Being in attendance and lending your name to something is not the same. He was not there, and frankly it's doubtful he even saw much of it. They may have sent him something to look at or they may have just said, we've done a great new transfer can you say you approve it. Who knows? He may have seen one scene or the whole thing or none of it. But he was NOT involved in the transfer or the timing. He was on the new version.
You're drawing conclusions that are not supported by any of the evidence. "It's doubtful he even saw much of it"? Why would you say that? You doubt it only because you don't like the outcome and you don't want to believe that he actually approved it at the time, nothing more.
Cundey does not need to have been present during the color grading or mastering sessions to have watched the final product and given it his approval.
What we actually know is that the 1999 DVD includes text explicitly stating that the color transfer was approved by cinematographer Dean Cundey. To the best of anyone's available knowledge, Cundey did not sue Anchor Bay or publicly complain that they used his name without permission.
Starz/Anchor Bay in 1999: "Hey Dean, okay with you if Adam Adams does his colorist thing for the new THX DVD of Halloween?"
Dean Cundey: "Sure."
Starz/Anchor Bay to marketing department: "Okay, Dean said Adam Adams could change the color timing so this new transfer is Dean Cundey approved!"
I just can't understand why you think this supports your position. On the one hand, you want to rely on Dean Cundey as the definitive reference source for how Halloween is supposed to look. On the other hand, you're calling him a disreputable sell-out who slapped his name on a previous copy of the movie that (you believe) he didn't even watch. According to your theory, the man is not a credible source of information about the movie. So why should we trust his word that this new "Dean Cundey approved" transfer is any more accurate than the last "Dean Cundey approved" transfer? You're shooting yourself in the foot with your own argument.
In five years' time, when Starz/Anchor Bay re-releases the movie yet again with another Dean Cundey approved transfer that looks nothing at all like either the 1999 DVD or the 2013 Blu-ray, how will you justify it then?
I don't think that Dean Cundey is a disreputable sell-out. However, I do think that every time he approves a color transfer for the movie, he bases it on how he feels the movie should look at that moment in time, which may or may not have anything to do with how it actually looked back in 1978.
Edited by JoshZ, October 18 2013 - 11:09 AM.