Some Brief Notes By Brad About: Starcrash (1979) on Blu-ray (1 Viewer)

The Movie Itself: A Roger Corman Cult Classic. Talk about a hokey pokey Sci-Fi film. Almost as hokey, well maybe more hokey than Barbarella, the 1968 Jane Fonda Sci-Fi/Sex Fantasy film. OK so there was no nudity in Starcrash but oh did Caroline Munro (deadly beauty "Naomi" from the 1977 James Bond classic The Spy Who Loved Me) ever shine, even in this laughable so-bad-its-good film. She didn't get nude but I'll take Caroline over Jane Fonda any day. Worth the price of admission just to see Caroline Munro in that outfit for a big chunk of the movie (and like Raquel Welch, she still looks good well into her 60s). Suffice to say, Caroline was pretty much the whole film (and she still can set male hearts aflutter) Also featured a early appearance by then-unknown David Hasselhoff (as the Emperor's Son) and some brief appearances by Christopher Plummer.

The Technical Aspects:
Picture Quality: I have to rate the PQ about a 1.5, maybe a 2 3 to 3.5 (on RAH's scale of 5). Looks like they used a older transfer used for VHS and early DVDs. (Correction, according to Walter Olsen, there was no DVD released and any VHS releases date back to the 1980s. My mistake. Grain is very noticeable; in fact some DNR in moderation might have benefited this film (I don't mind DNR in moderation, in fact I kinda like it but I now know when too much DNR is used, re: Disney's The Jungle Book (1968). I'd say that the PQ of this film was similar to the PQ of the blu-ray for another 1979 film, Wanda Nevada (1979 featuring Brooke Shields), though Wanda Nevada was a little better PQ.
From IMDB:
Runtime 1 hr 32 min (92 min) (USA)
1 hr 34 min (94 min) (Italy) Sound Mix Dolby Color Color (Technicolor) Aspect Ratio 1.85 : 1 Laboratory Rank Film Laboratories, Denham, UK Negative Format 35 mm Printed Film Format 35 mm

Sound Quality: About a 2.5 out of 5. I don't yet have a real sound system with my home theater (that comes this Christmas with a new Denon AVR and Boston Acoustics Speaker System). But I could tell on my current setup they really went for big sound, though the quality left something to be desired.

In Summary: Unless Roger Corman ponies up to get a new 4K scan done from the OCNs or a decent print, this sub-par Blu looks to be the best we'll get of this 1979 cult classic.
Doesn't really compare to something like Star Wars or the original Battlestar Galactica but a fun diversion, especially for Caroline Munro fans...like me.

WARNING to our younger readers, your Mother (or even Grandmother) might be in this film as one of Roger Corman's sci-fi beauties.

Kyrsten,

Well, you had me at the screen captures.

Thanks for giving us a summary of what to expect from this Blu-ray.

Kyrsten Brad said:

The Technical Aspects:
Picture Quality: I have to rate the PQ about a 1.5, maybe a 2 (on RAH's scale of 5). Looks like they used a older transfer used for VHS and early DVDs. Grain is very noticeable; in fact some DNR in moderation might have benefited this film (I don't mind DNR in moderation, in fact I kinda like it but I now know when too much DNR is used, re: Disney's The Jungle Book (1968). I'd say that the PQ of this film was similar to the PQ of the blu-ray for another 1979 film, Wanda Nevada (1979 featuring Brooke Shields), though Wanda Nevada was a little better PQ.
From IMDB:

Click to expand...

what earlier vhs? they were all full frame masters from a 1 inch. hasnt been on vhs since the early 80's. also what early DVD release? They were all bootleggs off the same video rental master. Shout's HD Master was a brand new HD master made around 2010. A top colorist did this. I am sure it was probably a IN, but it is million of miles better than anything else previously.Cliff is a hug fan of this film and he made damn sure this looks top notch. 1.5 stars????? I assume my titles probably will get a 1 star then?

I own a DVD/BluRay label and when I read these comments, it disheartens me that unless you spend Criterion like restoration on lower B titles, the BluRay enthusiasts will always shoot it down. And genre films on Blu are not profitable for me and many others, as they barely sell 1000 units going retail, and giving low rating to a hard work Shout/Cliff did just makes one realize unless its a brand new studio film, these kind of films are not worth restoring.

End of my rant.

Walter Olsen
Scorpion Releasing

I strongly disagree with the image quality ranking, as well. For a low-budget sci-fi movie from the late-70s, this looks very good.

I have this.Granted I watched it with a JVC projected onto a Screen Research and listened with an Onkyo 1008 pushing 9 speakers.This is not a 1.5 image.Certainly isn't 2.5 sound either.Is this film Gravity?Hell no. But it looks better than most B- movies out there.

Oh yeah, please tell me you don't plan to give us your impressions of Ms 45...Especially if you thought this was 1.5...

I only have the DVD and it looks good at least a 3 so I can't imagine the Blu is anything less than 3.5. This film has never looked this good, not even in the theaters. I saw it when it came out. Its a B-film from the 70's so that has to be taken into account.

walter o said:

what earlier vhs? they were all full frame masters from a 1 inch. hasnt been on vhs since the early 80's. also what early DVD release? They were all bootleggs off the same video rental master. Shout's HD Master was a brand new HD master made around 2010. A top colorist did this. I am sure it was probably a IN, but it is million of miles better than anything else previously.Cliff is a hug fan of this film and he made damn sure this looks top notch. 1.5 stars????? I assume my titles probably will get a 1 star then? I own a DVD/BluRay label and when I read these comments, it disheartens me that unless you spend Criterion like restoration on lower B titles, the BluRay enthusiasts will always shoot it down. And genre films on Blu are not profitable for me and many others, as they barely sell 1000 units going retail, and giving low rating to a hard work Shout/Cliff did just makes one realize unless its a brand new studio film, these kind of films are not worth restoring. End of my rant. Walter OlsenScorpion Releasing

Click to expand...

Question for you Walter. Is $20 an appropriate price for this movie? For me, for this movie, that's too much. This is a movie you're not going to watch as much as you are going to wallow in it. .

While some think $20.00 is too much for specific catalog titles.. keep in mind some of these titles should be thankful they get BLU releases... or I should say we should be thankful also... so the price depends on how much you would like the film with HD audio also. I don't mind paying 15-20 for a title such as this. Keep in mind a title like this isn't going to be a huge seller so they need to try to make some profit. I think many want $4.99 blus but we shouldn't want these companies to go bankrupt and be dissolved because someone wants to pay less. I say "you get what you get"

It has been around a 14.99 price point previously thru amazon. You just have to watch for the prices to drop from time to time. This release has a lot of bonus features also.

Why do people think a movie's price should depend on the "quality" of it? I don't get that. The price should depend on the costs involved behind the scenes, generally speaking. I also don't understand the whole stupid view that a movie should be cheap if it's older than the last five years or less. "It's old! It should be cheap!" Bah...

bgart13 said:

Why do people think a movie's price should depend on the "quality" of it? I don't get that. The price should depend on the costs involved behind the scenes, generally speaking. I also don't understand the whole stupid view that a movie should be cheap if it's older than the last five years or less. "It's old! It should be cheap!" Bah...

Click to expand...

Seems to me that in capitalism, the merchant charges what the customer will pay. If a merchant has a widget that cost $20 to make ready for sale, he needs to charge more than that. What happens when the customer base thinks it's not worth that much? That's what a merchant has to figure out. What will the widget sell for, how many, and can he make a profit?I was asking Walter because he has a better understanding of the business than I do. I only know my personal point of view, consumer half. I have paid more for an old movie. Just bought Mr Peabody and the Mermaid for $22-24. I wanted that movie, even at that price. My personal view is that this Corman movie is not worth that much too me. Yes, I do think the older the movie, in general, it should cost less because demand is not going to be as high as for Captain America.

Man oh man. Some posts just burn my bacon.

It was 2004 when I posted here excitedly about getting in a Region 2 PAL DVD of this film. Cost me about $30-$40 IIRC- but that was the was the first time since 1979 I was able to see the movie in it's original OAR and apparently there were complicated rights issues which were keeping it far from the Region 1 market.
The DVD was mastered from a smeary old analog source, complete with a very harsh audio drop out that I was always afraid would destroy my speakers.
But I treasured that disc for years...up until Shouts phenomonal effort hit in HD.
To this day, out of all the titles in my collection this, along with Wanda Nevada another senitmental childhood favorite from '79, are the two titles I'm most in awe of an thankful for having on this format.
That doesn't mean they are the films I enjoy or love the most...just that I am forever floored I can screen sparkling clear copies of them whenever I want, when for so long they were given no love whatsoever in standard definition.

Brad and I are about the same age and have many of the same tastes in catalog titles we want to see released...but he is sooooooo way off base on the quality ratings here. I can understand 1.5 for the film itself. No bones about it, it is a truly bad movie- hell, even as a 12 year old I was fully aware of how cheesily horrible it was, which of course is a large part of it's appeal to me now. But the BD presentation of it is 4 stars (out of 5) at least.
Cliff and Shout engendered a whole lot of goodwill with this release for me.

walter o said:

what earlier vhs? they were all full frame masters from a 1 inch. hasnt been on vhs since the early 80's. also what early DVD release? They were all bootleggs off the same video rental master. Shout's HD Master was a brand new HD master made around 2010. A top colorist did this. I am sure it was probably a IN, but it is million of miles better than anything else previously.Cliff is a hug fan of this film and he made damn sure this looks top notch. 1.5 stars????? I assume my titles probably will get a 1 star then?

I own a DVD/BluRay label and when I read these comments, it disheartens me that unless you spend Criterion like restoration on lower B titles, the BluRay enthusiasts will always shoot it down. And genre films on Blu are not profitable for me and many others, as they barely sell 1000 units going retail, and giving low rating to a hard work Shout/Cliff did just makes one realize unless its a brand new studio film, these kind of films are not worth restoring.

End of my rant.

Walter Olsen
Scorpion Releasing

Click to expand...

Brad here. Well after writing my initial evals and reading this, I went back and re-watched the film. I will admit that my initial PQ evaluations of Starcrash were probably a bit off. But thats what I get after just watching some very high-qualithy Blus (Buddy Holly Story for one) and kinda got spoiled by that.
That and I didn't account for the fact that this was a B-movie and didn't get the same quality treatment as say, Battlestar Galactica.

Note that I did revise my PQ rankings to 3-3.5. And as the movie progressed, the PQ did seem to get better.

Finally Mr. Olsen, your efforts (and those of other Blu-ray producers) are very much appreciated. I imagine that you (and the folks at Shout) go thru quite a bit to bring a title to Blu that the bigger studios won't touch. Don't let my film critic ramblings here stop you and other studios from bringing us these titles. They are appreciated. I probably should have stated that in my initial posting.

Now that I"ve been thoroughly toasted here, time for a cold Pepsi Max on ice.