About gRindhouse? (1 Viewer)

[hdkid]

I skipped the theater release and the dvd's to wait for the hd release to come out, if its even going to come out, anyone have any info on this?

 

[TravisR]

There's no word on a release date but I'm sure it'll happen sometime.

 

[hdkid]

I also want to get a few movies that are only on dvd but are on the hd-dvd camp, should I just wait and hope they release it or just get it on dvd.

 

[troy evans]

The questions I have are, if Grindhouse was made to look raw and crappy to give you the 70s cheapo movie experience,why make an HD release? Do you need that presentation in HD? If there's a cut of the films without that then sure. If not, HD rendering would be meaningless, At least for me.

 

[Rhoq]

Did you like 300 in HD? Despite all of the heavy grain and other effects which intentionally degraded the PQ, the image still has plenty of "pop". It kind of proves that a movie that is supposed to look a certain way can still look amazing in high definition. I'm sure that if Weinstein does decide to give HD another chance and they release Grindhouse on HD DVD it would still look great underneath all of the artificial aging and dirt.

 

[BrettGallman]

Yes, the film just has an artificial layer of grain and film scratches--the resolution wouldn't be affected at all.

 

[Mendoza]

The way the image was degraded in 300 is totally different from the way it was in Grindhouse. I just watched Planet Terror (again). Rodriguez adds just about everything to make the film look like actual film which was run through the same dirty projector for 5 years then stored, open, in the window of someone's attic for 30 years. You have major dust, you have scratches, mismatched colors, wrong colors, faded colors, bland colors, color shifting... you've got the "projector" skipping frames with the picture stuttering and jumping, and you even have the 'film' catching on fire followed by--(not to spoil it)--something funny you'd expect to see at a run-down movie theater thirty years ago.
300 isn't meant to parody a 90-minute Saturday afternoon exploitation movie from the 1970's. The grain and color saturation of 300 is meant to come across as deliberately stylized. It's a film of sweeping battle vistas and the visual, artistic sensibility of the graphic novel. Grindhouse (at least Planet Terror--I haven't bought Death Proof yet so what I'm saying doesn't apply as much to Death Proof) is a film of shambling, brain-eating zombies which I'd be happy to buy on VHS if that were the only available format. Heck, I'd even go 16mm.
At the same time you do have some cool, seamless digital effects (mixed with cheesy effects) -- the most obvious example being Rose McGowan's machine-gun leg. And the level of dust and degradation is not fixed at a high level throughout the entire movie. The soundtrack/theme is cool but the sound design is only as good as it needs to be.

It would be nice if there was an HD (or just a DVD) release of Grindhouse which included BOTH movies (!@#$%^&*) with slightly better sound and dust in high definition, but honestly I can't think of any single movie less worthy of an HD release than Planet Terror and I'm not saying that to be snide but to be honest.

 

[TravisR]

Exactly. It's the same as people wondering if old movies will any better since they're old. The resolution is still increased because it's high definition and the amount of scratches and dirt doesn't have any effect on the resolution.

 

[troy evans]

Well, for me if they don't remove the artificial debris and scratches and other crap then sd dvd will be good enough. I'm sorry, but, the point of Hi-Def is to improve picture and sound quality. With an amazing HD PQ burried under all that shit whose gonna care to have a HD transfer? Also, if they don't have the debris and other stuff you no longer have what the director intended. That's not how the film was meant to be and if Hi-Def was an issue here I think the "Grindhouse" effect would have all been a pointless endeavor.It was intended to look shitty, not shitty in Hi-Def, for that combination clearly does not go hand in hand by any standard.

 

[BrettGallman]

Planet Terror, despite the artificial degradations, looks fantastic. It'd definately benefit from an HD release.

If we extend the logic that it doesn't deserve to be in HD, then you could argue that it should never had appeared on film, which has a much higher quality than HD.

 

[troy evans]

I don't follow your logic here. Point blank, Hi-Def is to be an improvement and not necessary on a film made to look like crap in the first place.Also, most films are filmed in Hi-Def now anyways, but, the transfer here has been deliberately degraded by the films director to look like SHIT. So, even if a HD version of the films get released what would it truely matter.

 

[TravisR]

I really don't want to belabor this but think of it this way: The video that is underneath the artificial dirt and debris will look better than it would in an SD resolution. The dirt and debris don't obscure the picture completely so what's under it will look better.

 

[troy evans]

I understand that. I guess with the presentation, at least in this case, I personally feel that it would be worthless. Perhaps that's just my opinion and I'm alone in it.

 

[BrettGallman]

It's because the transfer itself really isn't degraded. Really, all that's going on with Planet Terror is a layer of digtial noise that was added. Everything underneath looks like a brand new film, as it should. It'd be different if say, Rodriguez de-saturated the colors, made the transfer look "soft," etc--in that case, then, yes, an HD release would probably be pointless. That's not the case, though.

 

[JustinCleveland]

Except that the stressing is a part of the movie. You wouldn't colorize a B&W film because it would look better on HD-DVD, would you? The scratches are an artistic choice.

 

[Jason Seaver]

The HD-DVD version would still look closer to what was on the big screen than the standard DVD version, which is sort of the goal. For all the gunk Rodriguez added to Planet Terror, he didn't shoot it at 480p - there's frequently a very nice-looking movie on-screen, even if there are noticeable fake spots and scratches.

And Death Proof, especially the last act, absolutely would benefit from an HD transfer. The picture gets cleaner as the movie goes on; Tarantino wants you looking at the crazy action and doesn't put a lot of goofy artifacts in the way.

 

[TravisR]

Honestly, I can't believe this is even being debated. It's like the people who don't think that a black and white movie can't look better in HD because it's old. Whether a viewer cares about the increase in resolution is up to each viewer but it's undeniable that the movie would look better in HD rather than SD.

 

[troy evans]

Travis, just so you know, I fully understand what your point is as far as the picture being improved under the artificial debris and what not. I also think you could improve the picture under the debris as you've stated. My point is why bother? If the debris and scratches, even though artificial, are to remain then it is my opinion that the film need not get an HD transfer. I repeat, my opinion that it need not happen. If others feel different about it and want thier Grindhouse in Hi-Def, so be it. You all have the right to have the film as you see fit if it becomes available in both sd dvd and HDM formats. There's also no wrong in wanting that, but, for me it is completely not needed. Hopefully, my point will come across a little better this time.

 

[hdkid]

it looks as though the weinsteen* company might not even come out with the hd version since their sales on the hd-dvd side of the camp aren't faring so well.

 

[JustinCleveland]

Travis,

A lot of people continually ask for a "clean" version of the Grindhouse films, which I find disgusting. I thought you were advocating that; as you are not, I apologize for misconstruing your comments.