Upcoming EVIL DEAD release -- full screen? (1 Viewer)

[Lannie Lorence]

Dammit. Because of this thread, now I am tempted to go out and buy the current AB DVD despite the fact that I have the Elite DVD and will surely be getting the upcoming AB release.
Just leave it fullscreen.

 

[Jon Robertson]

I think it would be EXTREMELY short-sighted of Anchor Bay not to include a full-screen version in addition to the matted print.
However, the 1.85 framing is how the director wants it now, but in this case of this film, the 1.33:1 framing looks correct, with no dead space at the top or bottom.
If they did dual-versions (widescreen & full-frame, like Santa Claus the Movie) would everyone here would ditch the widescreen in favour of the unmatted print, or go with the new filmmaker-approved re-framing?
------------------
"Here lies Ash Buchanan, protected by the Ejaculation of Serpents" - coming to DVD on 21st August 2001

 

[Rolando]

Dudes,
I am the number one Evil Dead fan in existence and I say if Bruce says widescreen then widescreen it is baby!!! This is the best movie ever made, think about it! It has all the elements you need for a horror movie. They’re dead, they’re evil… what more could you want?
Seriously, this is a movie. It was filmed on 16 mm yes but in the hopes to be shown… that’s right, at the movies. And what is the aspect ratio of screens in theatres? NOT 1.33:1 no sir! As PerryD suggested or asked: this was NOT meant to be a direct to video production. Bruce even says it on the LD/DVD commentary that video was not even widely available at the time and that many FX shots were done knowing people would just see it for a few seconds or less at theatres. They DID NOT expect people to own this movie at home and for it to be watched over and over, being paused or on slow motion.
So if it was meant to be seen in theatres then by that same token it CANNOT be meant to be seen 4:3. It’s one or the other. Now I agree framing seems fine in 4:3, heck maybe even better but I have watched it zoomed on my 16:9 TV (to see what it would look like) and it seems fine too. You might say some scenes seem cropped a little close at the top and bottom but we’ve seen this on plenty of other widescreen movies. Many close ups on 1.85 and more movies cut top of the heads or chins or anything else.
If it was being reformatting to fit 16:9 TV I would be appalled and disgusted. But it sounds like we will be getting the aspect ratio of it’s theatrical presentation or one much closer to it then the one out there now. And isn’t that what we at the HTF are all about? Reproducing the “theatre” experience at home? Have the sound and AR of the theatrical presentation? Guys pick one. It’s one or the other. Theatre version or home version, real fans like me will likely hold on to both
(edited since I meant DID NOT in 2nd paragraph but forgot the all important NOT)
[Edited last by Rolando on August 09, 2001 at 05:49 PM]
[Edited last by Rolando on September 08, 2001 at 04:11 PM]

 

[Adam Tyner]

As I said earlier in the thread, the theatrical aspect ratio was 1.66:1.
------------------
My DVD list | My personal site

 

[Artur Meinild]

I would not ditch the WS version. I would watch it, and if I liked it, that would be my preferred version.
------------------
~ Stud. Polyt. ~ Artur Meinild ~

 

[John CW]

So much confusion!
Sam Raimi always intended the film to be shown widescreen, he shot it 1.33 and intended to go back and reframe -- he never got the chance for home video.
If you saw this film in the cinema it would have been in widescreen. If you saw it on video it was INCORRECTLY presented in 4:3 -- it is NOT a full screen film!
Anchor Bay promised Sam the chance to finally get the proper aspect ratio he's always wanted for their new release (which is using a brand new print they've recently discovered), but because Sam had to take the Spiderman job he couldn't do it.
Instead he's entrusted the job to his friend Bruce Campbell.
Hopefully Anchor Bay will also include the original Evil Dead: "Within the Woods" which is a short film that Sam and Bruce (and Ellen) made to try and drum up money from investors.
Hardly anyone had ever seen this!
Fingers crossed!
------------------
http://www.geocities.com/fwwmfight

 

[Ian_H]

Hopefully Anchor Bay will also include the original Evil Dead: "Within the Woods" which is a short film that Sam and Bruce (and Ellen) made to try and drum up money from investors.

I attended a book signing tonight with Bruce and during the Q & A he was asked about the upcoming DVD. While he made no mention of reframing the movie he did talk about extras.
The disc is to include his 20 minute documentary
"Fanalysis". When asked about "Within the Woods" he cited the usual music rights issue and said that there would only be some clips from the short. At this point I kinda wish they would just do like Criterion had to do on the Sid & Nancy DVD extras and show the short without the music...not the best solution at all but I would like to see the film.
--Ian

 

[Mitty]

Adam said earlier:

Campbell is rumored to be going through the movie shot by shot for the widescreen presentation.

If the OAR is actually 1.66:1, why would he have to go through it shot by shot? It's not like they would have done that for the theatrical prints.

I dunno, but that makes it sound more like it's being recomposed/reframed than just being presented in its OAR.
But, I could be wrong. It almost happened once before, so I suppose it's possible.

 

[Adam Tyner]

Come on, Mitty -- you know better than that. Of course you're right!
At least, I think you are. My theory, and I'm not really sure if this is correct, is that Raimi tried to compose for 1.66:1, but due to the rough-and-tumble method of the shoot, didn't pull it off quite as well as he intended. He wanted to go back and reframe for widescreen, but he didn't have the time and/or ability to do so until recently. Well, technically, he still didn't have the time, but Bruce Campbell stepped in, and here we are today...
'The word' floating around is that the film has been reframed, and to a different aspect ratio than it was presented theatrically.
BTW, I probably should've said 'new' widescreen presentation in that earlier post.
------------------
My DVD list | My personal site
[Edited last by Adam Tyner on August 11, 2001 at 07:45 AM]

 

[Ed Vandeweerd]

Jeff,
The Elite Transfer is Excellent like the established reputation that Anchor Bay enjoys this is the case with them as well. So if you haven't bought it do it. IMHO the Elite Edition is the definitive version to have in Your Collection.
------------------
Ed Vandeweerd
[email protected]
my collection

 

[John CW]

Whoever said the picture was 1.66:1? I thought it was 1.85:1!?
Adam Tyner: Actually Adam and Mitty - Sticking "black bars" over the top and bottom of the picture is NOT how widescreen matting is done, the image is moved around and zoomed in and out to make sure everything important is still visible. Go see the T2:UE for an example of how they reframe every shot based on the source.
This is how ALL widescreen versions of movies that were shot Super 35 or 16mm are done.
FYI - 16mm is SQUARE in nature and (as far as I know) must ALWAYS be cropped for widescreen versions.
------------------
http://www.geocities.com/fwwmfight
[Edited last by John CW on September 08, 2001 at 07:29 AM]

 

[Adam Tyner]

quote: Whoever said the picture was 1.66:1? I thought it was 1.85:1!?[/quote]The comments about 1.66:1 were based on the aspect ratio Sam Raimi composed for, according to The Evil Dead Companion. The R2 disc (and the upcoming R1 release) will be presented at 1.85:1, having been reframed from the original, reportedly by Bruce Campbell himself. This information was already mentioned in page 1 of this thread.
I could very well be wrong, but I don't think your comments about zooming and the like apply to The Evil Dead. It's mentioned in The Evil Dead Companion that the premiere was at an older theater that accomodated 1.37:1, and Raimi decided (for the premiere only) to present the film unmatted. If there was all sorts of zooming and strange cropping, I doubt he could've pulled that off the way he wanted.
------------------
My DVD list | My personal site
[Edited last by Adam Tyner on September 08, 2001 at 07:56 AM]

 

[Kevin M]

quote: And I doubt that the upcoming AB release will contain both versions. They have before because they've used player generated mattes. [/quote]
I guess they may have did this for some 1:85:1 films but they couldn't have done this with Halloween because that is a 2:35:1 panavision (anamorphic lenses) film so they couldn't just simply produce mattes with the player.
While I'm on the subject, if they just have the player generate mattes how is the anamorphically(?) enhanced version....anamorphically enhanced?
Can you anamorphically squeeze and then unsqueeze a 1:33 image and avoid artifacts?
I tend to think they might offer both versions but as was said before if not then I'll still have my Elite version and the older Anchor Bay version to look at.
By the way I did a side by side (with video switching) comparison of these two DVD's (Anchor Bay and Elite SE) & the only difference that I can see is that the Anchor Bay version might have just a bit more contrast (white level) than the Elite SE DVD and if you ask me the Elite version has a much warmer "film like" feel to it than the otherwise fine AB version...IMHO.
------------------
-Kevin M.
"Have a good time all the time........that's my philosophy, Marty."
[Edited last by Kevin M on September 08, 2001 at 09:57 AM]

 

[Mathias Klemme]

Okay, first off, 1.66: 1 was the intended ratio when the film was shot. It was never meant to be full-frame and was only shown that way at the premiere. The video versions have always been full-screen, although that is not the intended ratio.
I got my Region 2 DVD from Anchor Bay UK today, and it is in 1.85: 1. Yes, they re-framed it but let me tell you, it looks gorgeous! It's better than AB's first R1 release, and the "new" aspect ratio doesn't hurt the film at all. It could easily have been like that from the beginning. Anyone not familiar with the film will not notice anything missing, and there has always been a lot of headroom in this film. I won't watch my full-frame DVD again, it's going straight to ebay. Also, the DTS sound rocks the house!
Plus, the packaging is very neat.

 

[John DeLuca]

Mathias, those were the exact words I was hoping to hear about the DTS-ES track. It's off to Amazon.UK to order the R2 version. Thanks for the info.

 

[Mathias Klemme]

John -
While I don't have an "ES"-setup (just plain 5.1) it sounds great on my system (just don't expect it to sound like Gladiator). And you might get it cheaper at www.play247.com
On another note, a short scene of lightning striking into a tree that was removed from earlier DVD versions is back in. It was my impression that Raimi removed this scene himself, so it might be an oversight.
--
Mathias

 

[Ken_McAlinden]

This is not definitive evidence of anything, since I have not seen a lot of 16mm film projected since I was in school, but every full frame presentation of something shot on 16mm I remember seeing before always had rounded edges on the corners when projected. I know the Elite DVD did not have this (I've seen it displayed on a monitor with 0 overscan). Is it possible that the previous transfers have been zoomed in a little? If you don't know what I mean by "rounded edges", take a look at the 16mm portions of "The Blair Witch Project". That title was windowboxed so severely that anyone should be able to see the corners.
Regards,
------------------
Ken McAlinden
Livonia, MI USA
[Edited last by Ken_McAlinden on September 10, 2001 at 08:59 AM]