A few words about...™ Bram Stoker's Dracula -- in BD

Re: A few words about...™ Bram Stoker's Dracula -- in BD

You expect a vampire to be wearing lipstick and disco-blue eye shadow?

Re: A few words about...™ Bram Stoker's Dracula -- in BD

I don't expect a vampire to look like an overbaked sunbather yet I'm watching the actual BRD. No winkie is necessary for me.

Re: A few words about...™ Bram Stoker's Dracula -- in BD

And I find the SD image to be way too warm and red for the tone of the film (while acknowledging that comparing screen caps is a very inexact science).

Re: A few words about...™ Bram Stoker's Dracula -- in BD

I tend to agree with Robert.

The top picture brings out all the natural colors of the vampire and her surroundings and the orange-tinted second picture of the same scene reminds me of the color filtered sequences of Bali Hi in scenes from "South Pacific".

Paul

Re: A few words about...™ Bram Stoker's Dracula -- in BD

Alllllllllllll right - fine! Two can play at that game. I hereby withdraw my "winkie", good sir...!



Seriously, it is a fire-lit scene. There should be some orange/yellow light and not all white (as it looks like on the BD). Could the colors have been that off on the other transfers? Seems like we'd have heard holy-heck about 'em before this if they had been. I mean, there's certainly one thing we can agree on: those two shots are night-&-day different.

Re: A few words about...™ Bram Stoker's Dracula -- in BD

If you watch that whole scene on the BD there is still quite a bit of warm fire light, its just now the whole scene isn't a wash in it. There are other colors coming from the windows Also the sheets that they are laying on have greens and golds in them that you couldn't see before because of the amber wash that covered everything.

Doug

Re: A few words about...™ Bram Stoker's Dracula -- in BD

Yes.

The colors were THAT off in the earlier incarnation.

This is NOT a unique example of the problem.

RAH

Re: A few words about...™ Bram Stoker's Dracula -- in BD

Thank you.





Crawdaddy

Re: A few words about...™ Bram Stoker's Dracula -- in BD

My wife and I watched the Blu-ray from Netflix tonight. I opted to rent due to the fact that while I claim to be a horror nut, I have never seen this film before. We both enjoyed it a lot, so it will be getting purchased very soon.

I actually like the lighting/coloring of the scenes that have been screen-capped better in the BD than in the DVD screen caps that have been posted (I plan to check them out on the Superbit release once I borrow it from my friend Josh). I was able to make out a lot more detail in the darker scenes than I was in the screenshots posted (such as the night shot of the castle, and Quincy and Arthur at the mausoleum at night) The transfer isn't sparkling, but it was quite a bit better than I was expecting, and I got the feeling it would take a Lowry level restoration to make it too much better, which would actually kinda hurt the old school feel of the movie.

Anyway, great movie from a first timer, and the BD definitely isn't a let down.

Re: A few words about...™ Bram Stoker's Dracula -- in BD

I had canceled my pre-order but have since re-ordred it and it is now on it's way to me. Can't wait to watch it.

Re: A few words about...™ Bram Stoker's Dracula -- in BD

Curious at your opinion, Ron!

And hey, Edward Scissorhands in 2 days, but no early reviews yet.

Re: A few words about...™ Bram Stoker's Dracula -- in BD

Well I watched Dracula last night and call me a heretic but I actually prefer this new (corrected and/or altered) version over the other video incarnations. It adds quite a bit more of an eerie feel to an already atmospheric film.

I've seen this numerous times over the years including two theatrical viewings so you could say I'm a fan of this film but I wasn't taken aback at the obvious differences between the video versions.

I'm so glad I decided to not join the village mob by cancelling my pre-order.

Re: A few words about...™ Bram Stoker's Dracula -- in BD

I'll post my thoughts Dave, but it will be a week before I can watch it. It's also been a long time since I've seen this and it was only the SD-DVD so I won't be able to compare the two. The memory card in my head doesn't work like it used too

As for Ed in HD, that is a dream come true, my favorite film and only a couple of days to go.

Re: A few words about...™ Bram Stoker's Dracula -- in BD

Oops, seems I got my screen caps backwards! I thought the picture of the female vampire with the heavy orange color was from the new version, turns out that it's from the previous DVD version. The new transfer for the new DVD and Blu-Ray versions actually has more believable colors in that scene. Perhaps that's not the case in all scenes, but in this one I would say it's an improvement.

Of course, one does expect some orange and yellow tint from a fire being in front of one's face, so I'm surprised that doesn't show a bit more in the new transfer. But the female vampire does indeed look more like a vampire there. But there should be more orange from the fire, without the orange color being overwhelming. Which it shouldn't be unless she was very near the fire, and vampires aren't fond of fire, so she probably wouldn't have been that close. But still, while the overall appearance of her face does look better now, the lighting actually looks more artificial, when it should look like a camp fire flame casting the light on her face.

Hmm, I guess you have a choice between it looking as though she was right near the fire, and thus her face flooded with the orange and yellow light of the camp fire (original DVD), or the more realistic color tones of her face showing through, but trading that off for artificial looking light on her face (new DVD), which sort of breaks the authentic rustic outdoor atmosphere. And believable atmosphere is very important to a film like this. Can we get a transfer in between the two perhaps? hehe

Re: A few words about...™ Bram Stoker's Dracula -- in BD

Is this posted?

http://forum.blu-ray.com/showpost.ph...&postcount=155

"Kim Aubrey, who works for ZAP Zoetrope Aubry Productions LLC and worked on the Blu-ray transfer of this title, took some issues with some of the statements in our Empire Review.

In the interest of "fair play" and making sure our customers had all the facts, we thought it fair to include his comments here:



If the electronic transfer of the film that you are seeing reveals grain structure...that is, if you are SEEING the film grain, then by definition, you are seeing all of the sharpness that was captured by the film camera. We can’t manufacture sharpness or definition in the telecine process. It is true that in the standard definition home video era, it was common to dial in some electronic edge enhancement to overcome the limitations of NTSC Video and television receivers of that era. And it was common in pre HD transfers to “filter out” the grain giving movies more of a “TV look” which was considered desirable at that time. But the “detail enhancement” they used in that era was erzatz definition....fake. An illusion of detail. Again, if you are seeing “tons of grain” then you are seeing a faithful reproduction of the film element.

American Zoetrope, Francis Coppola’s company does not own (and has never owned) the facilities to do feature film telecine mastering...aka the film transfer. The studio that OWNS the title (in this case Columbia-Sony) owns Dracula and they commissioned and paid for the new transfer in (UPDATED) 2006 because they believed that the old one was wanting. I agreed with them. I was post production executive on the film in 1991-1992 and I always was horrified at what the home video and TV editions of Dracula looked like because they were so far from what Coppola and Ballhaus had done for the original release prints. So orange-y. So bright. Zoetrope’s role in the new transfer was to make sure that the transfer colorist had access to a pristine original “final answer print” to screen and refer to. A final answer print is a vaulted 35mm film print in Sony’s possession that bears a signature from the original production indicating that the director or director of photography was satisfied with the color timing and that this print was to be the gold standard...the reference for all 35mm release prints to be compared with and accepted/rejected. It was a controversial answer print at the time. It was dark. The soundtrack was considered very avant-garde. Coppola was breaking rules. Some critics appreciated it, others did not."

Re: A few words about...™ Bram Stoker's Dracula -- in BD

I posted it earlier. Kim PMed me to clarify that there is a typo in that statement and that the new transfer was commissioned in 2006, not 1996.

Re: A few words about...™ Bram Stoker's Dracula -- in BD

You know, the more and more I read about this going back and forth about the transfer being correct/crap, the more and more interest I have in getting this title and watching it.

Before any of this dialog started, this title would have gone completely under my radar, but now I want to get it partly to see how different it looks, and if it looks good, and partly just to test my system to see if I can see the details that some people can see, and others can't.

Regardless of the correctness in incorrectness of the transfer, the publicity is seeming to work.

Re: A few words about...™ Bram Stoker's Dracula -- in BD

I watched the Blu-ray version last night. At times, the picture is darker than I remember it being(unfortunately, I don't have the Superbit to compare it to). The color is definitely less saturated during certain scenes; reds are less hot, and the picture almost has a two strip Technicolor look to it at times. Still, there is a lot of detail; the costumes, sets and furnishings look beautiful. I was never less than satisfied with what I was seeing. Overall, this was a very filmlike transfer.

I guess it's a crapshoot. If you really like the ultra glossy color of the previous release, then hold onto your Superbit and your 20 bucks. But this new edition is certainly well done, and didn't disappoint me in the least.

Note: I viewed this on a 84" screen, projected by a Mitusubishi HD1000 720p DLP projector(calibrated with DVE), and the Sony BPD-S301 Blu-ray player.

Re: A few words about...™ Bram Stoker's Dracula -- in BD

I'm no expert and may be taken to task, but since I promised I would weigh in and I got my Netflix Saturday, here's my take, as posted on AVS:

My rental (having canceled the pre-order) came in, and it's the first time I ever watched the film and was BORED.

Oddly, for the first couple of minutes I was prepared to tell the detractors they were crazy. Sure, it looked a bit darker, and the colors more subtle, but the differences seemed to grow as the picture continued.

This is a REVISIONIST version of the film, plain and simple and that should be admitted to. I'm starting to believe that "the colors were altered on the previous VHS and DVD versions because of problems mastering the original colors" line is just a smokescreen being used to disguise the fact the film has been elaborately re-tooled. Remember when rumours were abound that this would be a new Director's Cut? Well, perhaps it is, just not the kind we were expecting.

I'm of the opinion there is NO WAY this BD is closer to how the film looked theatrically (though suddenly on the HTF, it's unimportant what it looked like theatrically? that's wrong too?), because they weren't coloring films like this back in 1992. We weren't seeing this kind of digitally manipulated color until after Schindler's List in 1993, followed by Pleasantville. Unless you count colorized versions of B&W classics. And these methods certainly weren't used when they originally made Bram Stoker's Dracula, nor were they desired. At it's worst this is a botched job, at it's best this is how FFC would have made the film look were he making it TODAY, using today's modern technology, which is a far cry from what he was going for when he made the film.

In fact, I was distracted by being reminded of Pleasantville and sometimes Sky Captain while watching this version of the film.
What's sad is this new digital version goes totally against the ideas behind how the film was made: low-tech, with old fashioned in-camera techniques, and one would presume on-set lighting (lots of gels, like a play).

All those beautiful costume and set designs that won Academy Awards, totally altered (and in many cases dramatically obscured) with this revisionist version. Now that green dress of Winona's is almost a fluorescent lime green standing out in a nearly B&W crowd, just the principles in (too) vibrant color. There is borderline haloing from the digital alteration, and often you'll feel there are pink faces floating around the nearly colorless landscape.

I could almost live with how dark the film is, save obvious errors. Harker's writing is completely invisible in the famed scene exhibited on the forums. I ran it back a few times. Completely undetectable. Other details, like pulsating walls, the hair on Dracula's palms were missed by me until I started re-watching my Superbit version. Even the bottle that dripped up would have been easy to miss had I not known iabout it in advance.

Now it's possible that it's suffering from a Lowry-like treatment: that there was an attempt to preserve scenes' overall contrast and black levels during optical effects and crucial FX were lost because of this, but I'm unsure.

The superbit DVD still has deep, inky blacks, so I thought maybe the old versions had the contrast rather than the brightness amped up. But things like Harker's candle as he explores Drac's castle are still glowing like lightsabers in the BD version. It's just that there's no longer any dynamic range in from darkness to light, nor range in the colors, making it look smeary and digital compared with previous versions. Perhaps Francis has been corrupted by his buddy George Lucas in that BSD now looks like it was shot with a digital camera circa Episode II. Sure, you can zoom an image and say "oh, obviously the BD has more resolution," but when you actually watch the film as intended the superbit DVD has a far more high-definition, film-like appearance.

Though the shot of Harker's carriage approaching Drac's castle (and similar shots) actually looks good in uber-dark mode (far better than screenshots that let one mountain range disappear into another), I tend to think the film originally looked moonlit. For one thing, in the crappy theater I went to at the time, I wouldn't have been able to see anything had the film originally appeared so dark -- the bulbs were so dim there. Batman (1989) sure was fun to see (or, more correctly, not see) there. I'd remember if the film had been too dark to see.

I think it's more likely someone thought it was a good idea to re-work the brightness so the film would look less like it was shot on soundstages and meticulously constructed sets.

That there has been such a dodge by the fillmmakers in admitting this is a revisionist version of the film, makes me doubt an otherwise plausible explanation that previous video versions were colored differently from the theatrical feature. Even if that's true (and those who have attended revivals don't seem to think so), there's no way this new version is closer to the original intent.

If you like this new version, bully for you. Buy it, and enjoy it, despite the obvious errors, like effects lost to blackness and the neo-Lucas-like digital color palette and low resolution (resembling early HD cam rather than film). But for anyone who fell in love with the original version of the film, it's look, it's feel, it's grandiose theatrical charm, prepare to be disappointed.

Rent before you buy. If you're as diappointed as I am, you'll really long for an HD version from the master used for the superbit (or playing on TV), because that's the beautiful film you'll want in the best possible version.

I guess I should say the one good thing is the sound. The PCM track, though dated by today's standards is great, deftly defeating the DTS from the superbit. While the DTS track has ambient sounds that sound a ways away, the PCM track succeeds in making you feel there are sounds coming from antoher room in your house, or perhaps outside. Incredible realism. I really wondered at times. Definitely a far more enveloping and satisfying experience than a lossy track -- but not enough to make up for the revised video.

The DVD is the life!

Re: A few words about...™ Bram Stoker's Dracula -- in BD

Just out of curiosity, has anyone--apart from a Zoetrope official--actually had an opportunity to screen an original answer print of Dracula? That would seem an important part of determining whether this transfer is really accurate or not. Just curious, because I get the impression these vaulted prints are hard to get access to.

Re: A few words about...™ Bram Stoker's Dracula -- in BD

Although I respect your opinion of this release and your personal review, I find that highly unfair.

If you've read this thread and previous ones about the same subject, you know that the opinions on this forum about this BD are varied and differ over a wide range.

You'd also know that people here were interested in the comparison with the Answer Print (the concept of which was explained here extensively too) and therefore totally in line with our mission statement: to have the product in our homes as closely to the way the original creators of the film intended.


Cees

Re: A few words about...™ Bram Stoker's Dracula -- in BD

Jack,

Read this thread!


Cees

Re: A few words about...™ Bram Stoker's Dracula -- in BD

Grant,
that was a very good post. Speaking only for myself, I certainly am not saying that the new BD is an accurate representation of the original intent. I only saw the film once theatrically, and that was 15 years ago(and at a dingy theater, at that). I did own a laserdisc, but one issued by Sony, not the Criterion. And I did have the first DVD version. I haven't seen the movie on any medium in about three years. I can only say that I found this new BD to be a pleasurable viewing experience, and that I think many people who aren't as familiar with the previous incarnations of the film will agree.

I would love to see Coppola make a statement about this issue. I think it's the only way that this controversy will be settled.

Re: A few words about...™ Bram Stoker's Dracula -- in BD

Me too, an utterly honest one that doesn't obfuscate, evade, or distort the truth.

Re: A few words about...™ Bram Stoker's Dracula -- in BD

So what would that mean? If he said that this is the way the film was supposed to look all along, would that be obfuscating and distorting the truth?

Doug

Re: A few words about...™ Bram Stoker's Dracula -- in BD

I'd have to see exactly what he says. It would also help if the statement was backed up by objective evidence. I'm not necessarily saying the two incidents are the same situation, but I flat out believe George Lucas is being completely dishonest, for example, when he says he never intended for Han to shoot first. Objective evidence contradicts him. I've NEVER understood his reluctance to say very simply "hey, I changed my mind. Deal with it".

Re: A few words about...™ Bram Stoker's Dracula -- in BD

Thought I had... The only party I thought had actually claimed to screen an answer print was a Zoetrope official during the mastering process. I know Mr. Harris has chimed in on this, but I never caught whether he was referencing an answer print himself directly, or was referring to Zoetrope's dusting one off for the purposes of putting this dvd together. I'll give things another read-through.

Re: A few words about...™ Bram Stoker's Dracula -- in BD

As I said, I was very pleased with the Blu-Ray presentation, but any claims that changes were "alway intended" from any filmmaker these days can be taken with a grain of salt (though looking at the various screenshots, this particular release doesn't look like a case of Lucas syndrome to me).

After, all, Greedo was ALWAYS supposed to shoot first.

It looks pretty darn good, it sounds good, and it doesn't have a CGI Max Reebo singing "Jedi Rocks", so I'm gonna buy it.

Re: A few words about...™ Bram Stoker's Dracula -- in BD

Perhaps the statement should be amended to "...film intended at the time of production." Yesterday's Lucas or FFC isn't the same as today's, and we defeat the archival principle of film by endorsing revisionist filmmaking.

While I can believe the previous video incarnations might be a little bright or a little too color this new version goes far beyond tending to those issues. It's WAY different and looks digitally enhanced with tools employed in years since the film's original production.

Also, I didn't notice any grain in the film to imply I was getting the full resolution of the print, as that press release suggests. Looked surprisingly smooth. I expected a dark, naturally grainy print, but that's now how it appears at all.

I've never even seen Apocalypse Now, but I think I know how people must have felt when Coppola changed the AR on that for the Redux. At least both versions were made available on DVD. I'd love to see a true theatrical version of BSD (as opposed to Bram Stoker's Unpleasantville) on BD.

Re: A few words about...™ Bram Stoker's Dracula -- in BD

I have never read a quote from Lucas or seen an interview with him where he said that he never intended for Han to shoot first. I have read and seen many other things where he said that he only got about 40% of what he wanted with the first film. In fact he was saying that in interviews in 1977, particularly about the cantina scene.

Doug