Dracula (1979) (Blu-ray) Available for Preorder (1 Viewer)

[stevenHa]

I'm happy that this time Universal is releasing a blu ray in the states along with Europe instead of us having to wait 2-3 years. Maybe they saw the posts on this matter ! Please continue with Hindenburg, Macarthur, Forbin Project, Andromeda Strain, etc.

 

[ABaglivi]

I prefer the full-color version. I saw the film in it's original-release year; it was in full color. I subsequently ran a 16mm scope print (edge code Fuji 1979) and it was in full color. As for home video, I have only seen the de-saturated DVD.

 

[Kevin EK]

I wonder if John Badham addresses the color palette in his commentary. I'd be surprised if he didn't.
I don't know if this movie will be submitted to me for review. If it is, I'll let you know.

 

[Will Krupp]

Moe,

You're welcome to prefer the color-drained version and more power to you as you'll now have it on blu-ray. As far as I'm concerned, you can keep it as I'm not buying it in that version again.

If you say "JB" and company originally designed the color to look as it does now, then I have to take you at your word as I have no evidence to the contrary, yet the fact that they went to the all the trouble to make a point of shooting Langella specifically in pink sunset (and talking about it) when the "original color design" renders the scenes as a gray, overcast day seems a waste of time and doesn't completely add up.

Why does someone who creates a piece of art have no say in how that work should be perceived, just because you like some pretty colors?

Beyond painting me as an ignorant philistine, I'm not sure exactly what you're saying here. If you mean the artist has a say in how the piece of art is presented, then I agree wholeheartedly with you. Considering that "JB"'s preferred version is the only version available then I would comfortably argue that he has ALL the say, so I'm not sure why you would intimate that his vision is somehow being denied by "pretty color" philistines like me. I have no power in this.

If you're arguing that he should have a say in how his art is perceived by the end user, then, sorry but absolutely not. No artist should have an expectation of control over the perception of his creation by the end user. As a consumer, I have every right to my own perception, and I find the version as seen (twice) on DVD to be downright ugly and I won't be spending my money on it again.

The current version is the ORIGINAL color design.

You want the 1979 Theatrical release color design, or perhaps the boosted original video color design

With all due respect, you know damn well what I meant

Again, people basing all their knowledge on a previous home video release, never a good idea.

What are you even talking about, Bruce? The current video masters are NO more an accurate representation of the theatrical release color design than the "boosted" early video masters were and no one, not even Moe, is claiming that the movie looked like this in 1979. In fact, I will go so far as to say I'm willing to lay money on the fact that the early video masters, "boosted" as they may have been, were far closer in look and spirit to the 1979 prints than this.

 

[Moe Dickstein]

I wonder if John Badham addresses the color palette in his commentary. I'd be surprised if he didn't.
I don't know if this movie will be submitted to me for review. If it is, I'll let you know.

I believe he does discuss it there, I'd have to listed again it's been a while and since I have the primary source I usually just ask things directly.

Will, sorry if my replies were a little "hot" but this is such well trod ground it gets old and I get irritated at seeing a good friend talked about that way so perhaps I wasn't as measured as I should be. Presented is absolutely correct. And "JB" is what folks call John, so not trying to be cute or anything.

 

[Will Krupp]

this is such well trod ground it gets old

Don't expect it to go away any time soon, you'll give yourself ulcers.

 

[haineshisway]

Moe,

You're welcome to prefer the color-drained version and more power to you as you'll now have it on blu-ray. As far as I'm concerned, you can keep it as I'm not buying it in that version again.

If you say "JB" and company originally designed the color to look as it does now, then I have to take you at your word as I have no evidence to the contrary, yet the fact that they went to the all the trouble to make a point of shooting Langella specifically in pink sunset (and talking about it) when the "original color design" renders the scenes as a gray, overcast day seems a waste of time and doesn't completely add up.


Beyond painting me as an ignorant philistine, I'm not sure exactly what you're saying here. If you mean the artist has a say in how the piece of art is presented, then I agree wholeheartedly with you. Considering that "JB"'s preferred version is the only version available then I would comfortably argue that he has ALL the say, so I'm not sure why you would intimate that his vision is somehow being denied by "pretty color" philistines like me. I have no power in this.

If you're arguing that he should have a say in how his art is perceived by the end user, then, sorry but absolutely not. No artist should have an expectation of control over the perception of his creation by the end user. As a consumer, I have every right to my own perception, and I find the version as seen (twice) on DVD to be downright ugly and I won't be spending my money on it again.


With all due respect, you know damn well what I meant


What are you even talking about, Bruce? The current video masters are NO more an accurate representation of the theatrical release color design than the "boosted" early video masters were and no one, not even Moe, is claiming that the movie looked like this in 1979. In fact, I will go so far as to say I'm willing to lay money on the fact that the early video masters, "boosted" as they may have been, were far closer in look and spirit to the 1979 prints than this.

I was making a response and I think my point was clear. Mr. Badham says the colors were boosted on the early video incarnations and not what he wanted. He said the original theatrical prints were as close as they could get it back in the day but that the early video incarnations were absolutely not what he wanted. Most people have memories of or still have those earlier video incarnations and that's what they want, even though its director is saying those were not what HE wanted. HE feels that those earlier incarnations were even far from the original theatrical, which was close but no cigar.

 

[Douglas R]

I wonder if John Badham addresses the color palette in his commentary. I'd be surprised if he didn't.I don't know if this movie will be submitted to me for review. If it is, I'll let you know.

John Badham did address the colour in his commentary on the DVD. He said he originally wanted the look of old black and white etchings, similarly to the play but it wasn't possible to do that with film and so the colour was warmed up to give a golden look theatrically. Subsequently they were able to drain the colour electronically for the DVD.I saw the film when it first opened at the Empire, London at a midnight screening and loved it - especially with that great John Williams music.

 

[Richard Stammer]

I will ask again, have any of you gone into your display settings and dialed up the color saturation to the Max while watching the DVD? I did and I swear the color came back.

 

[JohnMor]

My preference is based SOLELY on the numerous (seven) times I saw it screened in theaters upon it's initial release (and two times in retrospective houses). It has nothing to do with previous home video incarnations, as both the vhs and dvd I had were also desaturated. It now looks flat, bland and uninteresting to me. But as long as Badham is happy, I understand we'll never see the "theatrical" palette again. Too bad. The desaturated look is NOT the original. It may have been the original INTENTION, but it was NOT the way the film actually looked in the theaters.

And Richard, yes, I have dialed up the color and it doesn't work.

 

[haineshisway]

Just adding that I haven't seen any video incarnations of the film at all - I saw the movie twice when it came out, and I also saw the play with Jeremy Brett here at the Ahmanson in LA, with its Edward Gorey black-and-white designs. Therefore I really have no opinion on any transfers until I actually see one of them, which will probably be the Blu-ray.

 

[JohnMor]

I would have loved to have seen the (Gorey) stage version, especially with Langella (although I love Jeremy Brett). Sigh.

 

[Richard Stammer]

ThanKs John Mor for trying the color saturation. I am out of the country now and can't access my video display (Pioneer Elite 60"), but when I return home in August I am going to do before and after screen captures of the DVD. By then, I will also have the new Blu-Ray release to compare as well.

 

[SteveJKo]

...It may have been the original INTENTION, but it was NOT the way the film actually looked in the theaters....

I remember that at the time I saw this film, I thought to myself it was the most beautiful looking movie I had seen in years. The color was so dense and rich, and the image so well defined, it looked to me like it was shot in 70mm (which of course it was not). It's really too bad both versions aren't being made available on this release.

 

[Richard Stammer]

So, from a purely technical point, does anyone here have any insight into "how" the color was toned down in the subsequent video releases?

 

[Alan Tully]

So, from a purely technical point, does anyone here have any insight into "how" the color was toned down in the subsequent video releases?

A very good question. I had the DVD yonks ago, & it looked like someone had just turned the colour down about 85%. The trouble with doing that each shot is affected differently & don't match very well, some look total b/w & some have a bit of colour, but all looked murky. Did Universal just do the same with the HD? I don't mind the director giving it a look, but with all the tools available these days it could look something special. I love the look of The Wolfman remake, that has a lot of colour turned down, but the way it's done makes the picture look really stunning. So did Universal get the director Badham in for a few days to work with a colourist, maybe working off an HD scan of the interpos?

 

[Moe Dickstein]

I will see if I can get some info on that.

 

[JohnMor]

A very good question. I had the DVD yonks ago, & it looked like someone had just turned the colour down about 85%. The trouble with doing that each shot is affected differently & don't match very well, some look total b/w & some have a bit of colour, but all looked murky.

Murky is a very apt description now. You even lose a great deal of the life in the actors' eyes, and that's a major part of any performance.

I will see if I can get some info on that.

Thanks Ted.

 

[Dick]

If Universal and/or John Badham could see their way clear to releasing both versions, a la THE FRENCH CONNECTION, they will gain a great deal of good will and make everyone happy = lots more sales and much less online bitching.

 

[Moe Dickstein]

I don't believe both versions of TFC were released together.