What's new

WHV Press Release: The Exorcist 40th Anniversary (Blu-ray) (1 Viewer)

Charles Smith

Extremely Talented Member
Supporter
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jun 27, 2007
Messages
5,984
Location
Nor'east
Real Name
Charles Smith
Beautiful, though. Really. And how often do I say that? Never. Well, hardly ever.
 

Nick*Z

Screenwriter
Joined
Apr 30, 2003
Messages
1,801
Location
Canada
Real Name
NICK
I have to side with Ken Koc on this one. How about WB releasing movies to Blu that haven't come to Blu yet. The answer of course is easy to figure out. It's easier to re-issue titles with minimum upgrade than to do a ground up restoration and remastering of titles that have yet to see the light of day in hi-def. Money and time. That's what it all boils down to. WB isn't particularly willing to spend either these days on catalogue that they haven't already previously mined for the all mighty buck. Tragic.

The Exorcist - been there. Done that. Yes, there's always room for improvements. But we don't need a 40th, particularly when I can pretty much guarantee they're already working on a 45th and then a 50th. Oz debacle anyone?!?

As I've said before, the WB catalogue is such an embarrassment of riches there are easily over a couple hundred titles that could go to Blu tomorrow and be flying off the racks. One problem - none of them have been given the badly needed re-scan of original film elements to get them up to snuff.

The powers that be take a look at their aging catalogue and go "Whoa! Too much work for me. Is it in our budget? Whoa! Problem number two! What should we do? How about nothing. Say, aren't there some hi-def files kicking around on The Exorcist? Yep. How long's it been since we issued this? Five years? Fantastic. Time for another go at it. Throw in a 30 minute 'new to video' featurette and they'll eat it up...or spew it out. Ha! Ha! A little satanic humor there."

Word to Warner - nobody's laughing that more of your glorious catalogue hasn't made it to Blu in 2013. Time to get with the program!!!
 

Jeff Adkins

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Sep 18, 1998
Messages
2,842
Location
Tampa, FL
Real Name
Jeff Adkins
Somehow I missed picking this up the first time around. The new features do sound interesting, but but due to the artwork and the higher price, I'm skipping it. I hate the cover art. The original art was so iconic to me. I just went and ordered the British release that has both cuts for around $20 including shipping. Interestingly enough, the British version uses the green tint on the cover which was on most of the video releases that I remember (although the original poster did not have the tint). It's just a personal preference for me as I've grown up with that green-tinted art since I was a child.

Perhaps I will eventually pick up the new version if they indeed restore the Saul Bass WB logo at the beginning, but I'm betting the new version will be the same transfer with the new supplements and packaging.

U.K. Cover
exorcist.jpg
 

Johnny Angell

Played With Dinosaurs Member
Senior HTF Member
Deceased Member
Joined
Dec 13, 1998
Messages
14,905
Location
Central Arkansas
Real Name
Johnny Angell
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.
 

moviebuff75

Screenwriter
Joined
Oct 4, 2009
Messages
1,308
Location
Indianapolis, Indiana
Real Name
Eric Scott Richard
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?
 

willyTass

Supporting Actor
Joined
Sep 9, 2005
Messages
994
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
 

Ronald Epstein

Founder
Owner
Moderator
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jul 3, 1997
Messages
66,558
Real Name
Ronald Epstein
This is similar to a HTF member pointing me to a thread in another Blu-ray
forum where a member there comes out and states (out of the blue) that
the upcoming 2D version of The Wizard of Oz is a brand-new transfer.

...well, all indications from what I have gathered is that it is probably not.

I would think if WB wants to stress to its buyers that there has been a
new transfer struck, it would probably have been noted in the press release.
The studio is infamous (as are others) for repackaging existing transfers.
 

Jeff Adkins

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Sep 18, 1998
Messages
2,842
Location
Tampa, FL
Real Name
Jeff Adkins
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.

The cover isn't the only reason. It's a combination of things. The discs inside are most important, and I would always choose the higher quality product in terms of the feature film. That's a no-brainer. I've yet to see any proof that this new version is a different scan. While I'd like to see the new documentary, I'll probably just check it out at the local library as they'll likely get this. I don't know what the street price will be on this, but I'm sure it's going to be close to $10-15 more than the $20 I just paid for a sealed copy of the British release. If the Saul Bass WB logo and the original mono soundtrack are included in this new release, I'll bite the bullet and get that too.

The British rating symbols are a slight annoyance, but the lesser of two evils to me. The U.S. cover released in 2010 is way too bright and reveals too much detail of the building and its surroundings. The British one is darker, foggier and looks more the way that the scene has been shown in promotional materials throughout the years.
 

Dave H

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2000
Messages
6,152
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?
Possibly, or Friedkin was confused and the new transfer had already been done for the original Blu-ray - which actually looks quite good.
 

Lord Dalek

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Apr 4, 2005
Messages
7,093
Real Name
Joel Henderson
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.
Yeah as I have said repeatedly, the existing transfer looks pretty damn amazing for an alleged 2k.
 

Vincent_P

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Sep 13, 2003
Messages
2,147
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
 

Lord Dalek

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Apr 4, 2005
Messages
7,093
Real Name
Joel Henderson
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
At this point it wouldn't surprise me if its just a repackaging with the new features on a third disc.
 

Keith Cobby

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jan 8, 2013
Messages
4,510
Location
Kent "The Garden of England", UK
Real Name
Keith Cobby
I have not owned The Exorcist before and have only seen the film once so I shall probably buy this edition.

Incidentally, why do they call him The Exorcist?

Because he doesn't leave until all the spirits have gone!
 

Ronald Epstein

Founder
Owner
Moderator
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jul 3, 1997
Messages
66,558
Real Name
Ronald Epstein
Now Available For Preorder

57331_large.jpg


The link below will take you directly to the product on Amazon. If you are using an adblocker you will not see link.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Users who are viewing this thread

Latest Articles

Forum statistics

Threads
356,814
Messages
5,123,656
Members
144,184
Latest member
H-508
Recent bookmarks
0
Top