cafink
Senior HTF Member
- Joined
- Apr 19, 1999
- Messages
- 3,044
- Real Name
- Carl Fink
Thanks for posting those screen shots. I always enjoy seeing different releases of a movie compared to one another.
I don't notice anyone looking fatter when I watch the movie.Originally Posted by Eric Scott Richard
So what is the consensus on the framing differences with Alien from the original dvd release? The original looked stretched up and everyone thin. This one makes everyone look fatter. Could that be why there is heavier cropping?
With increase in technology comes an increase in color accuracy, so comparing this to the old laserdisc master is going to create a fair amount of discrepency. The original poster didn't help his case when he went all "ANGRY WHITE BOY STAR WARS FAN RAWR!" originally to boot.
Originally Posted by Paul_Scott
No. The Blu-ray technology you are enjoying is not so spectacular that you are suddenly seeing hidden truths now revelead. The Director of the film went back and revised the look of it plain and simple.
Whether you like the new (Improved! Fresher Scent!) look is one thing. But the fact is, this release is more in line with other catalog title that have been 'tarted up' for Blu-ray consumers, rather than something pulled back to be more reverential and representative to the original, theatrical look of the film.
The new DVD version of this disc is packed with both quality and features. The film has been given a brand new THX-certified, high definition transfer, by the Sony HD Center. It is presented in full anamorphic widescreen, and dozens of man-hours were spent digitally removing tiny flecks of dust, scratches and other print defects - more than 10,000 frames were cleaned up in all. The color timing was also corrected, to be more accurate to Scott and cinematographer Derek Vanlint's original intent (notice that Mother's computer access chamber now appears in more subdued tones, instead of the overly-saturated, yellow-gold hues of previous releases). The result of all this work is spectacular - simply the best home video presentation of this film to date.
Maybe Cameron should have done Scott's transfer as well as 'Aliens' looks stellar. I've seen both movies theatrically as well as in their various video incarnations and while 'Alien' barely matches up to its original theatrical presentation, 'Aliens' far surpasses it and it's the real revelation of this set.Originally Posted by Steve Christou
Despite Cameron saying Aliens has been "de-grained" there is still grain on screen, ironically grainier than Scott's Alien which had very little grain that I could see. Aliens looks fantastic but of the two I'd pick Alien as the better transfer. The only extras I've checked thus far were the isolated scores, perfecto.
Pretty much my exact thoughts. Watching Aliens right now. And yeah, revelation is the perfect word to describe it. It looks better than I possibly imagined. For example, during the Hadley's Hope scene, for the first time I noticed the volcanic fissures in the planet's surface. Whatever de-grain process they used is brilliant. Perfect balance between light grain and fine detail.Maybe Cameron should have done Scott's transfer as well as 'Aliens' looks stellar. I've seen both movies theatrically as well as in their various video incarnations and while 'Alien' barely matches up to its original theatrical presentation, 'Aliens' far surpasses it and it's the real revelation of this set.
Originally Posted by WillG
Pretty much my exact thoughts. Watching Aliens right now. And yeah, revelation is the perfect word to describe it. It looks better than I possibly imagined. For example, during the Hadley's Hope scene, for the first time I noticed the volcanic fissures in the planet's surface. Whatever de-grain process they used is brilliant. Perfect balance between light grain and fine detail.
One thing though, as long as they were fixing the Bishop torso shot at the end, I kind of wish they somehow could have digitally fixed the company people smoking during the inquest. Not for PC reasons mind you, just because it horribly dates the film. Also the price of the Nostromo always bothers me a little too. $46 million in adjusted, 57 years earlier dollars, but still well into our future seems like an awfully small amount for a starship like that.