Olive's new Signature Edition release, is more about extras than the feature, which looks as nice as it possibly might. 4 Stars

Don Siegel’s quintessential sci-fi classic, the 1956 Invasion of the Body Snatchers, is one of those films that once viewed, will not be forgotten.

With ties to the real world, and politics galore, it’s up there with the sci-fi greats.

Unfortunately, it was created during an unfortunate era in the world of cinema.

SuperScope.

Photographed open matte, presumably designed for projection in 1.85, it has ended up overly cropped, with seemingly no means of correcting the problem.

How both an original negative, as well as a fine grain protection master, could both go missing is beyond me, but that’s the rumor.

What remains is a 2:1 anamorphic image, presumably from a dupe printing negative, and for that generation, especially through an optical stage, it looks quite nice. Certainly as good as original SuperScope prints, which were 2:1.

There were about twenty films that used variants of the process, inclusive of the least likely, Olivier’s King Henry the Fifth (1945, three-strip Technicolor, 1.37).

Olive’s new Signature Edition release, is more about extras than the feature, which looks as nice as it possibly might.

But it’s those extras which push this Olive edition into Criterion turf.

As to the track, one can only wonder why the original Perspecta wasn’t included.

Image – 5

Audio – 3.5

Pass / Fail – Pass

Upgrade from previous Blu-ray – Yes, for extras

Highly Recommended

RAH

Published by

Robert Harris

editor,member

Robert Crawford

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Dec 9, 1998
Messages
47,524
Reaction score
23,565
Points
9,110
Location
Michigan
Real Name
Robert
I have the previous Blu-ray, but I won't upgrade until I see the pricing lower than it's currently at. If it gets down to $20 then I might bite on it for the bonus material. I've read the encoding is better on this BD release than the previous release.
 

David Norman

Producer
Premium
Joined
Oct 12, 2001
Messages
6,269
Reaction score
2,780
Points
9,110
Location
Charlotte, NC
How both an original negative, as well as a fine grain protection master, could both go missing is beyond me, but that's the rumor.


RAH
Obvious answer -- it inserted itself into another movie's container and is hiding in plain site pretending to be a Navy Documentary on Personal Hygiene or maybe in the :Song of the South" canisters to go where nobody will ever look and be able to survive unmolested forever on the bottom shelf tucked safely away forever.
 

BobO'Link

Lead Actor
Joined
May 3, 2008
Messages
6,519
Reaction score
7,931
Points
9,110
Location
Mid-South
Real Name
Howie
I have the previous Blu-ray, but I won't upgrade until I see the pricing lower than it's currently at. If it gets down to $20 then I might bite on it for the bonus material. I've read the encoding is better on this BD release than the previous release.
Deepdiscount - currently $21.99 + $1.99 shipping (unless you add something to get at/above $25 for free shipping). No sales tax for many locations.
 

Tino

Executive Producer
Premium
Joined
Apr 19, 1999
Messages
17,724
Reaction score
9,195
Points
9,110
Age
56
Location
Metro NYC
Real Name
Valentino
Don Siegel's quintessential sci-fi classic, the 1956 Invasion of the Body Snatchers, is one of those films that once viewed, will not be forgotten.

With ties to the real world, and politics galore, it's up there with the sci-fi greats.

Unfortunately, it was created during an unfortunate era in the world of cinema.

SuperScope.

Photographed open matte, presumably designed for projection in 1.85, it has ended up overly cropped, with seemingly no means of correcting the problem.

How both an original negative, as well as a fine grain protection master, could both go missing is beyond me, but that's the rumor.

What remains is a 2:1 anamorphic image, presumably from a dupe printing negative, and for that generation, especially through an optical stage, it looks quite nice. Certainly as good as original SuperScope prints, which were 2:1.

There were about twenty films that used variants of the process, inclusive of the least likely, Olivier's King Henry the Fifth (1945, three-strip Technicolor, 1.37).

Olive's new Signature Edition release, is more about extras than the feature, which looks as nice as it possibly might.

But it's those extras which push this Olive edition into Criterion turf.

As to the track, one can only wonder why the original Perspecta wasn't included.

Image - 5

Audio - 3.5

Pass / Fail - Pass

Upgrade from previous Blu-ray - Yes, for extras

Highly Recommended

RAH
I’m a bit confused. Is this version 1:85 or 2:1?
 

Tino

Executive Producer
Premium
Joined
Apr 19, 1999
Messages
17,724
Reaction score
9,195
Points
9,110
Age
56
Location
Metro NYC
Real Name
Valentino
I asked because in another thread the poster said it was 1:85 but preferred the 1:66 version.
 

Worth

Producer
Joined
Jul 17, 2009
Messages
3,552
Reaction score
2,606
Points
4,110
Real Name
Nick Dobbs
I asked because in another thread the poster said it was 1:85 but preferred the 1:66 version.
I think that was for Some Like It Hot.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PMF

Robert Harris

Archivist
Reviewer
Joined
Feb 8, 1999
Messages
12,785
Reaction score
16,393
Points
9,110
Real Name
Robert Harris
Whereabouts presently unknown.

No evidence of their extinction, only their present state of being unknown.
Thank you!
 
  • Like
Reactions: aPhil

Robert Crawford

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Dec 9, 1998
Messages
47,524
Reaction score
23,565
Points
9,110
Location
Michigan
Real Name
Robert
Just to be very clear, this is off the same exact element as before so other than authoring (more bits or bytes or whatever) it's basically the same.
Yeah, we know that based on posted reviews.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: ahollis

octobercountry

Stunt Coordinator
Joined
Mar 28, 2015
Messages
76
Reaction score
60
Points
10
Real Name
Fred
I have this on order, and am looking forward to going through all the extras. I am a bit ticked off about the missing Perspecta track, though. Oh, I know Perspecta was only "fake" stereo, but still it would have been nice to hear it.

As for the aspect ratio, yep, it's a pity that the original elements are missing and we're locked into 2:1. Still, honestly, that isn't all THAT different than 1.85:1. Look at the black bars at the top and bottom of the screen. The intended aspect ratio would only add picture to half of that space; it isn't a huge difference. ( I'm sure I've viewed many films in the cinema in the past which had their pictures cropped to a greater degree, due to careless projection...)

 

Powell&Pressburger

Screenwriter
Joined
Feb 26, 2007
Messages
1,748
Reaction score
509
Points
1,610
Location
MPLS, MN
Real Name
Jack
I also agree that the 3.0 Perspecta audio should have been inlcuded. In fact the release choild have been pushed back to include it.

Without it just feels like a rush job, True this release is about some extras including a finally included commentary track