Jump to content

Sign up for a free account to remove the pop-up ads

Signing up for an account is fast and free. As a member you can join in the conversation, enter contests and remove the pop-up ads that guests get. Click here to create your free account.

- - - - -

While We Wait for Blu-ray Reviews of Touch of Evil and Double Indemnity

Blu-ray Universal

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

#21 of 23 ONLINE   Peter Apruzzese

Peter Apruzzese


  • 2,776 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 20 1999
  • Real Name:Peter Apruzzese

Posted April 17 2014 - 06:10 AM

Not according to the commentary on the Touch of Evil restoration. Welles shot Touch of Evil in 1.85:1 and that was what he wanted to do but the studio wanted it to also be available to be shown 1.37:1 because they wanted to show the film on television...which they felt was becoming such a popular medium. So, not Orson's idea to show it at 1.37:1.



I think Jose was joking with the 1.37 remark.


Of course it was shot for 1.85, Universal had been shooting that way for 4 years, and by the time of release in 1958 there was virtually no theater in the US that would have shown it in any other ratio. 

"Go ahead...make my day."


#22 of 23 OFFLINE   mikeyhitchfan


    Supporting Actor

  • 517 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 06 2012
  • Real Name:Mike
  • LocationCosta Mesa CA

Posted April 17 2014 - 06:19 AM

Could it be that only the Preview and Theatrical are seamlessly-branched, with the Reconstructed being on its own? I believe that's how it was on the DVD (albeit with 2 discs).


That's what I'm thinking. I also am wondering about the scanner quality since the difference in the picture between the MOC and Universal does not seem that much better to my eyes. I thought that a 4K scan of the original negative would look better than it does (which is not to say it's bad, just not that big of a difference).

#23 of 23 OFFLINE   Doug Otte

Doug Otte

    Supporting Actor

  • 705 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 20 2003

Posted April 17 2014 - 06:51 AM

I've posted a question to Torsten about this. I was confused by the discussion of color timing for a black and white movie. I also am not convinced that somehow Universal used a subpar scanner. I do believe that Torsten thinks they did, but what I saw on the blu-ray did not bear that idea out. I also read the dvd beaver review, and I'd agree that the beaver is lining up the two Blus and saying they each have their advantages. I don't agree with Jeffrey Wells about the 1.37:1 ratio. I'd be curious what the source is for such an argument.


Hi Kevin.  Although he seems very knowledgeable, I always have a hard time understanding Torsten's writing, probably because he's not a native English speaker, and his verbosity gets in the way of the meaning.  However, 'color timing' is done on any film, color or B&W.  It's how the grayscale, etc. are set.  I don't know if it includes contrast too, but I think it does.

Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: Blu-ray, Universal

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users