted me at some times, looking like friggin' ants dancing about.

I guess this is where some purists will try to persuade me that "Grain Is Good", but you'll never convince me. Yes, I realize "grain" is what makes up a film image -- but unless you walk right up to the screen in a theater, you should not see "graininess". Aesthetically, I like smoothness, not graininess.


This is still a great release overall.

 

[Robert Crawford]

I thought the blu-ray video presentation of the original theatrical version was great. As far as the film grain argument, it's a dead horse to me that I don't have any inclination of revisiting again. To each his own.







Crawdaddy

 

[Worth]

Originally Posted by Joe Karlosi

Yes, I realize "grain" is what makes up a film image -- but unless you walk right up to the screen in a theater, you should not see "graininess".

Blu-ray tends to emphasize grain because it's sharper, more stable and closer to the source than a 35mm release print.

 

[Michael Reuben]

Originally Posted by Worth


Blu-ray tends to emphasize grain because it's sharper, more stable and closer to the source than a 35mm release print.

The home theater experience tends to emphasize grain as well, because people don't expect to see it on their TV screen. This is a psychological phenomenon I've observed many times (in myself as well). People who insist that grain isn't readily visible in movie theaters are invariably people who also say they don't much go to the theater anymore. If you go regularly, and your theaters haven't replaced all their projectors with digital equipment, there'll be plenty of grain on display if you look for it. But the eye and the brain expect it at the cinema, and you tune it out. (I'm still getting used to its absence, now that so many local theaters have installed DLP.)