Could this be the DVD that looks most like film? (1 Viewer)

[Mitchell Kaufman]

I'm referring to Rosemary's Baby.

I've just gotten done watching this projected to approximately 100 inches for the first time (after having seen it only on a 35-inch direct-view), and found it to be an absolutely stunning piece of work.

That's not to say it looks like it was filmed yesterday. Quite the contrary: it's got a fine patina of grain overlaying it throughout, and it's got a mono soundtrack.

But it was a marvelously photographed film. On the DVD, except for some very minimal EE, it looks exactly as I remember it looking on a huge movie screen back in 1969. The color, including fleshtones, is spot-on, as is contrast. Aside from the aforementioned EE (which is virtually nonexistent compared to most releases), there's nary a digital artifact to be seen: no mosquito noise, no patchy areas, no DVNR artifacts. And that mono soundtrack wasn't monkeyed with; it comes through loud and clear.

These may be some of the reasons why this disc looks more like film than most anything I've seen.

What is the lesson to be learned here, if any?

While this film was obviously transferred and authored with loving care--and by people with very good eyes--could it also be that they were content to just leave well enough alone?

For all the praise lavished on LVI, I must tell you I'm glad they didn't get their hands on this one.

This disc has been floating around for awhile now, so I apologize if this isn't exactly news. But it's a terrific film, magnificently presented on DVD; if you haven't gotten it yet, run, don't walk.

MK

 

[David Ruiz]

Another DVD that looks almost as good as the original 35mm Film itself, is "Sleeply Hollow". It is EYE-POPPING clear! It's has the best video quality I have ever seen in my entire life on DVD! Trying blowing this one up to 100" and see how it looks.

 

[Dan M~]

...it looks exactly as I remember it looking on a huge movie screen back in 1969.

Dang Mitchell, you've got a great memory!!
I can't even remember my street address from 30 years ago!
I haven't watched Rosemary's Baby. I'll have to rent it now. Thanks for the report.

 

[James Miller]

I certainly can't say how faithul to the original theatrical presentation "Rosemary..." ( wasn't born wuite yet) but I didn't find the DVD transfer to be particularly memorable... either good or bad..

 

[Ken_McAlinden]

As much as people gripe about Paramount's pricing and lack of extra features, they have a very good batting average at turning out excellent film-like transfers of their catalog releases. They also frequently, but not always, offer a well mastered mono track on their titles where they create new 5.1 mixes. Too often, other studios either don't offer the original mono at all, or put minimal effort into its mastering.

Regards,

 

[Chuck L]

While I agree with you Ron and Paramount is one of the best when it comes to transfers that look great...it is in regards to a myrid of other things that makes people gripe.

Hopefully we will see some changes in relation to that with the upcoming announcements.

 

[Jack Briggs]

Another film-to-DVD transfer I hear a lot of good things about is The Pledge. The Perfect Vision even did a sidebar on its transfer quality, noting that it rivals a print viewed in a commercial cinema. I bought the thing just for that reason, though I still haven't screened it yet.

And for the most part, I am very pleased with the most recent edition of 2001--it brings me back the closest to a commercial print.

There are a lot of excellent DVDs out there.

 

[DarrenA]

Check out the Training Day DVD from Warner Bros. Holy cow that is one amazingly "film-like" transfer!

 

[David Coleman]

I must concur with your opinion of the transfer. I remember when I first saw the DVD I was surprised how colorful it was and even though there are instances of grain I thought that in general the film looked great and the transfer was excellent!

 

[Ryan L B]

how does the odd couple 1 look on a regular 50 inch big screen.