Search results

I never noticed that. Are the altered shots in all cuts of the film, or just the director's cut?

I've had Raiders on every video format, but I don't think I've ever sat down and watched the whole thing at home. I see it about once a year, but always in the theatre.

4K 77 is a scan of a print, but it's been nicely cleaned up. The Raiders one is more like the Empire scan, with all the dust and scratches intact.

There is more of a ‘grindhouse’ scan of a 35mm print.

There may be different DCPs out there. The 4K (non-IMAX) version I've seen on a few occasions doesn't have the blown-out, orange look of the disc.

The DCP looks great. They just need to take that master and not mess with it.

Look at the shot with the submarine. There's more noticeable detail of the clouds and the water on the DVD - on the blu-ray it's all washed out.

Are there two different DCP masters floating around, then? Because the ones I've seen the last couple of times, excluding the IMAX version, are nowhere near as blown-out as the blu-ray.

Maybe we'll get a redo when #5 comes out: http://deadline.com/2016/03/steven-spielberg-harrison-ford-team-up-for-indiana-jones-5-disney-sets-july-2019-release-1201720725/

Might you send me one of those, as well? It would be much appreciated.

The blu-ray looks significantly different from the 2011 restoration. I'd guess it was taken from the restoration master, but was pretty heavily tweaked with respect to colour and contrast.

That's simply not true. The copyrights on the modified editions of the original trilogy still read as 1977, 1980 and 1983, respectively. Marcia Lucas continues to get whatever royalties she's entitled to from the Star Wars profits, special editions or no special editions. Creating an alternate...

No it isn't - it's Fox's, who allowed Friedkin to supervise the transfer, but don't extend the same courtesy to many directors and cinematographers.

Specifically this:

A composer is a single creator, as is a painter or a writer. Film is a collaborative medium. I've never completely bought into the idea that the director is or should be considered the sole author of a film, particularly in cases where the director had little or no involvement in the script. Not...

Aren't all DVDs and blu-rays are encoded at YCbCr 4:2:0 color space?

Is there even a definitive source at this point? I'm not sure how well answer prints from '81 would have held up.

There's no reason why Spielberg couldn't have okayed two different looking transfers. Didn't Silence of the Lambs cinematographer Tak Fujimoto approve both the Criterion and MGM transfers of the film, even though they look nothing alike?

Is Temple of Doom any more violent than Raiders? You've got guys getting shot in the head, ripped apart by propeller blades, run over by trucks, exploding heads and melting faces. I'm kind of surprised that it, along with Jaws and Poltergeist, managed to secure a PG rating.

Sadly, the only vintage doc is the Making of Raiders.

It was always like that, from the vibration of the movement. Same with the flying scene at the beginning of Raiders.

In 1977, Dolby presented their own variation of the magnetic 6-track system of Todd-AO. The six channels of Dolby Stereo 70MM Six Track were left, center, right, surround and 2 low-frequency-only (below 200Hz) channels. The 2 bass channels gave this format its nickname: 'Baby Boom'. Because...

No, it's gone. Or rather, the first one - when Indy drops into the Well of Souls, is gone. The second one, when Marion is tossed inside, is still there.

Also, if you're going by 35mm release prints, the colour is going to vary substantially from print-to-print, or even reel-to-reel.

I'm less thrilled with the new look of Jaws than most - same with the Lowry Bond restorations. They're all a little too processed for my taste.

I've long lost count of the amount of times I've seen this film theatrically over the years. While I don't claim to remember exactly what the colour originally looked like, the shots on the left just seem more "right" to my eyes. The DVD caps look oversaturated with crushed blacks.

I can't comment on the blu-ray, as I haven't seen it yet, but I did see the Imax version, as well as a non-Imax digital presentaion of the restored film last spring. The Imax and non-Imax screenings looked very different, with the Imax looking much more processed - totally degrained and colour...

No cinema projects the entire image - even the very best theatres mask off a few percent of the total frame. Directors and cinematographers are aware of this and compose their shots accordingly. I'm all for proper presentation, but complaints about losing a tiny sliver of information, or...