New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Ray Harryhausen Collection

post #1 of 42
9/30/08 at 4:25pm
Thread Starter 
I had planned on just purchasing The 7th Voyage Of Sinbad but the set was lying there and well.... guess I have weakness for box sets ( the excuse is one saves money over buying the titles individually ). Good deal I suppose, being on sale but some of us that bought 20 Million Miles To Earth earlier will not be impressed! ( like me ). I will check the films out during the week - hope Sony did a stellar job on the transfers. Oh, I guess this means selling my SD versions.








Please excuse the lackluster photos - any reason I can find to practice using the camera.
Reply
post #2 of 42
9/30/08 at 5:39pm

Re: Ray Harryhausen Collection

I too picked up the initial release of 20 Million Miles to Earth which is one of the reasons I haven't pre-ordered this set. I remember picking up 20MMtE and seeing it the following week for virtually half off. I'm hoping this set will do the same closer to Christmas.
Reply
post #3 of 42
9/30/08 at 5:40pm
Thread Starter 

Re: Ray Harryhausen Collection

I did a quick comparison between the previous SD release and the BD (Sinbad) - one difference, the SD was framed at 1:85 and the BD is 1:66. I wonder which is the correct OAR? The audio is a definite improvement, a remixed Dolby 5.1 HD vs the SD's Mono. Much more defined and I had the volume turned down a fair amount and the BD was louder. The center channel is used for most of the dialogue. As usual I only have optical out so I am limited to the standard Dolby Digital core. Video image - cleaner, sharper, more depth to the image, in short the kind of results one expects from 1080. The various costumes really shine - the color and detail gives you more appreciation for what HD brings out.

I should add that I had forgotten how good the score by Bernard Hermann is - the 5.1 mix breathes some new life into it.
Reply
post #4 of 42
10/2/08 at 6:09pm

Re: Ray Harryhausen Collection

I would have loved to have the two movies exclusive to this box set, but I couldn't bring myself to double-dip on 20 Million, especially with a bunch of other desirable blu-rays coming out this week. I'll pick 'em up later if they're released individually.
Reply
post #5 of 42
10/3/08 at 5:13am

Re: Ray Harryhausen Collection

I'm really disapointed by the way Sony is handling this. I too already bought 20 million and I can think of 3 0r 4 other films that would have been a good fit in it's stead. At the very least, make the other two films available as a twofer.

If you buy Sinbad now, will you have to double dip again when the inevitable Sinbad box comes out next year?

Sony should treat fans of classic cinema with some respect. There's only so many of us out there and we don't like being taken advantage of. The original SD Harryhausen collections were really excellent. It makes no sense to crap up the BD releases of same.
Reply
post #6 of 42
10/3/08 at 7:30am

Re: Ray Harryhausen Collection

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brent Avery
I did a quick comparison between the previous SD release and the BD (Sinbad) - one difference, the SD was framed at 1:85 and the BD is 1:66. I wonder which is the correct OAR?
The Blu-ray/DVD comparison at DVD Beaver seems to indicate 1:66 is the preferred ratio:
Quote:
I guess the real questions are - "Why is this is a 1.66:1 aspect ratio?" and "Are the dragons on the Isle of Colossus dark green or light green?"

Firstly, Ray Harryhausen never really wanted his movies to be projected in any of the then new “widescreen” formats. He accepted the 1.85 aspect ratio under protest from the studio, but he hated working in the extreme widescreen formats, especially when he had to make First Men in the Moon in Panavision. It appears many shots are cropped too closely from both the top and bottom of the frame in the 1.85 format, so Columbia’s new 1.66 format transfer of The 7th Voyage of Sinbad will be a compromise that includes more information in the frame - which you can see in our captures below - extensively in the top and bottom but a bit on the two sides as well.
The 7th Voyage of Sinbad Blu-ray Kathryn Grant
Reply
post #7 of 42
10/3/08 at 4:55pm

Re: Ray Harryhausen Collection

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jesse Blacklow
The Blu-ray/DVD comparison at DVD Beaver:
url=http://www.dvdbeaver.com/film2/DVDReviews42/7th_voyage_of_sinbad_blu-ray.htm]The 7th Voyage of Sinbad Blu-ray Kathryn Grant[/url]
I know these are DVDB screen caps...
just ithe BD/new SD DVD are way too red & dark for me.
Hope some more reviews prove me wrong...
as I traded in the original SD last wk.
Reply
post #8 of 42
10/3/08 at 5:30pm

Re: Ray Harryhausen Collection

^ Agree. And I much prefer the previous DVD for colors, looks much more natural to me, for the things that are natural. Based on the caps. I watched the (old) 7th DVD a couple days ago before deciding if I might *need* the BD...

As far as the AR, sounds to me like some people may be trying *very hard* to convince themselves 1.66 is "right". I have no idea, but whenever I read too much "justification" I start to think the facts are probably being massaged to suit. If it was normally projected in 1.85:1, and not in 1.66:1, then that's good enough for me.
Reply
post #9 of 42
10/4/08 at 6:22pm

Re: Ray Harryhausen Collection

I also am just interested in all the Harryhausen Sinbad films and Argonauts, and that's pretty much it. So I think I'm going to pass on the set.
Reply
post #10 of 42
10/6/08 at 7:05am

Re: Ray Harryhausen Collection

Quote:
Originally Posted by CraigF
^ Agree. And I much prefer the previous DVD for colors, looks much more natural to me, for the things that are natural. Based on the caps. I watched the (old) 7th DVD a couple days ago before deciding if I might *need* the BD...
It's been noted elsewhere that DVD Beaver's method of getting screenshots off of Blu-ray is using the wrong colorspace, so I'd look to see if Xylon or someone else who's been doing it correctly for
Quote:
As far as the AR, sounds to me like some people may be trying *very hard* to convince themselves 1.66 is "right". I have no idea, but whenever I read too much "justification" I start to think the facts are probably being massaged to suit. If it was normally projected in 1.85:1, and not in 1.66:1, then that's good enough for me.


This seems like a bit of hyperbole to me. The article clearly states that it's Harryhausen who was uncomfortable with the 1.85:1 AR, and I hardly think 3 sentences is "too much justification". This article and (IIRC) the "Harryhausen Chronicles" documentary both support Harryhausen's claim.
Reply
post #11 of 42
10/6/08 at 12:02pm

Re: Ray Harryhausen Collection

^ It's been discussed plenty elsewhere, not just here!

I do my "research" on ALL BDs these days, what's getting released is not to be blindly trusted IME just because I know it's a good title or was good on SD (i.e. no more pre-orders of BDs for me).

I gleaned the film was usually (always??) projected in 1.85:1 in theaters. Regardless of what Harryhausen preferred or liked or was comfortable with himself, it's not what happened in theaters. I am coming from the side of revisionistic justification for the change. Not keen on that. I don't mind if we want to call it a new home video AR, nothing wrong with that, but I certainly don't think it would be correct to call it OAR and I doubt anyone will. That will bug some people, as AR changes always do, whether or not the change is "better".
Reply
post #12 of 42
10/6/08 at 1:07pm

Re: Ray Harryhausen Collection

Quote:
Originally Posted by CraigF
I gleaned the film was usually (always??) projected in 1.85:1 in theaters. Regardless of what Harryhausen preferred or liked or was comfortable with himself, it's not what happened in theaters. I am coming from the side of revisionistic justification for the change. Not keen on that. I don't mind if we want to call it a new home video AR, nothing wrong with that, but I certainly don't think it would be correct to call it OAR and I doubt anyone will. That will bug some people, as AR changes always do, whether or not the change is "better".
I don't recall anyone calling it OAR. And I hardly think you can call something "revisionistic justification" if it was intended to be presented one way, but was presented by only the studio's decision in another for completely non-artistic reasons (i.e. to fill up a screen). You're confusing re-imagining with a reversion to the intent, which what is happening here. This isn't a cropping of the image that removes important information, nor is it opening the ratio to reveal what shouldn't have been seen. As with "Sleeping Beauty", it's just the way it was made. Are you upset with that release because they've opened up the picture from 2.35:1 to 2.55:1 while not removing any part of it?

You claim this has been you've been doing research on this and that it's discussed plenty elsewhere. Could you give me some links so I can look into this myself? Because from the research and discussions I've seen, there's no one "trying *very hard* to convince themselves 1.66 is 'right'", while there's plenty of people (including the studio, via the release) that already admit that the 1.85:1 ratio was done only by the studio, and against Harryhausen's wishes.
Reply
post #13 of 42
10/6/08 at 1:26pm

Re: Ray Harryhausen Collection

I'm OK w/the 'new' AR.
Harry knows best! ;-)

Still waiting for more reviews...
Xylon too the rescue! :-)
Reply
post #14 of 42
10/6/08 at 2:28pm

Re: Ray Harryhausen Collection

Jesse: I think you're mistaking me disliking the new AR (which I don't hugely have an opinion about until I see it here) with my dislike of those trying to convince themselves it's "correct" and was "wrong" in the theaters. It's the latter point I don't like, not the specifics of what has been changed. Whether multiple ARs co-exist is of no concern to me really, it's been happening since DVDs have been around. I'm sure every single person involved in making important decisions about a film have to compromise, and they all would NOW have done something different, if they could have. That doesn't change what was done THEN for whatever reason. Going back and "correcting" the past is revisionism; just happens to be an annoyance to me, I realise it doesn't bug everybody.

The point is simply the movie was presented one way, and that is not how it is on the BD. You can make your own decision for whatever reason you want. For myself, I am just being picky about which movies I rebuy in BD: it's got to be very good as I don't use a projector and am not a close-sitter (a relative of close-talker). I am happy watching my apparently not-RH-approved-AR DVD for now. But I may bite when the 7th.. BD is available separately...

Anyway, I'll look for Xylons caps if he did some, for the color comparison, perhaps on the "forum that cannot now be named". I have not really looked for info for about a week. These days my process is to watch the DVD of a movie I'm considering upgrading to BD shortly before it's to be released on BD, when there's some concrete info available, just to affirm or deny my desire for the higher res version. And to "see" if I have a problem with the DVD audio JIC that could be motivation enough.

Edit: I think you are right about the DVDB BD captures. Looking around at some other films there, the reds are definitely exaggerated.
Reply
post #15 of 42
10/7/08 at 6:44am

Re: Ray Harryhausen Collection

Quote:
Originally Posted by CraigF
Jesse: I think you're mistaking me disliking the new AR (which I don't hugely have an opinion about until I see it here) with my dislike of those trying to convince themselves it's "correct" and was "wrong" in the theaters. It's the latter point I don't like, not the specifics of what has been changed. Whether multiple ARs co-exist is of no concern to me really, it's been happening since DVDs have been around. I'm sure every single person involved in making important decisions about a film have to compromise, and they all would NOW have done something different, if they could have. That doesn't change what was done THEN for whatever reason. Going back and "correcting" the past is revisionism; just happens to be an annoyance to me, I realise it doesn't bug everybody.
So, you don't respect the decisions of the filmmakers, just the arbitrary decisions of the studio? And just because that's what was presented to the audience? That's a bit backwards, IMO.

Again, according to the available material, the only one trying to convince themselves of what is correct is people who are claiming the studio's presentation is the "correct" version despite the fact that the studio--by way of providing the 1.66:1 presentation--has admitted they showed it the wrong way in the theaters. Like I said before, if you've got evidence that anybody is trying to convince themselves rather than some nebulous "them" or "those people", feel free to provide it.
Reply
post #16 of 42
10/9/08 at 11:44am

Re: Ray Harryhausen Collection

Wow! Sinbad is FANTASTIC! Don't pass this one up. The Herrmann score in TrueHD sound is reason enough to buy the set.

The picture is astounding, too. No, it doesn't look like Iron Man. It looks like a great fantasy movie made 50 years ago.

I've seen the movie many times, and each time is a pleasure, a new experience. This new BD is another great, new experience.
Reply
post #17 of 42
10/9/08 at 1:42pm

Re: Ray Harryhausen Collection

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jesse Blacklow
You claim this has been you've been doing research on this and that it's discussed plenty elsewhere. Could you give me some links so I can look into this myself? Because from the research and discussions I've seen, there's no one "trying *very hard* to convince themselves 1.66 is 'right'", while there's plenty of people (including the studio, via the release) that already admit that the 1.85:1 ratio was done only by the studio, and against Harryhausen's wishes.

However, no cinema in the USA or Canada would have shown a film in 1.66:1 in 1958 and, of course, every filmmaker knew that. To complicate the issue though, 1.66:1 was standard widescreen in Europe in the 'fifties. So I suppose you could say that this new version is the correct ratio as presented in Europe.
Reply
post #18 of 42
10/9/08 at 7:10pm

Re: Ray Harryhausen Collection

Very dissapointed with Sinbads transfer...but the sound and extras are great.
Reply
post #19 of 42
10/10/08 at 1:00am

Re: Ray Harryhausen Collection

Update

I addressed our friend Grover Crisp over at Sony about your concerns
and this is the reply I received from him...

Quote:
Earlier this year, as we were finishing the new HD transfer of this film, I had a conversation with Ray about what the aspect ratio should be for the 50th anniversary release. Most people who know his films know that he basically shot all his effects work 1.33, but with the idea that they could be framed 1.66 or 1.85 and still work. When this film came out originally, it was projected 1.85 domestically, but 1.66 in Europe, and the live action footage was framed and shot to work in either ratio. We usually show it 1.85 in theaters here, and the previous dvd correctly reflects that theatrical projection ratio. But Ray has never been happy to have some of the imagery cut off at top or bottom on any of his films, so we simply agreed that it should be 1.66 this time out, giving viewers more while still being true to the imagery created. There was no plan to insist 1.66 was the creatively correct ratio, or that 1.85 was wrong, or anything even remotely like that, since neither are really incorrect. Ray simply feels the film looks best at this ratio and wanted people to see it that way for the first time on dvd and Blu-ray.
Reply
post #20 of 42
10/10/08 at 7:58am

Re: Ray Harryhausen Collection

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tino
Very dissapointed with Sinbads transfer...but the sound and extras are great.

Would you care to elaborate?

Thanks,
Doug
Reply
post #21 of 42
10/10/08 at 9:33am

Re: Ray Harryhausen Collection

I seem to have a problem with EARTH VS. THE FLYING SAUCERS in the BluRay set. Whatever I do, I can't get rid of that little "projecter" bug in the upper right hand corner. If I pause, it goes away, but it there when I play the disc. Tried hitting the display button, but it just sits there! I assume it has something to do with being able to toggle between color and black and white, but it is bugging me. Sinbad was okay, but I assume the other two black and white films would be the same. I have a newer Pioneer BluRay player.
Thanks
Reply
post #22 of 42
10/10/08 at 9:40am

Re: Ray Harryhausen Collection

There is a lot of grain in Sinbad. Crisp decided just to leave it there, not process it at all. And all these opticals required several generations of prints, so it's grain on top of grain.

It doesn't look like Iron Man. So what? It's still amazing! No digital artifacts that I can see, and the details are tremendous. And the colors!
Reply
post #23 of 42
10/10/08 at 11:02am

Re: Ray Harryhausen Collection

I wonder how long it will be before they break the set up, cause i wont rebuy 20 MMTE, and i am not interested in Sinbad...but i am in for the others!
Reply
post #24 of 42
10/10/08 at 11:18am

Re: Ray Harryhausen Collection

What Ron quotes from Grover Crisp is essentially the same story I got from Ray himself when I interviewed him year before last: the animation was all done 1.33:1, with an eye to framing it for either European or US widescreen formats, but that he really would rather as much of the frame be visible as possible.

That's pretty obvious on the old 20M Miles to Earth disc; as I recall there's one scene on the P&S version where you can see all sorts of animation business by the Ymir that is just cut off entirely at the bottom on the widescreen version. Harryhausen didn't animate all that for his own amusement.
Reply
post #25 of 42
10/10/08 at 12:25pm

Re: Ray Harryhausen Collection

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Zimmer
What Ron quotes from Grover Crisp is essentially the same story I got from Ray himself when I interviewed him year before last: the animation was all done 1.33:1, with an eye to framing it for either European or US widescreen formats, but that he really would rather as much of the frame be visible as possible.

That's pretty obvious on the old 20M Miles to Earth disc; as I recall there's one scene on the P&S version where you can see all sorts of animation business by the Ymir that is just cut off entirely at the bottom on the widescreen version. Harryhausen didn't animate all that for his own amusement.
Is there a chance we'll see that?
(the "P&S" would have been "full frame" then)
Reply
post #26 of 42
10/10/08 at 1:30pm

Re: Ray Harryhausen Collection

Quote:
Originally Posted by Doug Otte
Would you care to elaborate?

Thanks,
Doug
Sure..with all due respect to Dee, I thought the grain was too distracting...and the detail was lacking too..to my eyes it was marginally better than the sd..Imean 20 million miles is older and looks much better. Btw, I am watching it on a 65 inch avia calibrated SONY set..

Still very happy I got it, just dissapointed

ymmv
Reply
post #27 of 42
10/11/08 at 7:19am

Re: Ray Harryhausen Collection

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tino
Sure..with all due respect to Dee, I thought the grain was too distracting...and the detail was lacking too..to my eyes it was marginally better than the sd..Imean 20 million miles is older and looks much better. Btw, I am watching it on a 65 inch avia calibrated SONY set..

Still very happy I got it, just dissapointed

ymmv
My take on Sinbad (my all-time favorite fantasy, and I'm almost 60):

I wasn't disappointed in the Blu-ray. It's ten times better than any previous video incarnation, and trust me - I was watching with a very critical eye. True, there is constant grain, but very fine grain. I would say this was not taken from a negative, as I do not recall this grain in any theatrical showing, either in 1958 or the 1977 re-issue. It is actually distracting during the Roc sequence, where the grain is darker than the sky and looks like a distant swarm of locusts. But once one settles into the fact that he will almost certainly never see a better video edition than this, the pluses begin to mount. First, the sharpness is striking and, rather than revealing the Dynamation effects flaws, it seems to enhance them, which I would say is a demonstration of Harryhausen's amazing skills. Next, the color is head over heels improved over any video in the past, including all DVD's, both the Columbia and Pioneer laser discs, and VHS. I've had them ALL. You have never seen reds as vivid as this on any other 7th Voyage transfer. Flesh tones are occasionally OVERsaturated, if anything. The strange color shifting evident in most previous video editions during the cyclops/dragon battle are not evident here (nor were they in my 70's Super 8mm digest edition - so where did they come from?). The sound is much clearer than I've ever heard it, INCLUDING in theaters. There is a stereo soundtrack (the music is stereo and dialog/effects are center channel, as on the Pioneer laser, except it's 5.1 here), but the mono sounds excellent as well.

As for the extras - they are a mixed bag. Lots of talking heads "documentaries." I wish they would stop referring to these looking-just-off-to-the-side-of-the-camera interviews as "documentaries" just because a few film clips and stills are thrown in. They are, simply, interviews. The Harryhausen interviews are always interesting. Thank God they got this stuff when they did, as Harryhausen is looking pretty frail. But at least, for this movie, we don't have to listen to him espousing the great wonders of colorization!

I've not yet listened to the commentary.

Again, Sony shortchanges us in the trailer department - no Sinbad or any other Harryhausen trailer (at least one of these Harryhausen special editions should include a complete gallery of his Columbia trailers). It does include a trailer for "Casino Royale," which has not been available before.

So, the short of it is, I'm ecstatic to be able to own a gorgeous transfer of what I consider to be the seminal fantasy of my youth (and my life), looking and sounding exponentially finer than anything I have seen on a t.v. screen (mine is a 46" Sony Bravia).

Hope this helps to encourage a few more on-the-edge fans.
Reply
post #28 of 42
11/14/08 at 8:34pm

Re: Ray Harryhausen Collection

I already have 20,000,000 in SD and I'm wondering if the b&w movies in this set are appreciably better on BR than in SD? Is the set worth it, or should I just get Sinbad separately?
Reply
post #29 of 42
11/17/08 at 9:21am

Re: Ray Harryhausen Collection

I got no replies to my question, so I bit the bullet and ordered the set from DDD. Of course it's on back order, but so was Casino Royale and they shipped that pretty quick. I also ordered The Mummy.
Reply
post #30 of 42
11/17/08 at 10:32am

Re: Ray Harryhausen Collection

The B&W movies look fantastic, and of course you are given the option of original or colorized. I doubt most of us will look at the colorized versions for more than a couple of minutes, but they are available if you want to check them out.
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Blu-ray