Kaufman's 1978 INVASION OF THE BODY SNATCHERS coming to Blu-ray (1 Viewer)

[Dick]

At least, according to Amazon it is....


http://www.amazon.com/dp/B003WTO5YI/ref=nosim?tag=dvdbeaver-20&link_code=as3&creativeASIN=B003WTO5YI&creative=373489&camp=211189



MGM isn't quite as dead as I thought they were. Bring on the Bonds, guys!

 

[Stephen_J_H]

I'm wondering if this will be one of their upcoming BD/DVD combo packs.

 

[Johnny Angell]

Originally Posted by Stephen_J_H

I'm wondering if this will be one of their upcoming BD/DVD combo packs.

According to the link it is. I'd sure like to see the original on blu.

 

[Sam Favate]

Isn't the DVD of this movie in non-anamorphic widescreen? That would make it a perfect choice for upgrading to BD.

 

[Worth]

The first DVD release was non-anamorphic, but the special edition from a couple of years ago was 16X9.

 

[JoshuaB.]

I know there'd be rights issues, but I'd love to see a blu-ray set of the original film and the Kaufman and Ferrara remakes. I have a soft spot for this creepy remake--Leonard Nimoy gave me a nightmare after I first watched this on TV as a child!

 

[RickardL]

The amazon text says:

[*] Aspect Ratio: 1.33:1

[*]

[*] let's hope it is incorrect...

 

[Stephen_J_H]

Originally Posted by JoshuaB.

I know there'd be rights issues, but I'd love to see a blu-ray set of the original film and the Kaufman and Ferrara remakes. I have a soft spot for this creepy remake--Leonard Nimoy gave me a nightmare after I first watched this on TV as a child!

That would be complicated. The original sits with Paramount (as a result of Viacom's acquisition of the Republic/NTA library, even though it was an RKO release and the last DVD was released by Artisan [now Lionsgate] in 2002...... the mind reels), the Kaufman remake from 1978 is a United Artists title and as such sits with MGM, and finally, the two most recent remakes (Ferrara's 1993 Body Snatchers, and Oliver Hirschbiegel's 2007 The Invasion) are distributed by Warner. The only thing that would simplify the mess is if Warner acquired MGM, leaving only Paramount as the odd man out, and they've been licencing catalogue titles left, right and centre as of late.

 

[cineMANIAC]

I agree that a boxed set with all the films would be the ideal release but it'll never happen. I actually like the 1978 version the best. I haven't been in the hi-def game very long so I'm not sure but is merely releasing something on Blu-ray without doing a new hi-def transfer going to automatically improve the picture quality? I still don't buy the argument that even crappy low-budget films would look great on Blu-ray "just because it's Blu-ray".

 

[TravisR]

Originally Posted by Luisito34

I still don't buy the argument that even crappy low-budget films would look great on Blu-ray "just because it's Blu-ray".

DVD has 525 lines of resolution. Blu-ray has 1080 lines of resolution. That increase in resolution guarantees that the Blu-ray will look better than the DVD. There might not be a night and day difference and it doesn't guarantee perfection but it's still going to look better.

 

[Joe Karlosi]

Originally Posted by TravisR



DVD has 525 lines of resolution. Blu-ray has 1080 lines of resolution. That increase in resolution guarantees that the Blu-ray will look better than the DVD. There might not be a night and day difference and it doesn't guarantee perfection but it's still going to look better.

So they say, but I've had my share of Blus which looked either exactly the same as their DVD counterparts. Words and numbers are not important; seeing is believing.

 

[Michael Reuben]

Originally Posted by Luisito34

I still don't buy the argument that even crappy low-budget films would look great on Blu-ray "just because it's Blu-ray". (emphasis added)

Have you ever actually heard anyone make that argument? Has anyone ever said that putting something on Blu-ray will make it look "great" (as opposed to "better", "more accurate", "more detailed", etc.)?


Blu-ray is a medium, nothing more. It can't improve on the source, but it can, if properly handled, reproduce the source with exceptional accuracy. It's the first consumer video medium capable of recreating a film image with enough resolution and color variation to truly look like film.


If the source is a washed-out, grainy image, then that's what will be on the Blu-ray -- and it's what should be there. The Blu-ray will still show you a lot more than a DVD could. How do I know? Because I've seen (and reviewed) the results in enough instances to be certain that the improvements offered by Blu-ray, properly transferred and mastered, are indisputable.


This does not guarantee that every Blu-ray will be an improvement over its DVD counterpart. Not every Blu-ray is properly transferred and mastered. That's why we review them.

 

[TravisR]

Originally Posted by Joe Karlosi

So they say, but I've had my share of Blus which looked either exactly the same as their DVD counterparts. Words and numbers are not important; seeing is believing.

What titles? I've never seen it but I think I remember hearing that Evil Dead 2 looked like the DVD but, outside of that, I can't remember hearing about any title that looked exactly like the DVD. Like I said before, I'm not saying that they're all perfect or that there's a huge difference between the two but I'd be shocked if there was half of a dozen of titles (out of the thousands of Blu-rays that exist) where the Blu-ray and DVD look like exactly alike.

 

[cineMANIAC]

I've yet to come across a Blu-ray that looked like a DVD in the picture quality dept. I've certainly seen some BDs that weren't demo-material, particularly some of the earliest ones, but my original question was about Fox's combo packs and whether or not something that hasn't been given a NEW hi-def transfer would benefit much from a standard to hi-def transition. It doesn't appear that Fox is doing much with the source materials other than just releasing Blu-ray versions of existing DVDs. As much as I want a Blu-ray version of Escape From New York I'll just hang onto the excellent Collector's Edition DVD until something with a little more effort from the studio comes along.

 

[Worth]

Originally Posted by Luisito34

I've yet to come across a Blu-ray that looked like a DVD in the picture quality dept. I've certainly seen some BDs that weren't demo-material, particularly some of the earliest ones, but my original question was about Fox's combo packs and whether or not something that hasn't been given a NEW hi-def transfer would benefit much from a standard to hi-def transition. It doesn't appear that Fox is doing much with the source materials other than just releasing Blu-ray versions of existing DVDs. As much as I want a Blu-ray version of Escape From New York I'll just hang onto the excellent Collector's Edition DVD until something with a little more effort from the studio comes along.

I'm not sure what you mean here. Are you suggesting that the MGM/Fox blu-rays are upconverts? If so, that's most certainly not the case.


I just picked up the Escape From New York BD and it looks excellent. Lots of detail, spot-on black levels and no noticeable DNR, EE or other digital processing. I don't know if it's taken from a new transfer or one that's several years old - either way, it blows away the DVD by a wide margin, and it only cost $10 to boot.

 

[Michael Reuben]

Originally Posted by Luisito34

. . . but my original question was about Fox's combo packs and whether or not something that hasn't been given a NEW hi-def transfer would benefit much from a standard to hi-def transition.

The answer is simple: It depends.


If the existing hi-def transfer was well-done and in good condition, a Blu-ray created from it should be a significant improvement over a DVD created by down-res'ing the hi-def image.

If the existing hi-transfer was poorly done, was done on outdated equipment, or was performed by techicians whose mentality was geared toward an eventual DVD output (which often affected choices regarding contrast, black levels, noise reduction, etc.), then there may still be benefits from a Blu-ray presentation, but they will be significantly less -- and may be outweighed by other issues.


There is no all-purpose answer.

 

[Nelson Au]

This Blu ray is coming this week. It's a good sequel....

 

But I want to see the original Don Siegel B&W version! If it looks as good as the upcoming Psycho appears to be, then that would be wonderful. There's something delicious about a well transferred black and film. Especially a good scary one!

 

[Powell&Pressburger]

DVD Beaver Posted a review over on their site, and the bit rate on this release is crazy insane good.

 

Disc Size: 40,995,040,719 bytes
Feature Size: 37,982,269,440 bytes
Average Bitrate: 37.94 Mbps

 

I love this film so much. People always talk about films and wishing they could see it again for the first time. This would be that type of film.

 

I would also like the original released on BLU also, but this remake is very well done, and a nice piece of entertainment.

 

Brooke Adams is so good in the film, I could listen to her read the telephone book!

 

[Dick]

Hang on to your special edition DVD -- the Kaufman commentary isn't on the new release, for whatever ungodly reason.

 

[MichaelEl]

Originally Posted by Luisito34 

I've yet to come across a Blu-ray that looked like a DVD in the picture quality dept.

I've seen Blu-Rays that looked WORSE than DVD - DELIVERANCE, for example.

 

1080 lines is only twice the vertical resolution of DVD, and that advantage can be completely negated if they do a lot of digital image manipulation. In fact, the best Blu-Ray transfers I've seen are ones which haven't been especially remastered for HD.