Jump to content



Sign up for a free account!

Signing up for an account is fast and free. As a member you can join in the conversation, enter contests to win things like this Logitech Harmony Ultimate Remote and you won't get the popup ads that guests get. Click here to create your free account.

Photo
- - - - -

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

Warner

  • You cannot start a new topic
  • Please log in to reply
120 replies to this topic

#61 of 121 Charles Smith

Charles Smith

    Extremely Talented Member

  • 4,071 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 27 2007
  • LocationNor'east

Posted July 05 2013 - 04:11 PM

Beautiful, though. Really. And how often do I say that? Never. Well, hardly ever.

#62 of 121 Nick*Z

Nick*Z

    Stunt Coordinator

  • 210 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 30 2003
  • Real Name:NICK

Posted July 07 2013 - 05:28 AM

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!!!


  • Keith Cobby and ROclockCK like this

#63 of 121 Jeff Adkins

Jeff Adkins

    Screenwriter

  • 1,762 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 18 1998
  • Real Name:Jeff Adkins

Posted July 14 2013 - 11:05 PM

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


Edited by Jeff Adkins, July 14 2013 - 11:13 PM.


#64 of 121 Johnny Angell

Johnny Angell

    Played With Dinosaurs Member

  • 5,000 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 13 1998
  • Real Name:Johnny Angell
  • LocationCentral Arkansas

Posted July 15 2013 - 05:59 AM

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.
  • cafink likes this
Johnny
www.teamfurr.org
But a family cat is not replaceable like a wornout coat or a set of tires. Each new kitten becomes its own cat, and none is repeated. I am four cats old, measuring out my life in friends that have succeeded but not replaced one another.--Irving Townsend


#65 of 121 moviebuff75

moviebuff75

    Second Unit

  • 448 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 04 2009
  • Real Name:Eric Scott Richard
  • LocationIndianapolis, Indiana

Posted July 15 2013 - 06:54 AM

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?


Proud HTF Member Since: April, 2001


#66 of 121 willyTass

willyTass

    Second Unit

  • 348 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 09 2005

Posted July 15 2013 - 07:20 AM

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 



#67 of 121 Lord Dalek

Lord Dalek

    Screenwriter

  • 1,972 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 04 2005

Posted July 15 2013 - 09:41 AM

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 

Prove it.



#68 of 121 Ronald Epstein

Ronald Epstein

    Studio Mogul

  • 38,853 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 03 1997

Posted July 15 2013 - 09:45 AM

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.


Ronald J Epstein
Home Theater Forum co-owner

 

gallery_269895_23_10043.jpg Click Here for the latest/hottest Blu-ray Preorders gallery_269895_23_1316.jpg Click Here for our complete Blu-ray review archive

gallery_269895_23_773.jpg Click Here for our complete 3D Blu-ray review archive gallery_269895_23_992.jpgClick Here for our complete DVD review archive

gallery_269895_23_7246.jpg Click Here for Blu-Ray Preorder Release Schedule gallery_269895_23_3120.jpg Click Here for forum posting rules and regulations


#69 of 121 Jeff Adkins

Jeff Adkins

    Screenwriter

  • 1,762 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 18 1998
  • Real Name:Jeff Adkins

Posted July 15 2013 - 11:03 AM

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.



#70 of 121 Dave H

Dave H

    Producer

  • 5,229 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 13 2000

Posted July 15 2013 - 11:52 AM

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.


Edited by Dave H, July 15 2013 - 11:52 AM.


#71 of 121 Lord Dalek

Lord Dalek

    Screenwriter

  • 1,972 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 04 2005

Posted July 15 2013 - 11:58 AM

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.



#72 of 121 Vincent_P

Vincent_P

    Screenwriter

  • 1,695 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 13 2003

Posted July 15 2013 - 01:33 PM

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



#73 of 121 Lord Dalek

Lord Dalek

    Screenwriter

  • 1,972 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 04 2005

Posted July 15 2013 - 06:40 PM

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.


  • ahollis likes this

#74 of 121 moviebuff75

moviebuff75

    Second Unit

  • 448 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 04 2009
  • Real Name:Eric Scott Richard
  • LocationIndianapolis, Indiana

Posted July 15 2013 - 07:51 PM

If that's the case, no sale for me. The new features don't look that interesting to me. I guess the previous disc will be fine for me until the 50th.


Proud HTF Member Since: April, 2001


#75 of 121 darkrock17

darkrock17

    Supporting Actor

  • 719 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 13 2007
  • Real Name:Andrew McClure
  • LocationAlexandria, VA

Posted July 15 2013 - 10:31 PM

Since a few people have mentioned 4K scans already, anyone know anything about this? http://www.blu-ray.c...-Blu-ray/69509/



#76 of 121 Lord Dalek

Lord Dalek

    Screenwriter

  • 1,972 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 04 2005

Posted July 16 2013 - 07:06 AM

Since a few people have mentioned 4K scans already, anyone know anything about this? http://www.blu-ray.c...-Blu-ray/69509/

 

Chinese whispers most likely.



#77 of 121 Keith Cobby

Keith Cobby

    Supporting Actor

  • 789 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 08 2013
  • Real Name:Keith Cobby
  • LocationKent "The Garden of England", UK

Posted July 16 2013 - 07:15 AM

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!



#78 of 121 Ronald Epstein

Ronald Epstein

    Studio Mogul

  • 38,853 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 03 1997

Posted July 17 2013 - 09:44 PM

Now Available For Preorder

 

57331_large.jpg

 

Thank you for supporting HTF when you preorder using the link below.  If you are using an adblocker you will not see link.  

 

 

  • ahollis likes this

Ronald J Epstein
Home Theater Forum co-owner

 

gallery_269895_23_10043.jpg Click Here for the latest/hottest Blu-ray Preorders gallery_269895_23_1316.jpg Click Here for our complete Blu-ray review archive

gallery_269895_23_773.jpg Click Here for our complete 3D Blu-ray review archive gallery_269895_23_992.jpgClick Here for our complete DVD review archive

gallery_269895_23_7246.jpg Click Here for Blu-Ray Preorder Release Schedule gallery_269895_23_3120.jpg Click Here for forum posting rules and regulations


#79 of 121 Ronald Epstein

Ronald Epstein

    Studio Mogul

  • 38,853 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 03 1997

Posted July 18 2013 - 11:02 AM

559091_706054899423966_1713073473_n.jpg


Ronald J Epstein
Home Theater Forum co-owner

 

gallery_269895_23_10043.jpg Click Here for the latest/hottest Blu-ray Preorders gallery_269895_23_1316.jpg Click Here for our complete Blu-ray review archive

gallery_269895_23_773.jpg Click Here for our complete 3D Blu-ray review archive gallery_269895_23_992.jpgClick Here for our complete DVD review archive

gallery_269895_23_7246.jpg Click Here for Blu-Ray Preorder Release Schedule gallery_269895_23_3120.jpg Click Here for forum posting rules and regulations


#80 of 121 TravisR

TravisR

    Studio Mogul

  • 21,432 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 15 2004
  • LocationThe basement of the FBI building

Posted July 18 2013 - 11:03 AM

^ Like a record, baby?







Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: Warner

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users