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

[mskaye]

I think we've seen enough "revised" color palettes to make people suspicious - and the original BD of "French Connection" puts Friedkin on the "guilty until proven innocent" list!

But anytime an older movie hews toward colors that don't "feel right", we're gonna suspect alterations.

When I plopped the "Exorcist" 4K into my player and saw the orangeness of the Iraq scenes, I couldn't help but think changes occurred.

But honestly, as this thread shows, it's hard to nail down "original colors" - or original anything - much of the time.

I tend to just go agnostic when I review titles like this.

Unless I have strong evidence the image has been severely mucked with, I just rate what I see onscreen.

Mr. Friedkin was a very big, domineering personality and he got his way with wanting to tweak things and making his films a little less 70s for these re-releases. You've heard stories about him (or have seen/heard interviews with him. Can you imagine winning an argument with William Friedkin? He's going to win. Personally, I saw TE at at this year's TCM Film Fest and thought it looked great. But even the same transfer screened on an OLED will look less "filmic" than it would in a theater. As others have said, this is hardly French Connection revisionism, really just an attempt to make things a dot more vivid and its fine for The Exorcist. It's lurid. If anything I agree w the poster that said that 4k isn't kind to the Max von Sydow aging effects. I've noticed more webbing on the foreheads of actors for their wigs/hairpieces than ever before because of transfers being a little too resolving.

 

[sbjork]

I tend to just go agnostic when I review titles like this.

Unless I have strong evidence the image has been severely mucked with, I just rate what I see onscreen.

There's a lot of discs that I don't look forward to reviewing just because I don't want to hear from the people who are going to claim that X should look like Y because of Z. I like to describe things as accurately as possible, but absent being in possession of documentary evidence to prove anything, at a certain point you just have to describe what you see instead.

 

[Colin Jacobson]

There's a lot of discs that I don't look forward to reviewing just because I don't want to hear from the people who are going to claim that X should look like Y because of Z. I like to describe things as accurately as possible, but absent being in possession of documentary evidence to prove anything, at a certain point you just have to describe what you see instead.

Exactly. Are the colors right? Is the AR perfect:? Is the grain natural? Etc.

And that doesn't even get into audio!

Ya just do the best ya can.

 

[Colin Jacobson]

There's a lot of discs that I don't look forward to reviewing just because I don't want to hear from the people who are going to claim that X should look like Y because of Z. I like to describe things as accurately as possible, but absent being in possession of documentary evidence to prove anything, at a certain point you just have to describe what you see instead.

Exactly. Are the colors right? Is the AR perfect:? Is the grain natural? Etc.

And that doesn't even get into audio!

Ya just do the best ya can.

 

[ManW_TheUncool]

^Clearly, you just need to pull up dem bootstraps and do better, LOL!

_Man_

 

[sbjork]

^Clearly, you just need to pull up dem bootstraps and do better, LOL!

_Man_

 

[Colin Jacobson]

^Clearly, you just need to pull up dem bootstraps and do better, LOL!

_Man_

Joking aside, I really try hard to educate myself and get things as "right" as I can.

But it's a next to impossible task to be an expert on every facet of this stuff.

Even RAH doesn't know what every movie he watches is "supposed to look like" - and it's literally his life's work!

 

[Stephen_J_H]

Joking aside, I really try hard to educate myself and get things as "right" as I can.

But it's a next to impossible task to be an expert on every facet of this stuff.

Even RAH doesn't know what every movie he watches is "supposed to look like" - and it's literally his life's work!

Which is why he relies on reference material as much as possible. If you can get an IB or low fade answer print, that’s your goal for the look.

 

[Robert Harris]

Joking aside, I really try hard to educate myself and get things as "right" as I can.

But it's a next to impossible task to be an expert on every facet of this stuff.

Even RAH doesn't know what every movie he watches is "supposed to look like" - and it's literally his life's work!

Because knowing what a film originally looked like can be a great deal of research and heavy lifting. It is not guess-work. There are always clues, but that isn’t enough.

 

[BornOfAJackal]

Say what you will about how The Exorcist is supposed to look, notice that nobody criticizes the sound.

 

[Lord Dalek]

Say what you will about how The Exorcist is supposed to look, notice that nobody criticizes the sound.

Why would they? The OG mono is here.

 

[Dick]

I'm going to do my best here not to fall into various potential traps in reviewing WB's new 4k UHD release of Mr. Friedkin's The Exorcist.

There have been numerous variants of the film created for the past half century, with changes to color timing, effects, audio platforms, et al.

AFAIK, there are no true reference prints, although there should be a timed IP, that might be helpful toward finding the original color scheme, if that is what WB and the filmmakers desired to reproduce.

Therefore, this review will be based upon a single attribute. That being, how will this disc be perceived by virgin viewers, with no previous knowledge of the film and it's various incarnations.

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

Color and densities "work," as do black levels and shadow detail, although they may not be accurate to the original release. Grain looks proper for Eastman 5254.

Both cuts are included, with the extended using an Atmos track. The original logo has been replaced with something special - not certain if it's new to this releases. I've not researched.

The Atmos track is proscenium filling and works beautifully. One might presume that it's derived from the 1979 70mm release, but one shouldn't presume anything with this project, I shall follow that tenet.


Image – 5 (HDR)

Audio – 5 (Dolby Atmos)

Pass / Fail – Pass

Plays nicely with projectors - Yes

Makes use of and works well in 4k - 7

Upgrade from Blu-ray - Definitely

Worth your attention - 10

Slipcover rating - 2

Very Highly Recommended

RAH


Thank you for supporting HTF when you preorder using the link below. As an Amazon Associate, HTF earns from qualifying purchases. If you are using an adblocker you will not see link.

See on Amazon

The original logo has been replaced with something special - not certain if it's new to this releases. I've not researched.

Might this possibly be the correct opening logo, designed by Saul Bass?

 

[Stephen_J_H]

Might this possibly be the correct opening logo, designed by Saul Bass?

It's not.

 

[Dick]

It's not.

I know this sounds picky as hell [i.e. not restoring the 1973 Saul Bass opening logo), but that's a dealbreaker for me. I'll stick the with previous Blu.

 

[Robert Crawford]

I know this sounds picky as hell [i.e. not restoring the 1973 Saul Bass opening logo), but that's a dealbreaker for me. I'll stick the with previous Blu.

It's your money!

 

[Dick]

It's your money!

What little I have these days, yes.

 

[SD_Brian]

I think there needs to be a term created for the number of posts it takes, after Mr. Harris rates a title with Video 5 and Audio 5, for the thread to turn into a 9-page discussion over how well we do/do not recall exact color timing and/or grain structure from a screening we saw ___ years ago.

 

[John Maher_289910]

I saw THE EXORCIST 11 times in a movie theater during its original release. I saw it a couple more times in reissues and "The Version You've Never Seen". This 4K release (with color-grading just like the previous release in the "Complete Anthology") is the best the film has ever looked.

 

[cda1143]

Any thoughts on theatrical v. director’s cut?

 

[Kyle_D]

Any thoughts on theatrical v. director’s cut?

Each has their merits and are worth watching, but the theatrical is superior overall IMO. The additional medical testing scenes are interesting but ultimately superfluous. The spider-walk is too-much-too-soon and distracts from the impact of Burke Jennings' death. Merrin and Karras' discussion on the stairs is excellent but interrupts the pacing of the exorcism. I understand what Blatty was going for with the new ending between Kinderman and Dyer, and it works in the novel, but it tonally clashes with the film.

Friedkin himself seemed conflicted about the new scenes when interviewed about them, and many have described the "Directors Cut" as more of a Writers Cut,