Beautiful, though. Really. And how often do I say that? Never. Well, hardly ever.
Prove it.willyTass said:bit of a mystery the lack of doubt. It has been re-scanned at 4k. This new scan is the basis of the new Blu Ray
Johnny Angell said:To each his own, but making the cover the primary reason for selecting a version, makes no sense to me. Particularly in this day of custom covers. BTW, don't you think those British rating symbols mar the cover?I do like the original iconic cover image. It's one of those images that tells you immediately what the movie is. However, that stairs cover is pretty cool.
Possibly, or Friedkin was confused and the new transfer had already been done for the original Blu-ray - which actually looks quite good.moviebuff75 said:Friedkin said that a new transfer was made that looked like the day the film was printed. Could it be that WB made a new transfer like Clockwork Orange, but it won't be used for the new Blu-ray?
Yeah as I have said repeatedly, the existing transfer looks pretty damn amazing for an alleged 2k.Dave H said:Possibly, or Friedkin was confused and the new transfer had already been done for the original Blu-ray - which actually looks quite good.
At this point it wouldn't surprise me if its just a repackaging with the new features on a third disc.Vincent_P said:Nobody has ever given proof that the original Blu-ray was from a 2K transfer. A friend of mine checked with a buddy of his at WB and he was told this new Blu-ray will use the exact same transfer as the original release. I have no reason to doubt that this is the case, and that the original Blu-ray probably came from a 4K scan (I mean what, BLADE RUNNER from WB was done in 2007 and it was 4K, why wouldn't THE EXORCIST in 2010 have been 4K, as well?).
Vincent
Chinese whispers most likely.darkrock17 said:Since a few people have mentioned 4K scans already, anyone know anything about this? http://www.blu-ray.com/movies/The-Exorcist-Blu-ray/69509/