Any reviews for "Halloween" yet....????? (1 Viewer)

[Lyle_JP]

And yet, Damin, you have no trouble whatsoever officially declaring the disc "a pile of feces" even though you, by your own admission, haven't and won't even see it, based soley on a handful of screenshots posted on the internet. Screenshots which, as plenty of people have already pointed out, are hand-picked extremes that are in no way representitive of the overall look of this disc.

And, sorry to bring this up again, I really fail to see how so many people hate this new disc just because of how in love they were with the look of the THX one. It really wasn't that great, folks. From the day I bought that one nearly four years ago, I could clearly see how substandard it was, despite all the build-up that great article on DVDReview had given it. If there is an archive of alt.video.dvd somewhere that goes back that far, you can read some of my rantings on the subject. Color timing issues aside (which is really the minor difference between the two IMO), the THX disc was simply too dark! It exchanged shadow detail for black wherever it could, which I'm sure was great from a compression point of view, but was in no way faithful to any print I've ever seen.

-Lyle J.P.

 

[Damin J Toell]

And, sorry to bring this up again, I really fail to see how so many people hate this new disc just because of how in love they were with the look of the THX one.

And why do people refuse to buy colorized versions of B&W films "just because" they were so in love with the look of the original film? And why do people refused to buy P&S discs of widescreen films "just because" they were so in love with the look of the original framing? The quality of the DVD's compression is clearly the paramount concern...

Anyone remember when being a fan of film actually involved caring about the films themselves? Now it appears to be a love of technology over all else. Who cares if it's wrong? It's the latest and greatest!

DJ

 

[Lyle_JP]

Damin,

Let me be blunt here. You haven't seen the disc! Until you do see the disc, your posted opinions of the disc are simply full of FUD.

Now, once you see the disc, and give us your own review, your observations will hold the same weight as any one else's who has seen the disc. I respect Peter Bracke's opinion of the disc, even if I disagree with his conclusions. But you're not really adding anything to the discussion.

-Lyle J.P.

 

[Damin J Toell]

But you're not really adding anything to the discussion.

I hope to see you post the same thing to those who haven't seen the disc but are also defending it. Ironically, the person to whom I was replying that brought forth your reply was just such a person. Funny that you've called my opinion worthless, but not his.

DJ

 

[Richard Kim]

Now, about the color timing issues. Yes, I know Dean Cundey was involved with the creation of the THX DVD. In truth, I think he was doing a little revisionist telecining, making it look the way he had always wanted it to look, but not really the way it ever did look in 1978. This DVD is much more representitive of film prints I have come across as a projectionist than the previous disc was.

 

[Damin J Toell]

Because according to the above comments in the thread, the transfer from the 1999 THX DVD is different from the Criterion LD and apparently the original theatrical release (though it was approved by DP Dean Cundey).

Which are you saying was approved by Cundey? The original theatrical release? Because Cundey didn't approve the Criterion LD. Anyway, the only "evidence" we've got of what the original theatrical release looked like is the memory of someone who wasn't involved in the film about film prints he has "come across" (and such prints themselves may not even have retained their original 1978 look by the time he "came across" them, anyway). Put up against the opinion of Cundey, that doesn't mean much to me.

And what does any of that have to do with whether or not I've seen the new disc?

DJ

 

[Jim_K]

I assume you're talking about me.

First of all I have no opinion of the disc and have not stated an opinion that I'm aware of. Though I'll be happy to post my thoughts on it once my copy arrives.

All I did was complement Lyle's review & point out how ridiculous it is to fly off the handle over one negative review.


FYI - I've found out over the years that screengrabs are a very poor representation of how a film looks on your HT.

 

[Damin J Toell]

Sorry but this is why you'll never have a valid opinion of this disc.

Excuse me? Because I said that I didn't say that I'll never see the disc (to clear up the double-negative for you: I will see the disc if someone shows it to me), I'll never have a valid opinion? What in the world are you talking about?

DJ

 

[Joshua_Y]

Okay...well Im back to my original conclusion...I aint buyin it...the color is still not what Cundey has approved...and honestly...I saw no problems at all with the THX disc...so I'll just stick with it...

 

[Jim_K]

I think it could be.

Sorry but my discussion with you has now run it's course.

That is all.

 

[Lyle_JP]

If the best defense for this transfer that you've got is "you haven't seen the disc," it doesn't really make the disc any better.

Again, my best defense are my posts detailing my observations of both discs (all three if you count the laserdisc). My point is that at least my opinions of the disc are firsthand. If you think that means I believe that my opinion holds more weight than yours, you'd be right.:p)

-Lyle J.P.

 

[Joshua_Y]

"Lets get ready to RUUUUUUUMBLE!!!"

 

[Jordan_E]

LOL!
I've been following this, and while I still won't be getting the new version, reading various posts makes me want to dig out the LD and check the mono soundtrack. The LD player still hasn't been hooked up since getting my X1, but this seems like as good an excuse as any!

 

[ScottR]

I remember seeing Halloween in 1978, and as I remember, the blue tint was there. But I think it was a paler blue. I am sticking with the LE.

 

[Damin J Toell]

Jim_K:

I have been extremely clear, detailed, and explicit on why I like this new transfer and dislike the older THX one. If that's not "defending my opinion", I don't know what is.

Odd, then, that you had to resort to saying that my "posted opinions of the disc are simply full of FUD" instead of actually responding to what I have said.

There's a very simple way to clear all of this up. Does the new disc represent the color scheme for the film as approved by Dean Cundey in 1999? Yes or no? If no, then my opinion is not "simply full of FUD," but, rather, simply the opinion of someone who wants to see the film presented with its proper color scheme. Further, whether I have actually seen the disc firsthand is completely irrelevant. The disc either has Cundey's colors or it doesn't; this isn't Schroedinger's DVD where I need to open up the case myself to determine whether the transfer is correct. If I went out right now and bought the DVD, it would not suddenly affect the color of the transfer on the disc.

So: does the new disc contain the color scheme for the film as approved by Dean Cundey in 1999? Yes or no?

DJ

 

[Matt Stone]

So: does the new disc contain the color scheme for the film as approved by Dean Cundey in 1999? Yes or no?

It's not as black and white as you paint it. I know that Cundey didn't officially approve the Criterion LD transfer, but I'm pretty sure John Carpenter has. So, IMO what we have are two approved transfers...the one on the Criterion LD (similar to the new release) and the Cundey approved version released in '99. This is like Sam Raimi approving both 1.33:1 and a 1.78:1 transfers for The Evil Dead. Neither is wrong, since they are both approved.

That being said, we don't have official approval for the LD, so this argument is moot...but until we do, it's not a yes or no, black or white question. I'm not buying it either, because I'm happy with the '99 transfer, but I'm not jumping down anyones throat for preferring the new version.

 

[David Von Pein]

...the THX disc was simply too dark! It exchanged shadow detail for black
wherever it could...

Based on these two particular screenshots, I'd have to concur with the above quote
re. the 1999 version being too dark. To me, the 2003 variant of the film
looks better (in these two examples anyway). .........


(TOP = 2003 PRINT):

 

[David Von Pein]

The "too dark" print reminds me of the "Vertigo" transfer, in which the final
running-up-the-tower-stairs scene has been made to look almost totally black, without the ability to even discern the actors involved whatsoever. I'd prefer actually being able to at least partially see the principals on the screen. (But maybe it's just me. Hitchcock apparently wanted it pitch-dark, with just shadows & voices commanding this important climax scene.)

 

[Damin J Toell]

but I'm not jumping down anyones throat for preferring the new version.

I wasn't, either, until I was told that I was just getting my "panties all twisted in knots" for caring about whether a DVD transfer represents the desires of its filmmakers (which I thought was what this forum was about), as if somehow it's not an important consideration.

DJ

 

[Damin J Toell]

(But maybe it's just me. Hitchcock apparently wanted it pitch-dark, with just shadows & voices commanding this important climax scene.)

And, likewise, the darkness of the 1999 transfer may be what Carpenter and Cundey wanted. Turning up the brightness on any intentionally dark film will reveal more detail. So what? Just because more detail can be made visible, it doesn't mean that it's meant to be seen. It seems to me that the goal of a transfer is to display the film as it is meant to be seen, not just what may look "better" and "more detailed" to someone.

DJ