Confusion time Re: EVIL DEAD!!!! Help!! (1 Viewer)

[Dave Mack]

Hey Y'all!!
Was looking forward to the new Evil Dead disc, then I read the DVDfile.com review which said that the new transfer is a disappointment and reccomends the older 1.
THEN I read the review at DigitalBits and they gave the new transfer a RAVE and said it's the best the film has ever looked!!!!!!! AGH!!!!!!
What to do...? what to do....?
any thoughts, Y'all????

 

[Adam_WM]

Here was my solution. I Am going to buy the Book of the Dead regardless. However, to avoid being repetitous on the extras, I am going to pick up the original Anchor Bay Edition. I don't need Elite because it doubles up on the extras. I am going to get Anchor Bay also because it is full frame. That way I get the full fram 35 mm and the widescreen 16mm. Best of both worlds.

 

[Patrick McCart]

DVDFile just doesn't seem to like grain (Love it or not, it's part of film.)

16mm is going to look grainy unless massive digital work is done, but it will result in a loss of detail.

The Anchor Bay transfer is from the 16mm negative, so I'd like to know how that's worse than a 35mm blowup print (Elite).

 

[Rob Lutter]

The Anchor Bay transfer is from the 16mm negative, so I'd like to know how that's worse than a 35mm blowup print (Elite).

The thing is... I don't think the DVDFILE reviewer knows what he is talking about. The ELITE transfer is blown up then shrunk down again... the grain is less prominant because of the loss of resolution going back and forth. There is no middleman in Anchor Bay's transfer (straight from the 16mm print)... it is just as it was shot.

(Get the Book of the Dead )

 

[Artur Meinild]

RobL, after reading your post I'm looking forward even more to getting this release! Until now I wasn't aware that the new AB transfer is directly off the negative.
I'm quite confident that this new AB transfer is the way this film is supposed to be seen. Anybody who says different isn't paying much attention to the real world.
I can't wait till 5th of march!

 

[Tom-G]

Dave, the best thing I can recommend right now is to read Ron's review. Here is the link.

 

[John P Grosskopf]

There is no middleman in Anchor Bay's transfer (straight from the 16mm print)... it is just as it was shot.

Not quite true, as the film was shot in the academy aspect ratio of 1.37 to 1.

Anchor Bay's version, though directly from a 16mm print, is cropped to 1.85 to 1. This ratio is not how it was shot.

However, it does indeed bring the transfer one generation closer to the orignal camera negative (though chopping off the top and bottom).

This was done BTW with Sam Raimi's input, so I guess its's okay.

 

[Anthony Thorne]

It's funny how folks can (a.) cry foul over Warner's fullscreen remaster of THE SHINING, and (b.) complain over Anchor Bay's widescreen transfer of EVIL DEAD. Both film were shot fullscreen, and then matted for theaters. Also - reportedly - both DVD's (the fullscreen SHINING and the widescreen EVIL DEAD) represent the preferred aspect ratios chosen by Kubrick and Raimi for home viewing. Whatever.

I agree with the comments about DVD File's attitude towards grain. Without having even seen the transfer, I feel inclined to lean towards the Bits review of the new disc. Sold!

 

[JonZ]

Id like to pick this up as well and Im unsure which version to get.

 

[Artur Meinild]

Anchor Bay's version, though directly from a 16mm print, is cropped to 1.85 to 1. This ratio is not how it was shot.

99.999999% of all movies presented in the 1.85:1 ratio are shot on a 1.37.1 negative, as mentioned a million times before. And I'm not exaggerating!

 

[John P Grosskopf]

I was not indicating the director's preferred aspect ratio, only stating that it was not shot at 1.85 to 1.

The director gets to choose the aspect ratio of projection, not me.

Just clarifying how it was shot, not how it eventually ended up being ptrojected.

 

[Patrick McCart]

It was shot with 1.33:1 in mind, but with a mechanical "tilt & pan" process later added to make it compatible with modern theaters (usually 1.85:1 for open matte films).

The Kubrick DVD's are done according to Kubrick's wishes, this DVD is re-formatted according to Rami's wishes.

If you're seeing what the director want's you to see, it's done correctly.

 

[Brian Lawrence]

It's funny how folks can (a.) cry foul over Warner's fullscreen remaster of THE SHINING, and (b.) complain over Anchor Bay's widescreen transfer of EVIL DEAD.

But we have a lot of people on this forum, and a lot of differing opinions. My guess is that the majority of those complaining about the 1.85 ratio on Evil Dead are not the same individuals that complained about the Kubrick films being fullscreen. Thus it's not all that funny or odd.

 

[Anthony Thorne]

Yes it is.

 

[Jon Robertson]

It would be interesting to see just how much people are willing to accept as long as the disc is "Director-Approved".

 

[Colin Jacobson]

99.999999% of all movies presented in the 1.85:1 ratio are shot on a 1.37.1 negative, as mentioned a million times before.

Yup. How a film was SHOT is really irrelevant in these cases; what matters is how the director intended it to be SEEN. I find it amusing and ironic that some folks are crying foul over the absence of an unmatted Dead while others had a fit over the PRESENCE of an unmatted Willy Wonka.

Sam Raimi apparently approved the dimensions, and it's clear that those were used for theatrical exhibitions. I watched it tonight and thought the framing seemed fine. In fact, I don't recall any scenes that looked problematic, and I saw a number that would have lost some effect if they HADN'T been matted. For example, one early shot with extreme close-ups on eyes would make less sense unmatted; you'd see too much of their faces.

As for the picture, I never saw other Dead DVDs, so I can't compare them. Overall, I agree with Ron's assessment: subjectively, it looks pretty good for a very cheaply-shot 20-year-old flick, but objectively, it's got a lot of problems. The print's nicely clean, but otherwise, it's a pretty ugly presentation. I think it seems to be a good representation of the material, though I feel anyone who gives it an "A+" is off their rocker...

 

[Brian Lawrence]

Colin-

The reason many of us question the ratio of the film is because the filmmaker has sent out mixed messages on it .

-In the Evil Dead handbook it is mentioned that the film should be presented in a 1.66 aspect ratio.

-The Elite Collector's Edition Laserdisc released several years ago had a transfer that was personaly approved by the director at a fullframe aspect ratio of 1.33.

-Now we have a new dvd matted to a 1.85 ratio that was also approved by the director.