UHD Review A Few Words About A few words about...™ - The Exorcist -- in 4k UHD (1 Viewer)

[Stephen_J_H]

Sometimes on iOS devices you can get around the paywall by putting the browser in reader view

Can do the same in Edge or Chrome.

 

[Alex...]

Here's the full video

 

[Garysb]

Now $13.99 at Amazon

See on Amazon

 

[Chuck Pennington]

Made these for you all.

 

[Ronald Epstein]

Chuck, incredible work! Thank you for putting this together.

I miss the Saul Bass logo from the beginning of the film. THE EXORCIST should have been the most celebrated release Warner put out on 4k this year. It turned out to be the most disappointing in more ways than simply the original logo being removed.

 

[Robert Crawford]

To each his own because I thought The Exorcist 4K/UHD looked fine on my OLEDs. With that said, I have no defense over the cover art and no new bonus material.

 

[Ronald Epstein]

To each his own because I thought The Exorcist 4K/UHD looked fine on my OLEDs. With that said, I have no defense over the cover art and no new bonus material.

That's where I have the issue as discussed previously. The transfer looks fine.

 

[Robert Crawford]

One more thing, I never liked that old Warner logo, so I have zero problem with the new one which I find more appealing to watch on my OLED. As to the cover art, it's not my thing to care a great deal about cover art, but I can understand why others are upset about it because cover art is important to them and it is hideous. My main problem with that hideous cover art is that it's on the disc menu which forces me to see it longer than I wish to.

 

[Ronald Epstein]

One more thing, I never liked that old Warner logo, so I have zero problem with the new one which I find more appealing to watch on my OLED. As to the cover art, it's not my thing to care a great deal about cover art, but I can understand why others are upset about it because cover art is important to them and it is hideous. My main problem with that hideous cover art is that it's on the disc menu which forces me to see it longer than I wish to.

...and it's been imported to the digital as well. So, completely unavoidable.

My beef with logos being replaced, as has also been discussed ad nauseam, is that it's part of the film's history and the way those of us who first saw the film, remember its impact.

Small potatoes to some. I just don't understand the studio's need to tinker with it other than attempting to modernize its brand.

Otherwise, I believe we are on the same page about everything else regarding this release.

 

[Robert Crawford]

...and it's been imported to the digital as well. So, completely unavoidable.

My beef with logos being replaced, as has also been discussed ad nauseam, is that it's part of the film's history and the way those of us who first saw the film, remember its impact.

Small potatoes to some. I just don't understand the studio's need to tinker with it other than attempting to modernize its brand.

Otherwise, I believe we are on the same page about everything else regarding this release.

I agree that the cover art shot was iconic and should never have been messed with.

 

[Chuck Pennington]

To each his own because I thought The Exorcist 4K/UHD looked fine on my OLEDs. With that said, I have no defense over the cover art and no new bonus material.

I thought the 4K looked stunning - EXCEPT for the exorcism itself. The processing softened the image tremendously, but it appears they stuck with whatever was output to film for the 2000 reissue and left it that way, even on the “original theatrical version”, which isn’t what it claims to be.

Friedkin used the process shown in this featurette that was on the 2008 Blu-ray of The French Connection to wreck that release and then claimed he wasn’t responsible - lol - the 2011 Blu reversed the damage and quietly left off this featurette:

 

[Chuck Pennington]

One more thing, I never liked that old Warner logo, so I have zero problem with the new one which I find more appealing to watch on my OLED. As to the cover art, it's not my thing to care a great deal about cover art, but I can understand why others are upset about it because cover art is important to them and it is hideous. My main problem with that hideous cover art is that it's on the disc menu which forces me to see it longer than I wish to.

I have an OLED too, and I thought the comparison I made of Burstyn walking shows how gorgeous, natural and detailed the 4K master is. It’s the exorcism itself where the problem is. I zoomed in to 2.5x in the second half of the video to show how the detail has been fuzzed out. Watch the video on your OLED with the YouTube quality setting to 4K (I edited and uploaded it in 4K).

Preferring one logo over another isn’t up to you; the original film that won the Oscars and was a huge hit started with the red screen with the black logo. It’s ominous and sets a tone; it’s how most of us saw the film for 25 years. And now, for the past 25 years, that opening has been changed and the exorcism itself is a foggy blue mess.

 

[Robert Crawford]

Preferring one logo over another isn’t up to you; the original film that won the Oscars and was a huge hit started with the red screen with the black logo. It’s ominous and sets a tone; it’s how most of us saw the film for 25 years. And now, for the past 25 years, that opening has been changed and the exorcism itself is a foggy blue mess.

Choosing the logo isn’t up to you or anyone else on this forum so your point doesn’t change anything.

 

[Gerani53]

Not only is the logo incorrect, the music underneath the logo is wrong, as well, getting the movie off to a completely inaccurate start. No way to defend this. Sorry!

 

[Robert Crawford]

Not only is the logo incorrect, the music underneath the logo is wrong, as well, getting the movie off to a completely incorrect start. No way to defend this. Sorry!

Who’s defending it? The logo has been changed for many years.

 

[ManW_TheUncool]

Not only is the logo incorrect, the music underneath the logo is wrong, as well, getting the movie off to a completely inaccurate start. No way to defend this. Sorry!

Who’s defending it? The logo has been changed for many years.

I really don't recall as it'd been so long since I last revisited the film (other than my quick sampling of the recent 4K digital upgrade), but did they actually use their standard bit of accompanying music for the 75th anniv logo before? Probably so... as I really wasn't aware of this issue... though I also haven't seen the movie that many times, especially w/ the original/older logo(s) -- I might've only ever seen the movie on network TV telecast (and might never have actually seen the logo that way) before owning the DVD, which I might've only watched once... and I was never involved in discussions about this issue...

_Man_

 

[Citizen87645]

Even if they had this on the cover, it would at least be kind of cute.

aside from what I consider to be a horrid cover design, the film should hold up beautifully.

Have no idea what the US Warner Bros. marketing dept. were smoking, when they opted for that one. Even the worst Criterion covers from LaserDisc days are design masterpieces, compared to that.

 

[Chuck Pennington]

Choosing the logo isn’t up to you or anyone else on this forum so your point doesn’t change anything.

The original theatrical version was not released on Blu-ray or 4K though it was labeled as such. The opening logo was part of that, as was the finale without all of the revised filtering/color timing. That is my point and not up for debate.

 

[mskaye]

The original theatrical version was not released on Blu-ray or 4K though it was labeled as such. The opening logo was part of that, as was the finale without all of the revised filtering/color timing. That is my point and not up for debate.

Then it's the original theatrical version with an asterisk. If those two minor alterations ruin your enjoyment of a landmark masterpiece of cinema so be it.

 

[Stephen_J_H]

The original theatrical version was not released on Blu-ray or 4K though it was labeled as such. The opening logo was part of that, as was the finale without all of the revised filtering/color timing. That is my point and not up for debate.

Then it's the original theatrical version with an asterisk. If those two minor alterations ruin your enjoyment of a landmark masterpiece of cinema so be it.

It's a George Lucas original version.