|
Originally Posted by Dave H
...
Wow, first Dracula, now this. Oh well, just $40.00 used for other BDs. ![]() |
??? What about Dracula? I have not heard anything about the Dracula BD being reviewed it. Something wrong with it that I should know about?
|
Originally Posted by Dave H
...
Wow, first Dracula, now this. Oh well, just $40.00 used for other BDs. ![]() |







































|
Originally Posted by Dave Mack
Ok, the more I have watched the disc, the more I feel that they just botched the new transfer. I had already said that it looked flat, darker, washed out, (Bracke was RIGHT on the money with his comments...) but lo and behold, I just got through with watching all the new docs. on the disc that are also in HD. Well, guess what? The scenes from the film in the docs. look MUCH, MUCH better. .
|
|
Originally Posted by Bleddyn Williams
Also disappointing that the SB has the nice burned-in titles while the BD has player-generated ones.
|
|
Originally Posted by Chris S
Maybe I'm remembering this wrong but doesn't Blu-ray support various font stylings for player generated subtitles?
|



"Did you know that more people are murdered at 92 degrees Fahrenheit than any other temperature? I read an article once. Lower temperatures, people are easy-going, over 92 and it's too hot to move, but just 92, people get irritable."
|
Originally Posted by Brandon Conway
Dave, I appreciate all the effort. However, I find your stances on Dracula and Halloween rather compelling in their contrast.
On Dracula, you bemoan the changes in color/black level/shadows, though this appears to be the deliberate choice of Coppola. On Halloween, you bemoan the lack of changes to the night scenes (not blue enough for Cundey's 1999 version) even though it is highly likely that the blues were overdone in 1999 and not true to the original film. Essentially, you want the DP revised version of Halloween that isn't on BD, and you want the non-Coppola revised version of Dracula that isn't on BD. Would you say this may be a case of simply being used to one version over the other and Sony/Starz being damned if they do and damned if they don't? Not trying to call you out or anything, just something I thought was curious. Very interested in your response. ![]() |
" I think it's time we go to plan B". "What's plan B?" "That's the one where we don't do something stupid".
Universal, please release Streets of Fire on Blu-ray.
My midis bring all the Force to the yard; my midis are better than yours!
|
Originally Posted by Dave Mack
People at BluRay.com are all insisting that the new BD is the CORRECT way the film should have looked all along in it's defense. Interesting in that most there defending it haven't even seen it yet.
So I guess the VHS and both DVDs were wrong and the film was really meant to look dull, drab, flat, as soft as a DVD. I dunno... I saw it a few times in the theater, once AFTER the dvd had come out at a revival in NYC and I always thought they were correct... |
I can live with color changes, or even alternate footage being put back in. But i wont buy a HD disc that has no texture when it used to have it on all the other SD versions! Where is the hi def in that!?