Home Theater Forum › Home Theater Forum › Blu-ray, DVD, Streaming Video and Digital Downloads › Blu-ray › USHE Press Release: An American Werewolf In London - Full Moon Edition (DVD/Blu-ray)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

USHE Press Release: An American Werewolf In London - Full Moon Edition (DVD/Blu-ray)

post #1 of 38
7/13/09 at 11:14am
Thread Starter 
 

AVAILABLE FOR THE FIRST TIME ON BLU-RAY™HI-DEF

AN AMERICAN WEREWOLF IN LONDON –

FULL MOON EDITION

SEPTEMBER 15, 2009

OWN IT ON BLU-RAY™ HI-DEF AND 2-DISC DVD

FROM UNIVERSAL STUDIOS HOME ENTERTAINMENT

OVERVIEW: One of the most gripping horror films of all-time is now available in perfect picture and purest

digital sound on Blu-ray Hi-Def and DVD – An American Werewolf in London Full Moon Edition! When two

American students touring London are attacked by a vicious wolf during a full moon, their lives are suddenly

transformed forever. Featuring ground-breaking Academy Award®-winning make-up by Rick Baker (Michael

Jackson’s “Thriller,” How The Grinch Stole Christmas), this cult favorite is directed by John Landis (Michael

Jackson’s “Thriller,” National Lampoon’s Animal House) and perfectly blends the macabre with a touch of

humor. Digitally remastered for optimum picture quality and loaded with bonus features including an all-new

100-minute retrospective documentary, An American Werewolf in London - Full Moon Edition is a timeless

story that has never looked better!

EXCLUSIVE TO BLU-RAYTM HI-DEF:

• BD-LIVE™: Access the BD-Live™ Center through your Internet-connected player to get even

more content, watch the latest trailers, and more!

BONUS FEATURES (BLU-RAY™ HI-DEF and DVD):

• NEW! - BEWARE THE MOON: In this feature-length documentary, filmmaker Paul Davis guides

us through a never-before-seen, in-depth look at the Making of An American Werewolf in London,

with the help of director John Landis and make-up artist Rick Baker.

• NEW! - I WALKED WITH A WEREWOLF (IN HI-DEF): Make-up effects artist Rick Baker tells of

his life-long love of the Wolfman, how he would go on to create the creature in An American

Werewolf in London, and how he was able to pour his passion into the upcoming Wolfman feature.

• MAKING AN AMERICAN WEREWOLF IN LONDON, AN ORIGINAL FEATURETTE

• AN INTERVIEW WITH JOHN LANDIS

• MAKE-UP ARTIST RICK BAKER ON AN AMERICAN WEREWOLF IN LONDON

• CASTING OF THE HAND

• OUTTAKES

• STORYBOARDS

• PHOTOGRAPH MONTAGE

• FEATURE COMMENTARY WITH CAST MEMBERS DAVID NAUGHTON AND GRIFFIN DUNNE

SYNOPSIS: It's a rainy night on the Welsh moors. Two American students on a walking tour of Europe

trudge on to the next town, when suddenly the air is pierced by an unearthly howl...Three weeks later, one is

dead, the other is in the hospital and the nightmare begins for An American Werewolf in London. David

Naughton, Griffin Dunne and Jenny Agutter star in this contemporary story of the macabre which takes you

from the Welsh moors to Picadilly Circus, Trafalgar Square and the grounds of Windsor Castle. It is written

and directed by John Landis, the man who brought you National Lampoon's Animal House, The Blues

Brothers, Trading Places, and Coming to America. To add to the chill, there is art direction by Academy

Award®-winner Les Dilley of Star Wars and Alien fame and special makeup effects by six-time Academy

Award ®-winner Rick Baker, whose work includes Star Wars, The Nutty Professor, Tim Burton's Planet of

the Apes, Dr. Seuss' How the Grinch Stole Christmas and Men in Black.

TECHNICAL INFORMATION (BLU-RAY HI-DEF):

Street Date: September 15, 2009

Copyright: 2009 Universal Studios. All Rights Reserved

Selection Number: 61106285

Price: $26.98 SRP

Running Time: 1 Hour, 38 Minutes

Layers: BD-50

Aspect Ratio: Widescreen 1.85:1

Rating: R

Languages/Subtitles: English SDH, French, Italian, German, Spanish, Japanese, Korean, Swedish, Danish,

Finnish, Dutch, Norwegian, Portuguese, Mandarin, Greek

Sound: English DTS HD-Master Audio 5.1, French DTS 2.0 Mono, German DTS 2.0 Mono, Italian DTS 2.0

Mono

TECHNICAL INFORMATION (DVD):

Street Date: September 15, 2009

Copyright: 2009 Universal Studios. All Rights Reserved

Selection Number: 61107947

Price: $19.98 SRP

Running Time: 1 Hour, 38 Minutes

Layers: Dual

Aspect Ratio: Anamorphic Widescreen 1.85:1

Rating: R

Languages/Subtitles: English SDH, French, Spanish

Sound: English Dolby Digital 5.1; French Dolby Digital 2.0 Mono

CAST & FILMMAKERS:

Director: John Landis

Screenwriter: John Landis

Producer: George Folsey Jr.

Executive Producers: Peter Guber, Jon Peters

Director of Cinematography: Robert Paynter

Production Designer: Joyce Herlihy

Editors: Malcolm Campbell

Music: Elmer Bernstein

Costume Designer: Deborah Nadoolman

Cast: David Naughton, Griffin Dunne, Jenny Agutter



Edited by Ronald Epstein - 7/15/2009 at 02:40 pm GMT
Reply

Gear mentioned in this thread:

An American Werewolf in London (Full Moon Edition) [Blu-ray]
$12.69 at
See it »
post #2 of 38
7/13/09 at 12:02pm
There has been lots of scuttlebutt concerning a digital cleanup of this release, and, while I am quite interested to see the results of those efforts, I will be holding onto my HD DVD in the meantime in case things go too far.  I am hoping for the best however, and I am looking forward to the new extras.
Reply
post #3 of 38
7/13/09 at 1:34pm
By the way, Universal is releasing Army of Darkness and Van Helsing the same day on BRD.  However, they're only releasing The Wolf Man (1941) that same day on DVD in a 2-disc SE and 1-disc releases.  It's too bad a classic horror film like "The Wolf Man" can't be released on BRD too.




Crawdaddy
Reply
post #4 of 38
7/13/09 at 1:48pm
This release suggests that perhaps Uni isn't just porting over the same source used for the HD-DVD. I get the same vibe with their 25th Anniversary Edition of The Last Starfighter BD, but it remains to be seen.
Reply
post #5 of 38
7/13/09 at 2:09pm


Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert Crawford View Post

By the way, Universal is releasing Army of Darkness and Van Helsing the same day on BRD.  However, they're only releasing The Wolf Man (1941) that same day on DVD in a 2-disc SE and 1-disc releases.  It's too bad a classic horror film like "The Wolf Man" can't be released on BRD too.




Crawdaddy
Maybe by the time the 2009 Wolf Man hits Blu-ray, Universal will have some of the classics on BD to tie in? Looking forward to this release, one of my all-time faves.

Reply
post #6 of 38
7/13/09 at 2:38pm


Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert Crawford View Post

By the way, Universal is releasing Army of Darkness and Van Helsing the same day on BRD.  However, they're only releasing The Wolf Man (1941) that same day on DVD in a 2-disc SE and 1-disc releases.  It's too bad a classic horror film like "The Wolf Man" can't be released on BRD too.




Crawdaddy


I would be all over any Classic Uni monsters on Blu-Ray.  

Reply
post #7 of 38
7/13/09 at 4:09pm
Sold!  Easily one of my favorite 80's horror films.

Though these HD DVD to BD upgrades don't get me as excited as new to High Definition catalog titles. 

Unfortunately, not surprised at all about the lack of a Wolf Man BD.
Reply
post #8 of 38
7/13/09 at 5:18pm
Fantastic news, and it has my hopes up that John Landis may similarly grace us with INNOCENT BLOOD (Landis' vampire film with "La Femme Nikita" herself Anne Parillaud). I've always wanted to see the longer European cut of INNOCENT BLOOD, for instance. I do NOT want the short American version to be the version that comes to BluRay. It's only about 3 minutes longer, but in a horror film that can mean a lot.

For the longest time I thought the male lead in INNOCENT BLOOD was one of the Baldwin brothers, but it turns out Anthony LaPaglia is not a Baldwin. Just looks like one.

Come on Landis!
Reply
post #9 of 38
7/13/09 at 6:01pm
I guess I can now retire the DVD.   Here's another vote for "Innocent Blood" too.
Reply
post #10 of 38
7/14/09 at 7:03am


Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert Crawford View Post

By the way, Universal is releasing Army of Darkness and Van Helsing the same day on BRD.  However, they're only releasing The Wolf Man (1941) that same day on DVD in a 2-disc SE and 1-disc releases.  It's too bad a classic horror film like "The Wolf Man" can't be released on BRD too.




Crawdaddy

I agree, I had hoped that at least the original would be released on Blu, and maybe a title like An American Werewolf... with it. Strange it's the other way around.
But anyway, I am a casual monster movie fan (if there is such a thing) and I somehow managed to have never seen this, so my expectations are pretty high for this.

Reply
post #11 of 38
7/14/09 at 7:24pm
Sweet! There's gonna' be a Bad Moon Risin' come Sept.
Reply
post #12 of 38
7/15/09 at 2:38am
 I'm glad I have my HD DVD because I have a feeling this Bd is going to be scrubbed silly.
Sometimes the comments that people post in these forums do have actual consequences and the majority of comments that I saw about the first release was that is was too grainy, too old looking, needed a new master, and on and on- along with a generous helping of format antagonists that held this up as an example that the only HD DVD exclusive studio was doing a lousy job with their product.

I'm sure Universal saw those complaints and is ready to give people the image they profess they want now.

Reply
post #13 of 38
7/15/09 at 5:14am
I seem to remember there were similar complaints about the 12 Monkeys HD DVD so it'll be interesting when I get the BD in the next week or so and I can compare between the two on my system.

I'll be doing the same with An American Werewolf in Sept.  Hopefully this isn't "scrubbed silly" given Landis was involved. 

Then again seeing what Friedkin did with The French Connection [SHUDDERS] anything is possible.



Reply
post #14 of 38
7/15/09 at 5:59am
 The comments Landis made on bloody-disgusting.com give me cause to worry a bit
Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
he continues talking about the incredible Blu-ray transfer for the original film, "regardless, my film comes out on Blu-ray this summer and looks amazing. I was afraid the digital cleaning of the negative would result in too clear a picture and hurt Rick Baker's make-up, when in fact the incredibly crisp detail actually makes Rick stuff look even better!"
Reply
post #15 of 38
7/15/09 at 6:07am
 The comments Landis made on bloody-digusting.com cause me to worry a bit

Quote:
he continues talking about the incredible Blu-ray transfer for the original film, "regardless, my film comes out on Blu-ray this summer and looks amazing. I was afraid the digital cleaning of the negative would result in too clear a picture and hurt Rick Baker's make-up, when in fact the incredibly crisp detail actually makes Rick stuff look even better!"
 I've seen the cover art for the Bd and to me it looks great- huge improvement over the previous money shot hodge podge. And the extras sound great. I would likely be all over this even just as a saftey in case something happens to my HD DVD copy- but I dreading seeing  what's been done to it to make it palatable for the majority of bd buyers.
Well just have to see I guess.

I'm also curious what you find with 12 Monkeys.
Reply
post #16 of 38
7/16/09 at 4:51am
Yeah, I guess I can see your concern with those comments. 

Digital cleaning could simply be dirt/scratch removal
or it could involve light grain removal or moderate grain removal or heavy grain removal

Nothing to do but wait to see what they've done I guess.
Reply
post #17 of 38
7/16/09 at 5:43am
Of course, no one's commenting that this disc will be missing its original soundtrack, in this case mono, as per Universal's usual Blu-ray / DVD policy...
Reply
post #18 of 38
7/16/09 at 9:34am

 I pulled out my HD DVD last night. I've got a new projector since I last watched it, one that is more ruthlessly revealing of source issues. Up till now I've never noticed the EE on this title that some others have criticized it for. I can see it now, but for my tastes it's still verges on insignificant in terms of adding noticeable halos around objects.
However, there is no doubt to me it's there and given how much grain (noise?) there is, it has to be negatively affecting that- exacerbating it, changing it, giving it a slight digital signature. 
I've come around to thinking that maybe some of that noise is not a natural, analog characteristic of the source and could be minimized without negatively affecting the overall impression of the image.

I'm certain the image on the Bd is going to look quite a bit different from the HD DVD. I'm no longer of the mind that is going to be a full on negative though.
If they can show some restraint, this might be very admirable upgrade. 
At least that's what I'm hoping now.


As far as the audio goes- I'm more of a visual person. An audio re-mix has to be really  over the top (like the woeful ones for Grease or Jaws) for me to notice and get upset. I agree that the original mono track should always be included.
If they leave it off of Jaws then  I will be pissed.
Reply
post #19 of 38
7/16/09 at 10:20am
Landau spoke out against one of the previous DVD versions of Animal House before it got released claiming it looked too clean as they removed so much grain - they corrected the problem before the release, so my guess is the BD will not have issues like that.
Reply
post #20 of 38
7/16/09 at 10:29am
 I'm just baffled by these posts - do you know what the negative looks like on this title?  Do you know what it looked like theatrically?  If not, why do you just assume it's not going to be right?  If Landis is happy with what they did, then it should be just fine, because, you know, he's the director and knows what he shot (and yes, there are directors like Friedkin who likes revisionism, but Landis isn't one of them).  Given the printing processes and opticals of the time, I'm sure that there was overt and lousy-looking grain in Werewolf, but that was just something you had to live with back then on release prints.  If it were today, you would not have that problem and it would look more like what the director and DP actually intended it to look like - back then, they had to accept the technology and if they'd had the technology you would have not seen overt grain like that.
Reply
post #21 of 38
7/16/09 at 1:03pm
most of the time I read complaints about BD and HD transfers looking dirty and the films need to be remastered.  Now complaints about it looking too good. 
Reply
post #22 of 38
7/16/09 at 1:37pm


Quote:
Originally Posted by Bradley-E View Post

most of the time I read complaints about BD and HD transfers looking dirty and the films need to be remastered.  Now complaints about it looking too good. 

'Digitally processing' usually means the grain has been scrubbed out, giving the film a digital look it didn't have before it. It has happened to other titles, so some people are cautious.
Reply
post #23 of 38
7/19/09 at 9:26am


Quote:
Originally Posted by BillyFeldman View Post

 Given the printing processes and opticals of the time, I'm sure that there was overt and lousy-looking grain in Werewolf, but that was just something you had to live with back then on release prints.  If it were today, you would not have that problem and it would look more like what the director and DP actually intended it to look like - back then, they had to accept the technology and if they'd had the technology you would have not seen overt grain like that.

You seem to be assuming that film grain is a "defect" that filmmakers despise but had to "live with" because of technological "limitations".  What do you base that on?  Can you cite a specific quote from a filmmaker that says he wishes film didn't have grain?

If Universal degrains this film to satisfy the grainophobes, I'll be very disappointed, and will hang on to my HDDVD.

Reply
post #24 of 38
7/19/09 at 11:46am


Quote:
Originally Posted by RobertR View Post




You seem to be assuming that film grain is a "defect" that filmmakers despise but had to "live with" because of technological "limitations".  What do you base that on?  Can you cite a specific quote from a filmmaker that says he wishes film didn't have grain?

If Universal degrains this film to satisfy the grainophobes, I'll be very disappointed, and will hang on to my HDDVD.
 

Oh, please, stop with the usual Internet bushwa.  If you think cameramen were happy with the state of optical printing which caused overt grain in the opticals, grain like popcorn balls because of being generations away from the camera negative, you can think again.  I don't need to quote anyone because it's so basic - ask Robert Harris if you don't believe me.  No filmmaker was happy with the overt optical grain, which is why they used to cut the opticals in short, and go back to the non-optical footage as soon as possible.  In the 70s, they never cut in short, and those opticals are horrible to gaze at.  Go look at a painting in a museum, then look at a tenth-generation copy - think the artist would have been happy with the quality of the tenth-generation copy as compared to the original?  Maybe you do.  I don't.  So, if a studio wants to clean up the opticals (dissolves, etc.) and have them look more like the photography in the rest of the movie and match the grain in the rest of the movie, great.  You do understand that's what was originally being discussed here?  Not the natural film grain, but optical grain - two very different beasts.
Reply
post #25 of 38
7/19/09 at 2:55pm


Quote:
Originally Posted by BillyFeldman View Post




If you think cameramen were happy with the state of optical printing which caused overt grain in the opticals, grain like popcorn balls because of being generations away from the camera negative, you can think again.  I don't need to quote anyone because it's so basic - ask Robert Harris if you don't believe me.  No filmmaker was happy with the overt optical grain, which is why they used to cut the opticals in short, and go back to the non-optical footage as soon as possible.  In the 70s, they never cut in short, and those opticals are horrible to gaze at.  Go look at a painting in a museum, then look at a tenth-generation copy - think the artist would have been happy with the quality of the tenth-generation copy as compared to the original?  Maybe you do.  I don't.  So, if a studio wants to clean up the opticals (dissolves, etc.) and have them look more like the photography in the rest of the movie and match the grain in the rest of the movie, great.  You do understand that's what was originally being discussed here?  Not the natural film grain, but optical grain - two very different beasts.

The people who complain about film grain on Blu Ray don't talk about its increased presence as a result of using optical processes.  They talk about how they don't like its very existence.  They want films to look like HD video.  They don't like the look of film.  THAT'S what my fear is regarding this release--that Universal will cater to such people.

Edited by RobertR - 7/20/2009 at 12:24 am GMT
Edited by RobertR - 7/20/2009 at 12:25 am GMT
Edited by RobertR - 7/20/2009 at 12:26 am GMT
Reply
post #26 of 38
7/19/09 at 4:44pm
 Well, none of us will know for sure for a few months yet. I'm willing to suspend pre-judging it till then.

I just watched Pan's Labyrinth last night.
The US release has been slightly filtered, masking a very fine level of grain. Upon looking at the screenshot comparisons afterward, the difference is alternately disappointing and baffling. On first glance the difference is so exceedingly minor, my reaction was "this is another example of DNR shrieking Nutzis over-reacting. Upon closer look I had to admit that yes, the less filtered images had that extra little % integrity that is the whole point of HD to me. I can watch standard definition and still enjoy when done competently. HD however provides that extra little bit of refinement that usually makes the presentation that much more immersive. On content I love, I will pay the premium for that extra 5% (which is the common joke among enthusiasts of just about any tech hobby-you can get 95% of the way to perfection for a decent buy-in, but it's trying to attain that extra 5% that really ends up costing you).

anyway, long story short- this was all after the fact. I already knew what most people were saying about this release going in- It's one big reason that I avoided spinning it in the over year and a half that I've owned it. I wasn't looking forward to investing time in watching a 'compromised' release.  But when I did finally screen the HD DVD last night, I was never less than entranced and dazzled with the presentation. Finely filtered or not, there was still plenty of character in the image to not take me out of the picture, and not make me feel I was watching a compromised video feed.

I guess my point is, I understand the desire to chase perfection. That's fine.
But not settling for anything less than that, you are missing out on a whole lot of pleasure this technology can bring.

I don't want to settle for mediocrity, but at the same time, I'm in this to  enjoy my leisure time. Railing about and reading about the constant slights to be found on this format on message boards all day is starting to sap a lot of the pleasure out of this.
Not blaming anyone here for anything, just needed a place to vent I guess, because it seems like 9 out of every 10 releases I care about have 'issues'. 
Reply
post #27 of 38
7/19/09 at 6:39pm
 I understand completely - but either this wasn't the thread or I mis-read - because in one of these press releases it talked about cleaning up the optical grain so it matched the film.  As to those who want all grain wiped away, well that's a whole different ball of wax and ridiculous.  But overt grain from opticals - wash it away, please.
Reply
post #28 of 38
7/20/09 at 7:46am

Quote:

And how do you do that if the grain is baked into the negative? The only way to do that well is to go back to the original film elements (if they still exist) and re-composite them digitally. Otherwise, you'll end up with a smeary mess of frozen grain which some of us find much more objectionable and unnatural than organic film grain.

Quote:
If you think cameramen were happy with the state of optical printing which caused overt grain in the opticals, grain like popcorn balls because of being generations away from the camera negative, you can think again.

This argument constantly gets trotted out in order to justify revisionism - "Well, if only the filmmakers had had access to colour/widescreen/cgi/digital compositing/surround sound etc. they would have used them..."

Yes, they probably would have. And they probably would have loved to have had a bigger budget and a longer schedule and a better cast and a better crew and less studio interference and better shooting conditions and better weather and a host of other factors.

But they didn't. All films are ultimately a compromise - made by filmmakers to the best of their ability using the tools available to them at the time.

And some of us would like to see the results of those efforts replicated as faithfully as possible on blu-ray.
Reply
post #29 of 38
7/20/09 at 8:10am
 That's just fabulous.  And I have no real problem with it because I understand what the technology was.  But then let's simply not have any more complaints from reviewers here and elsewhere and posters here and elsewhere, talking about how awful the grain is in "certain" shots.  Let's just stop that right now.  

As to what they can and cannot do today, I don't think you or I have any idea what they can accomplish, and if some studio thinks they've found a way to have the grain of opticals match the grain of the rest of the film - bring it on and let's see it.  

No one is talking about revisionism - a word that gets trotted out whenever anyone makes any point.  I don't like sound bumps or anything that isn't the original mix of any film.  I want the film they made - always have, always will.  Don't need new sfx, new shots, new director's cuts, none of it.  You won't find more of a purist than me.  Since you're new here, you might want to just do a little research about people you respond to, so you know their deal.  But attempting to match optical grain to normal film grain (however little or much appears on the original camera negative) - absolutely.  That's not revisionism by any stretch of the imagination.  Revisionism is taking Hitchcock and team's brilliant sound mix on Vertigo and redoing it.  Revisionism is Spielberg's endless tampering with Close Encounters and ET.  Revisionism is George Lucas' tampering with Star Wars.  
Reply
post #30 of 38
7/20/09 at 8:17am


Quote:
Originally Posted by BillyFeldman View Post

 But then let's simply not have any more complaints from reviewers here and elsewhere and posters here and elsewhere, talking about how awful the grain is in "certain" shots.  Let's just stop that right now.  

 

I agree completely with that part.  In fact, let's have reviewers stop complaining about the presence of film grain period.  It's a natural aspect of film, and therefore needs to be on the disc as it is in the film.  They all need to get OVER it.
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Blu-ray

Gear mentioned in this thread:

An American Werewolf in London (Full Moon Edition) [Blu-ray]
$12.69 at
See it »
Home Theater Forum › Home Theater Forum › Blu-ray, DVD, Streaming Video and Digital Downloads › Blu-ray › USHE Press Release: An American Werewolf In London - Full Moon Edition (DVD/Blu-ray)