WHV Press Release: House of Wax (3D Blu-ray) (2 Viewers)

[Moe Dickstein]

Blu is a storage format. It can hold SD or HD of any size or resolution. It is merely a container, there's nothing wrong with putting SD out on Blu. WB Archive material never gets full restoration, so if this is SD on this release you're getting what you would there on a pressed disc with House of Wax as a free bonus.

 

[Bob Furmanek]

I'm all for a full restoration of MOTWM and would buy it in a heartbeat. With the near mint 35mm nitrate print that Jack Theakston discovered several years ago (now at UCLA) they can do a stunning restoration.

With that said, HOW is an important landmark film and deserves the deluxe treatment.

I don't preorder anything anymore (no need to really, it's most likely only going to fall in price rather than rise, and it's not a limited edition), but I've added it to my cart, ready to buy it pending an initial review by Mr Furmanek.

Thank you, Persianimmortal. If we get an advance screener, we will be glad to post our comments on the stereoscopic quality.

 

[Matt Hough]

Mine too Matt, but my experience was probably different than yours. I remember that revival well as it played at one of the movie theaters in my home town and I convinced my friends to come see it with me (we were in high school) and the one and only screening was an unmitigated DISASTER! I don't know the specifics of the print they played or how it differed from the other 3D stuff shown there (I had previously seen my first 3D movie COMIN' AT YA! at the same theater and, while a TERRIBLE movie the effects were amazing from where I sat!) but it was constantly out of focus, way too dark and really really headache inducing. To top it off, they were desperately trying to "fix" whatever was wrong while the show was going on so the brightness and focus kept changing erratically. We had an intermission (I can't remember at this late date if it was planned or not) and when we came back in half of the movie was playing on the WALL!! I felt SO sorry for them and could only imagine the poor projectionist sweating and crying up in the booth because it was going so very very wrong. Once the movie was over, Mr Krause, who owned the theater, was waiting for the full house to exit so he could hand out complimentary movie passes and coupons for free popcorn to everyone as they left. Needless to say, the run was cut short right then and there!

Thanks for the memories, and now that you mention it, at the House of Wax screening I attended, the print was unusually dark, I thought. Funny that I hadn't even thought about that until I read your post.

 

[Bob Furmanek]

The re-issue prints were too dark and mis-timed.
The best I've ever seen the film was the new left/right 35mm pair that WB struck in 2006. That was outstanding and we ran it at the Expo that year.

And this new edition will be even better. I can't wait!

 

[JoeDoakes]

Let the Warner Archive do what they were originally planning, restore MYSTERY properly, then release it via their program at $20-30 a shot.


I buy that in a second!!!

Ok by me.

 

[Jeffrey Nelson]

Six rolls of film scanned at 4K and then restored/aligned for flawless 3-D and people still find something to complain about!

As long as the 3-D is watchable on equipment besides a DLP setup (unlike, say, DIAL M FOR MURDER), you'll get no complaints from me. If it looks like CREATURE, I'm in. If it looks like DIAL M, I'm out.

 

[Ronald Epstein]

As long as the 3-D is watchable on equipment besides a DLP setup (unlike, say, DIAL M FOR MURDER), you'll get no complaints from me. If it looks like CREATURE, I'm in. If it looks like DIAL M, I'm out.

...and I got hell for criticizing Dial M and not including it in
my Top 20 3D list.

There was an abundance of ghosting in that release.

...and I rarely have problems with ghosting on my display.

Some saw it, some didn’t. I am hoping that experience is not repeated
with House of Wax.

 

[GregK]

As long as the 3-D is watchable on equipment besides a DLP setup (unlike, say, DIAL M FOR MURDER), you'll get no complaints from me. If it looks like CREATURE, I'm in. If it looks like DIAL M, I'm out.

Don't forget passive sets- DIAL M looked fine on a majority of those displays as well. Certain LCD displays and projectors have also been spec'd to meet maximum cancellation. The Panasonic AE-8000 is one LCD display example.

Why certain 3DTVs have shortcomings has been discussed repeatedly and at length. When I purchase or recommend 3-D displays, I make sure they have L/R cancellation at least as good as theatrical 3-D presentations. Many do displays not meet this criteria. Bottom line: Shop accordingly.

As for how HOUSE OF WAX will look on less than stellar 3-D displays, most of the time it should be on par with CREATURE, as most of the primary subject of interest takes place at the stereo window.

 

[Ronald Epstein]

Greg,

I have heard that DIAL M looks fine on passive displays.

However, I don't agree with the hardware argument completely.

I own close to 100 3D Blu-rays. I have reviewed dozens on this forum.

I don't generally have a problem with crosstalk. So, if it were a hardware
problem I would think that there would be consistency across most of the
titles I have viewed. There isn't.

That particular release received far more attention on crosstalk than any
other single 3D Blu-ray release. This tells me that there was something
about the way that film was transferred.

...of course, I am not an authority on these things. I can only surmise what the
problem is based on what I am seeing across my entire collection and the
amount of complaints that particular title received.

BTW, Have never seen House of Wax. This is definitely the most
anticipated release for me this year. I love discovering these classic
3D titles. They are so much more enjoyable to watch than recent releases
that tend to play it safe with their boundaries. Hopefully sales will be
successful enough to spark more interest in getting more of these classics
out into the marketplace.

 

[Dick]

I don't generally have a problem with crosstalk. So, if it were a hardwareproblem I would think that there would be consistency across most of thetitles I have viewed. There isn't. That particular release received far more attention on crosstalk than anyother single 3D Blu-ray release. This tells me that there was somethingabout the way that film was transferred.

I, too have a big crosstalk problem with DIAL M and am praying for better with HOUSE OF WAX. I own roughly 60 3-D movies, and run them on a terrific 55" Panny plasma. I rarely have crosstalk problems -- a few shots here and there is all. DIAL M is the worst offender by far, and I am not terribly fond of two or three others (CAVE OF FORGOTTEN DREAMS, CIRCQUE DU SOLEIL), but, like you, I wonder why all the rest of my collection looks great while these few don't, in spite of how great people say they are when played back on passive sets.

 

[Persianimmortal]

I also saw ghosting on Dial M for Murder on an active Panasonic Plasma with Pana glasses, without any such problems on other 3D titles. It wasn't atrocious, but it was the first time I've seen ghosting on my display, so it was mildly distracting in some scenes. I'm certain it isn't a hardware issue.

Although I'm fairly confident House of Wax will come out great, I'm more than happy to wait for official confirmation from knowledgeable folks, as well as reading some normal user reviews. More than most other films, if the 3D isn't of good enough quality in this title, it's worth skipping altogether in my opinion (whereas with Dial M I would still buy it just to watch the 2D version).

 

[RolandL]

Don't forget passive sets- DIAL M looked fine on a majority of those displays as well. Certain LCD displays and projectors have also been spec'd to meet maximum cancellation. The Panasonic AE-8000 is one LCD display example.

Why certain 3DTVs have shortcomings has been discussed repeatedly and at length. When I purchase or recommend 3-D displays, I make sure they have L/R cancellation at least as good as theatrical 3-D presentations. Many do displays not meet this criteria. Bottom line: Shop accordingly.

As for how HOUSE OF WAX will look on less than stellar 3-D displays, most of the time it should be on par with CREATURE, as most of the primary subject of interest takes place at the stereo window.

I have the Panasonic AE-8000 and a Sony KDL55NX810. I don't have Dial M for Murder but the worst ghosting/crosstalk I have seen is on Hugo. For most of the movie it was fine on the Sony but the scenes at the end were pretty bad. Watching the same title on the Panasonic cleared up almost all of it.

 

[FoxyMulder]

I have a 60 inch Samsung E6500 and use Panasonic 3D glasses, i didn't notice any ghosting on Hugo, i think your viewing position can be an issue, how many of you have the television screen or projection screen at around the middle of your eye level, how many have the television on a wall too high up, that's what i would like to know, how many move their heads while watching the film or have lighting on.

 

[RolandL]

Getting back to HOW, since WB has the mono surround track, I hope they at least use this for the Blu-ray. When it premiered at the NY Paramout theatre, they installed 25 surround speakers so, there must be a number of scenes where it is used.

For you lovers of in-your-face 3D, there are the opening titles, paddle-ball and a few other short scenes that have the out-of-screen effects.

 

[JoeDoakes]

If it looks like CREATURE, I'm in. If it looks like DIAL M, I'm out.

I thought the 3D on Creature was screwed up.

 

[Bob Furmanek]

I just showed DIAL M to some friends: no complaints and zero ghosting/crosstalk/double-imaging etc.

It's your displays, not the film or the transfer

 

[Ronald Epstein]

I just showed DIAL M to some friends: no complaints and zero ghosting/crosstalk/double-imaging etc.

Was this on your passive display?If so, I can understand why you didn't see anyghosting. People with a DLP display probably
will not, either.The problem seems to exist for those with activeshutter displays who don't normally have a ghostingissues.

I don't agree that it's necessarily a display problem
other than the fact that its related to active shutter
displays. I believe there is something in that transfer
offsetting the 3D in those displays....but that's something
that's not very easy to prove, so ultimately, we are going
to have to agree to disagree.

 

[Dan_Shane]

I just showed DIAL M to some friends: no complaints and zero ghosting/crosstalk/double-imaging etc.

It's your displays, not the film or the transfer

I will chip in that DIAL M and CREATURE both look superb on my 73" Mitsubishi DLP. No ghosting of any kind, and 3D effects surpass most of my other 3D Blu-rays.

 

[Bob Furmanek]

Yes, it was on the Vizio.

As Greg has explained in earlier posts, the older films have a much wider parallax than current 3-D. That's the issue.

 

[JoeDoakes]

This is what I was recalling about Creature:

http://www.3dfilmarchive.com/an-in-depth-look-at-creature-from-the-black-lagoon-1

http://www.hometheaterforum.com/topic/318241-an-in-depth-look-at™-creature-from-the-black-lagoon/?hl=%2Bcreature+%2Bfrom+%2Bthe+%2Bblack+%2Blagoon

Interestingly enough, Bob Furmanek speculates that some of the problems with Creature may have been created by Universal trying to avoid ghosting with active shutter displays.