Degrading the transfer for Animal House to suit the director's vision. Going too far?

Discussion in 'DVD' started by Johnny G, Jul 24, 2003.

  1. Johnny G

    Johnny G Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2000
    Messages:
    786
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Obviously the director knows how his film is supposed to look and he may have been happy with previous transfers and prints of the film but that may be because the way he viewed it all those years ago may have suffered from degradation in it's presentation.

    The original film stocks have obviously been used to make the new hi-def transfer but he's obviously never seen it so good so he's trying to match the original vision he had for the film by trying to match up to how he originally saw it.

    That's all well and good but how do you match up to something in someone else's head?

    ie could the technical crew go too far adding grain to the film?
     
  2. jonathan_govols

    jonathan_govols Stunt Coordinator

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2002
    Messages:
    123
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Well all I can say is I'm glad I'm not interested in this title. It would seem logical to make the film look as good as possible. But Landis has the right to his opinion and since he's the director he can do what he wants. But my reply to him I guess would be "Well why are you letting Universal release a full screen version? That's not the way Animal House is supposed to look either is it?"

    As long as De Palma doesn't give us this crap on the new Scarface DVD I'll be ok :)
     
  3. Todd_B

    Todd_B Second Unit

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2000
    Messages:
    381
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Taken from DavisDVD.com

     
  4.  
  5. Jesse Skeen

    Jesse Skeen Producer

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 1999
    Messages:
    4,380
    Likes Received:
    268
    Trophy Points:
    4,110
    All I know is that I saw Dazed and Confused countless times in the theater, since I worked as a projectionist, and it had a deliberate washed-out look to it. When it came out on laserdisc the picture was a lot sharper, colors brighter, and there were several scenes where you can see camera crew reflected in the sides of cars that were not visible on the film print- I would have noticed if they were. It was like whoever did the video transfer thought "Hey, this looks like crap, better fix it!"
     
  6. greg_t

    greg_t Screenwriter

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2001
    Messages:
    1,650
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    110
    If the new dvd doesn't meet with the directors approval, it should be revisedto do so. I'm glad I have the OOP version of this film. I generally don't get too concerned with dvd names and such, but "double secret probation edition" combined with that cover art just turns me away.
     
  7. Ted Ehlers

    Ted Ehlers Extra

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2003
    Messages:
    17
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    It's been said many times by people smarter than myself, but...

    Films that were made during the age of less-than-crystal digital perfection harnessed things like grain and blur for artistic and technical reasons.

    Jim Henson used the grain (grain being what the image is actually made of) to hide things like wires and other devices. He knew what level of detail could actually be seen by an audience member. Now that DVDs are being remastered from such hi-quality sources, older films are presented beyond their intended clarity. Some directors might like an enhancement, some would not.

    Landis obviously is going from an artistic stance. Why should a relic like Animal House look as sterilized as a modern blockbuster or (gulp) as a popular digitally-shot and editied space fantasy? Having said all that, if digital fake grain filters are used to achive a pseudo-distressed effect, that's as inauthentic as digitally mastering from the orignial negatives and re-editing the cuts and wipes.
     
  8.  
  9. george kaplan

    george kaplan Executive Producer

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2001
    Messages:
    13,063
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Instead of deliberately downgrading the image, just make it as good as possible, and if there are wires and stuff that show up, remove them digitally. This is something worthy of Nedermeyer. [​IMG]
     
  10. Felix Martinez

    Felix Martinez Screenwriter

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2001
    Messages:
    1,466
    Likes Received:
    28
    Trophy Points:
    1,610
    Location:
    South Florida
    My question would be:

    "What size screen is Landis basing his opinion on?"

    If he feels the film needs tweaking based on a viewing on a screen 90 inches or bigger, then I would say he's on the money to try to get the image closer to the theatrical image he prefers.

    But if he's viewing the transfer on a smaller screen (
     
  11. Patrick McCart

    Patrick McCart Lead Actor

    Joined:
    May 16, 2001
    Messages:
    7,566
    Likes Received:
    195
    Trophy Points:
    9,110
    Location:
    Georgia (the state)
    Real Name:
    Patrick McCart
    It's funny how some people will support anything to do with OAR, but won't support the filmmaker's wishes to keep the image the way it should be.

    I guess we need films to look great so we can show off our 10' wide TV screens.



    Seriously...what is wrong with the image being degraded if it's supposed to look that way?
     
  12. rich_d

    rich_d Cinematographer

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2001
    Messages:
    2,024
    Likes Received:
    50
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Connecticut
    Real Name:
    Rich
     
  13. Damin J Toell

    Damin J Toell Producer

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2001
    Messages:
    3,762
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Brooklyn, NY
    Real Name:
    Damin J. Toell
    [email protected]:
     
  14. Bill GrandPre

    Bill GrandPre Cinematographer

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2001
    Messages:
    2,068
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I can't understand why anyone would second-guess the decision by a FILMmaker to keep his FILM looking FILM-like.
     
  15. Patrick McCart

    Patrick McCart Lead Actor

    Joined:
    May 16, 2001
    Messages:
    7,566
    Likes Received:
    195
    Trophy Points:
    9,110
    Location:
    Georgia (the state)
    Real Name:
    Patrick McCart
     
  16. rutger_s

    rutger_s Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2000
    Messages:
    878
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I guess everyone forgot that Steve Oedekerk purposely damaged the "new" portions of Kung Pow: Enter The Fist to properly match the "old" portions.

    Not to mention several restoration artists like Robert Harris fighting to present films like Lawrence of Arabia with the proper look.

    Oh, and who could forget producer Mel Gibson purposely muting Payback for a darker look.

    Gee, you guys fight for original aspect ratios. Shouldn't we be fighting for original intended presentations?
     
  17. Johnny G

    Johnny G Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2000
    Messages:
    786
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    No, I think Landis has a point, like I said "That's all well and good but how do you match up to something in someone else's head?"

    It's one thing trying to match his original vision, I doubt it's anything to do with seeing things you shouldn't, more like the courseness of the film.

    Imagine if they took the masters of a film like Three Kings and it came out not having that over exposed look or one of these films with a tinge of added color like Far From Heaven or a hint of green (I think it was the Matrix), you'd make sure they looked like the way they came out originally.

    All I'm saying is the technical crew could go too far, I don't know if adding grain is the answer, from the sound of what Landis is saying it's too crystal clear as if it was meant to be seen through the eyes of a hung over Belushi's character, in which case it needs softeneing but again, how do the technical crew know how far to go? It really needs Landis working with them.
     
  18. Gordon McMurphy

    Gordon McMurphy Producer

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2002
    Messages:
    3,530
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Fincher completely color-corrected Se7en for the 2-disc - was he wrong to do so?

    Animal House didn't need a new edition - that's what annoys me. Scarface certainly did. Duel has been pulled - why? Seriously, Universal have some mondo whacko ideas about creativity, marketing and distribution and I know I'm not the only one who is confused and frustrated by their actions/non-actions.

    But more power to Landis! But I'll pass on the new Aninal House, great theough it is.

    TOGA!


    Gordy
     
  19. rich_d

    rich_d Cinematographer

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2001
    Messages:
    2,024
    Likes Received:
    50
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Connecticut
    Real Name:
    Rich
     

Share This Page