Home Theater Forum › Home Theater Forum › Blu-ray, DVD, Streaming Video and Digital Downloads › DVD › The Classic Sci-FI Ultimate Collection
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The Classic Sci-FI Ultimate Collection - Page 9

post #241 of 267
9/23/06 at 5:02am

Re: The Classic Sci-FI Ultimate Collection

Certainly glad to hear you and your friend were busy enjoying the movie, Joe!
Reply
post #242 of 267
9/23/06 at 5:17am

Re: The Classic Sci-FI Ultimate Collection

Yes, we still watched and enjoyed it! Took us all of a few seconds now and then to make those comments during a 70-something-minute feature!
Added to the experience too -- you know those cheesy ol' fifites flicks!

Yep, we certainly enjoyed it as opposed to not seeing it. Did you run your 35mm print last night...?
Reply
post #243 of 267
9/23/06 at 5:46am

Re: The Classic Sci-FI Ultimate Collection

Quote:
Originally Posted by Eric Huffstutler
Joe... I am sure Universal wouldn't have put DVD-18 out if the technology (players) wasn't out there to accomodate them. The problem is that not everyone has a player equal to one another and so the disc don't play on some while play perfect on others.
Eric

Much as I hate to resurrect an old argument, and in the wrong thread as well, but this reasoning is demonstrably faulty, because owners have been able to exchange discs that won't play properly for ones that will - on exactly the same equipment.

Similarly, some people have exchanged sets with a problem disc, and the new set has a disc that screws up - that did not in their first set.

This lead me to conclude, some time ago, that the problem does not lie in the authoring, in in players, but in the manufacture of the discs. Although this is complicated by the fact that some players do indeed cope better with the fault-laden discs than others - hence thoughts that the problem is located in players.

This is supported by evidence that the few DVD-18's utilised by other studios are very often manufactured in Taiwan, not the Mexico Deluxe factory, and that the Taiwanese ones have far, far lower incidences of problems.
Reply
post #244 of 267
9/23/06 at 9:14am

Re: The Classic Sci-FI Ultimate Collection

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack Theakston
If the New York Times said it, it must be so! :-D
I'm not saying the New York Times was necessarily RIGHT. I'm just saying what their critic said. I usually disagree 100% with that newspaper. You should read their silly review of the Inner Sanctum set this week.

However, the review of "This Island Earth" did make a good case that it was composed for a 1.33:1 ratio. The New York Times isn't ALWAYS wrong -- just most of the time.
Reply
post #245 of 267
9/23/06 at 9:40am

Re: The Classic Sci-FI Ultimate Collection

I watched "The Mole People" last night using the same zoom function I used earlier in the day with "Tarantula." Whereas "Tarantula" looked perfectly framed for widescreen, "The Mole People" did not. Many shots featured cut off heads, archaeological items appeared below the screen, etc. I had to switch back to 1.33:1 viewing as I was missing too much visual information in widescreen mode. To my eyes this transfer certainly appears to be more than just open matte as a strict matting to 1.85:1 or even 1.66:1 would have left out too much of the image. I can't imagine a director framing a shot in such a way that an item being discussed is completely out of the picture.

So in my continuing less than scientific study of this set so far I'm at:

"Tarantula" -- Open matte and most certainly shot to accomodate widescreen showings.

"The Mole People" -- Not open matte and this transfer does not support widescreen viewing. Whether that means it was shot for 1.33:1 viewing or this transfer features a zoomed in image I can't say. Sean's earlier screen images show that many of the effects shots appear to be designed with widescreen in mind but the bulk of the rest of the film just doesn't look right in that mode.
Reply
post #246 of 267
9/23/06 at 12:37pm

Re: The Classic Sci-FI Ultimate Collection

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Karlosi
"I want my money back -- there aren't any black bars covering up the tops of the doors and people's hair!

I watched Tarantula with a friend, and simply asked him to restrict his field of vision. By only viewing the area which was meant to be seen at any given time, this resulted in a much better experience for us both.

Everyone remembers in OAR anyway, right? I think I read that once.
Reply
post #247 of 267
9/24/06 at 7:29am

Re: The Classic Sci-FI Ultimate Collection

Here is DVD Savant's take on this set...
Reply
post #248 of 267
9/24/06 at 7:44am

Re: The Classic Sci-FI Ultimate Collection

Well I finished off the last of the set yesterday and I'm satisfied.

Not going to delve into the OAR debate as both sides have good points.

I will say this:

Had these been Pan and Scan transfers of scope films I would have passed.

I can justify supporting OAR with the inclusion of The Incredible Shrinking Man which is great to finally own.

Of the 4 open matte films, the two I care the most about (Tarantula and Monolith Monsters) looked fine framing wise to me.

In many instances the proper OAR on many films is not laid out in clear black and white and there are many compromises I've made over the years (over-matting on Horror of Dracula, 2 cropped releases of Apocalypse Now, the open matte Kubrick titles , etc, etc, etc, so this wouldn't be the first.

Each of those examples are more severe compromises than this Sci-Fi set IMO.

For those passing on this set for the open matte issue, I'm not going to try and convince you otherwise or even state that you're wrong for doing so. To each their own.
Reply
post #249 of 267
9/24/06 at 9:44am

Re: The Classic Sci-FI Ultimate Collection

tarantula and monolith monsters looks passable on my small 30in philips, flat, as savant refers to it.

the philips also has a 16x9 zoom mode that.

using this, both tarantula and monolith, framing wise looked "right"

the credits fit perfectly in the frame and everything else during the movie
seemed like it "felt" better while watching this way.
Reply
post #250 of 267
9/24/06 at 11:18am

Re: The Classic Sci-FI Ultimate Collection

Quote:
Originally Posted by TonyD
tarantula and monolith monsters looks passable on my small 30in philips, flat, as savant refers to it.

the philips also has a 16x9 zoom mode that.

using this, both tarantula and monolith, framing wise looked "right"

the credits fit perfectly in the frame and everything else during the movie
seemed like it "felt" better while watching this way.

I watched "Monster on the Campus" this morning and it framed perfectly in 16x9.
Reply
post #251 of 267
9/24/06 at 11:44am

Re: The Classic Sci-FI Ultimate Collection

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack Theakston
Stephen, that article says it all, however, the 2:1 aspect ratio was announced a few months later (I have no idea with what film). Some reputable trade magazines such as BoxOffice covered it quite well. It was a real AR, however short lived.

Jack, I have checked American Cinematographer issues 1953 through 1956 so far and the only reference to 2:1 was the introduction of 'Superscope'. Is there any way you can provide more information to where you read it?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack Theakston
The two Hammer films were shot that way (2:1), but I'm sure there were more.

Also can you remember where you read this?
Reply
post #252 of 267
9/24/06 at 12:20pm

Re: The Classic Sci-FI Ultimate Collection

Has anyone noticed that there are no chapter menus for any of the films in this set? Is this a common practice with Universal classic sets, or is it just this one?
Reply
post #253 of 267
9/24/06 at 1:11pm

Re: The Classic Sci-FI Ultimate Collection

that doesnt happen much anymore.
the chapters are there just not on the menu
Reply
post #254 of 267
9/24/06 at 2:38pm

Re: The Classic Sci-FI Ultimate Collection

I just received this set and they look fine to me, although I have a question or two.

First off, at the point (near the end) of THE INCREDIBLE SHRINKING MAN where the spider is punctured by the needle and the goo or blood starts to slowly descend, there seems to be a kind of freeze frame that is accompanied by a hiccup in the music. I don’t have the laser edition anymore, but I don’t remember this being the case in that edition. It seems that scene is a few frames short. I don’t think there was ever a censor cut there, but something seems amiss.

Also, MONSTER ON THE CAMPUS plays fine on my more expensive SONY, but my cheaper Panasonic player won’t read the disc. It tries to load, but a message comes up “This type disc can not be played. Insert another disc” I cleaned the disc and turned off the player and reinserted the disc, but it just won’t play on this machine. DVDrs and all my other discs seem to play fine. Could there be some “trigger” thingy that is missing? I am not up on technology.

Thanks...
Reply
post #255 of 267
9/25/06 at 4:54am

Re: The Classic Sci-FI Ultimate Collection

Plays fine on my Panasonic and Pioneer players.

It's a DVD-5 disc, which are usually the most reliable of them all, being the least complex in construction.

Sounds like you have a bad disc.
Reply
post #256 of 267
9/25/06 at 9:00am

Re: The Classic Sci-FI Ultimate Collection

I still wish someone would explain why Universal would choose *not* to matte these films. Masking off the tops and bottoms of a digital image just doesn't seem like that big a deal to me. It's possible I suppose they thought open matte looked better in some way, but the framing clearly indicates a widescreen format.
Reply
post #257 of 267
9/25/06 at 3:23pm

Re: The Classic Sci-FI Ultimate Collection

Quote:
Originally Posted by MichaelEl
I still wish someone would explain why Universal would choose *not* to matte these films. Masking off the tops and bottoms of a digital image just doesn't seem like that big a deal to me. It's possible I suppose they thought open matte looked better in some way, but the framing clearly indicates a widescreen format.
MichaelEl,

I'm almost sure they make the DVDs in this way simply beccause they saw the full frames on this films. I have worked here in Italy with same guys of the home video companies: they don't know almost nothing about movies history, they are more marketing people (and not the best ones).
Reply
post #258 of 267
9/25/06 at 5:07pm

Re: The Classic Sci-FI Ultimate Collection

Just watched THE INCREDIBLE SHRINKING MAN. And correct OAR or not, the picture quality left much to be desired on that one.
Reply
post #259 of 267
9/25/06 at 5:08pm

Re: The Classic Sci-FI Ultimate Collection

Quote:
Originally Posted by John Morgan
I just received this set and they look fine to me, although I have a question or two.

First off, at the point (near the end) of THE INCREDIBLE SHRINKING MAN where the spider is punctured by the needle and the goo or blood starts to slowly descend, there seems to be a kind of freeze frame that is accompanied by a hiccup in the music. I don’t have the laser edition anymore, but I don’t remember this being the case in that edition. It seems that scene is a few frames short. I don’t think there was ever a censor cut there, but something seems amiss.



Thanks...
censor isnt the right word for what that appears to be.
i doubt anything was intentionally removed do to content.

looks like a slight jump cut, missing frame.

i never saw the laser so i cant compare.
Reply
post #260 of 267
9/27/06 at 8:15am

Re: The Classic Sci-FI Ultimate Collection

So far I have watched all the films except for "The Mole People" of which I have just seen the opening and I think Universal need some credit for the great sound on these discs. Except for some distortion in high passages, there is no wow or flutter and no indication of high frequency roll off. The fantastic scores of these films and the great sound of the Universal scoring stage is well preserved.
Reply
post #261 of 267
9/29/06 at 12:26pm

Re: The Classic Sci-FI Ultimate Collection

Last night I finally sat down and watched the last movie on this set "Monster on the Campus." I have to say that I've had more fun with this DVD release than any in recent memory. Issues of proper OAR aside, I've certainly gotten my 20 bucks worth of entertainment. Here's how I personally rated the 5 films:

1. The Incredible Shrinking Man -- An absolute classic with a dark, moving ending.
2. The Monolith Monsters -- Interesting premise and I couldn't get enough of hearing everyone butcher the word "silicon."
3. Tarantula -- Surprisingly good effects and creepy atmosphere.
4. The Mole People -- A solid story but drags too much toward the end.
5. Monster on the Campus -- This is the only one of the 5 that I found myself going MST3K on. If Troy Donahue had asked one more time about Samson I was going to explode -- "No Jimmy, you can't have your damn dog back!"
Reply
post #262 of 267
9/29/06 at 12:33pm

Re: The Classic Sci-FI Ultimate Collection

Michael, that is exactly how I would rank them too.

The Mole People has been the most maligned film of the 5, but I have a soft heart for it. I just love the make-up for Mole People and I always end up feeling really sorry for them when I watch the film. I have the action figure of one of the Mole Men on my shelf:

Reply
post #263 of 267
9/30/06 at 1:36am

Re: The Classic Sci-FI Ultimate Collection

I think I'd rank them that way too.

In particular, "The Monolith Monsters" has always tended to be overlooked but I regard it as a very fine example of science-fiction of it's time. The effects work is also very impressive.
Reply
post #264 of 267
9/30/06 at 7:44am

Re: The Classic Sci-FI Ultimate Collection

I watched the "The Monolith Monsters" last nite, as it is my favorite in the set. I know "The Incredible Shrinking Man" is an absolute classic, but for me "The Monolith Monsters" is MORE fun! I'll watch all of the films over time.
Reply
post #265 of 267
9/30/06 at 10:20am

Re: The Classic Sci-FI Ultimate Collection

I'm sure I will be accused of sci-fi sacrilege, but my ranking would be:
1) Tarantula
2) ISM
3) Mole Peopple
4) Monolith Monsters

I have never seen MoC, so I have not ranked it yet. Incredible as it may seem, I had never seen the Monolith Monsters till acquiring this set. I didn't find it as interesting as I thought I would.

I have always loved Tarantula. I can think of no better use of a living creature as a monster in any other movie. By that I mean, the use of an actual tarantula to portray the giant beast and not by some other special effect.

I have usually found the use of living animals, say lizards for dinosaurs, usually looks cheap and cheesy. In Tarantula, there are genuinely creepy moments. I like the scenes where the spider pauses at the top of a hill, while he surveys his prey below.
Reply
post #266 of 267
9/30/06 at 11:54am

Re: The Classic Sci-FI Ultimate Collection

My $.02

1. The Incredible Shrinking Man
2. Tarantula
3. The Monolith Monsters

G
A
P

4. Monster on the Campus
5. The Mole People

The Monolith Monsters and The Mole People were first time views. It's probably too much to ask for but I'd really like to see more of these sets in the future.

Maybe even delving into their 30's/40's catalog holdings with Island of Lost Souls, Dr. Cyclops, etc.
Reply
post #267 of 267
9/30/06 at 2:34pm

Re: The Classic Sci-FI Ultimate Collection

Jay: I love those Monsters action figures! I don't have the big ones, but I do have the following:

Image Hosted by ImageShack.us

That's my li'l mole guy, third from the right in the top row.
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: DVD
Home Theater Forum › Home Theater Forum › Blu-ray, DVD, Streaming Video and Digital Downloads › DVD › The Classic Sci-FI Ultimate Collection