A Few Words About A few words about...™ Halloween 35th Anniversary -- in Blu-ray (1 Viewer)

[DVDvision]

I was at a private showing of the Friedkin so called "remastered" FC before it was released on Blu, and I got out of the theater after about one hour. I felt like being punched in the face because it looked so ugly and it was nothing like what was sold to me. Lo and behold, in the garden of the theater, I ran straight into WF, speaking to a couple of people about how awesome this version was. (he was guest after the film that night)

I must admit I resisted my usual urge to crash the party. That night, I kept to myself and just enjoyed the ride (he was a charming host to everybody, infuriating even the press attache when he said yes to a friend who asked to sign his whole filmography -- on laserdisc sleeves!). But this is certain, he really thought that look enhanced the film.

Not saying Cundey is the same (I haven't received the Halloween disc yet) just saying you can never trust a director's opinion, especially 35 years after the fact, let alone two years. Oh, and movies have to adapt to any particular format. They can't be the same because formats aren't the same.

 

[cineMANIAC]

Halloween is such a cash cow for Anchor Bay, we'll never see a definitive version released that will satisfy everyone. I'm still waiting for the television edit to be included on a separate disc (I missed the initial release about 10 years ago). And I don't want to get into a debate about Spring vs. Fall colors (or lack of) but I think this 35th Anniversary edition looks more like mid-Fall actually looks like, original intentions or not. Also, to my eyes the film looks a bit less "high-def" than I'm used to seeing for similarly-budgeted films made around the same time. Not sure if this is a new print or not but I do remember watching a version of the film that was a little sharper-looking. It still looks very good, though. This will definitely be the last time I buy this movie (until the next format, that is).

 

[Lord Dalek]

If Cundey says that the 35AV is his "original look" of the film it should be enough for the fans.Then again we have DOPs like Storaro who suddenly said that 2.20:1 is the "corret aspect ratio" (or something) of Apocalypse Now some years ago. Even artists can change their minds or even forget their "original vision" over the years.

2.20:1 would have been perfectly acceptable for Apocalypse Now and it was originally shown at that ratio. However the old pre-Lionsgate releases were actually cropped to the Univisium standard of 2.00:1 losing a lot more image.

 

[Bryan^H]

I wish Romero's 'Dawn Of The Dead' were revisited(with as many variations) as 'Halloween'. That is one horror title I will buy every release of. There are still a few versions that have yet to be released on Blu-Ray, including the extended(my favorite) cut.

I am getting the current 35th Anniversary release of 'Halloween', and plan on watching it sometime in October.

 

[Jari K]

2.20:1 would have been perfectly acceptable for Apocalypse Now and it was originally shown at that ratio. However the old pre-Lionsgate releases were actually cropped to the Univisium standard of 2.00:1 losing a lot more image.

2:35:1 was the original theatrical aspect ratio of Apocalypse Now. And it's the aspect ratio of the Blu-ray release also. Storaro made a bad call at the time.

"There's been a lot of talk about the aspect ratio on Apocalypse Now, Can you help clarify?Yes, this subject always seems to confuse...let me try to illuminate. The film was shot using the Super Technovision process which is essentially anamorphic 35mm film to create a 2.35:1 "widescreen" aspect ration in the theater. The initial release included 70mm prints also with the wide aspect. The cinematographer, Vitorio Storaro played a critical role in the film-to-tape transfer both for laser disk a few years ago and also in the DVD which was just re-transferred a few months ago. It was Storaro's decision that for home video + broadcast, he would transfer the film with a slightly modified framing: 2.0:1. This essentially crops a very small amount of the image on the sides but allows for a taller picture for viewers using conventional 4:3 TVs in the "letterbox" mode. The DVD we made preserves the anamorphic wide screen picture in the best way possible because we transferred the film anamorphorphically to video Users who have the fancy (today $5000) digital 16:9 TVs can see the film in its wide screen aspect with maximum vertical resolution. Folks like us with ordinary analog televisions will see a well-rendered 2.0:1 letterbox. Hope this answers the question.
( http://www.dvdtalk.com/apocalypsenowchat.html )

 

[Lord Dalek]

^You're forgetting that Apocalypse Now was shown exclusively in 70mm blow up for its first few months. That would have shorn a smidge off the left and right.

 

[Vincent_P]

Also, you can't compare normal humans to William Friedkin.

True, most "normal humans" aren't as talented filmakers as he is to this day.

Vincent

 

[Scott Merryfield]

I watched the new BD this past weekend. While I did see the film in the theater in the late '70's, I do not recall whether the trees were green or an autumn orange. The transfer did look fine to me, though.

I do find it humorous that people talk so much about the trees being green in autumn, but yet there is rarely any mention of the other major continuity issues with the film -- the sidewalk and street going from dry to wet as Laurie walks home from school, the lighting going from daylight to night as Laurie and Annie drive to babysit, and how long the drive is for Laurie and Annie to get to Tommy's house -- the same kid Laurie walked to school with that morning. These are all just part of the charm of this low budget film for me.

 

[moviebuff75]

I'm more concerned about the original mono missing. I guess this isn't the original mono track.

 

[TravisR]

I do find it humorous that people talk so much about the trees being green in autumn, but yet there is rarely any mention of the other major continuity issues with the film -- the sidewalk and street going from dry to wet as Laurie walks home from school, the lighting going from daylight to night as Laurie and Annie drive to babysit, and how long the drive is for Laurie and Annie to get to Tommy's house -- the same kid Laurie walked to school with that morning. These are all just part of the charm of this low budget film for me.

Don't forget the dead leaves all over Laurie's lawn but none at any of the other houses.

 

[JoshZ]

Don't forget the dead leaves all over Laurie's lawn but none at any of the other houses.

Her neighbors were much more zealous about keeping their yards raked.

 

[FoxyMulder]

Everybody is saying the colour timing is wrong, people are saying the leaves and grass don't look like it's Autumn/Fall, that might be true but the movie was shot in the Spring and it looks like it was shot in the Spring, Cundey is not using the digital tools to alter the look of the film and make it look like Autumn/Fall, instead i think he is finally giving us the original cinema colour timing.

 

[Jari K]

It would be great if mr. Cundey could give an in-depth interview about this subject. DOP/restoration/color timing point of view, I mean.

 

[Mark Booth]

For the folks that prefer the THX DVD because the revisionist color timing made the trees look more like Illinois instead of where it was really shot, California:

Yep, no sign of California in THAT screen shot!

Mark

 

[Moe Dickstein]

The color scheme certainly hides it pretty well

 

[DVDvision]

Everybody is saying the colour timing is wrong, people are saying the leaves and grass don't look like it's Autumn/Fall, that might be true but the movie was shot in the Spring and it looks like it was shot in the Spring, Cundey is not using the digital tools to alter the look of the film and make it look like Autumn/Fall, instead i think he is finally giving us the original cinema colour timing.

True, but it doesn"t mean the cinema colors were correct. This was a low budget film with a rush release and it became a hit by a combination of word of the mouth and hitting the zeigest of the times. It's unlike Star Wars or Mad Max 2 where every effort was made to make the film look a certain way. (note that apart from me and a couple of guys, no one complain about the awful Mad Max 2 Blu colors timing which does not look at all like the theatrical prints (unlike the DVD, LD, VHS etc), and yet they all are happy that this new release looks like it used to look (ie bad, if you discount of course the resolution which is great).

The 99 production diary clearly spells that past was bad, and why then was good. To transpose that to Blu should have been easy (give or take a couple of tweaks), instead, this release reverts to the original, bad looking color timing (ie nearly not color timed). It's not an evolution but a devolution. I bought the steelbook, but probably won't open it and will wait for someone to fix this. In the meantime, I will watch this month the 99 DVD. At least it looks like a fine tuned film and not like a rushed, not color timed release.

Films needs to be color timed. It's just like mastering for audio.

 

[Jonathan Perregaux]

Don't forget the dead leaves all over Laurie's lawn but none at any of the other houses.

Well, you see, Michael Meyers killed those leaves and left them on his sister's front lawn and no one else's. You see. It's very intentional. You see.

 

[Mark Booth]

Mark

 

[Mark Booth]

Here's a very recent short interview with Dean Cundey, cinematographer for 'Halloween':



Cundey makes it quite clear that the 35th Anniversary Blu-ray is the FIRST TIME he's been involved in a home video transfer of 'Halloween'! That blue look to the movie is the INTENDED look and any previous transfers where the colorist removed or lessened the blue did so WITHOUT Cundey's approval. Nobody called him!

Mark

 

[TravisR]

I'm still at loss as to why anyone is talking about the video (however anyone feels about it, it's approved by the DOP) and no one is mentioning the mono track that is without a doubt messed up.