Has Anyone Seen the New JACK THE RIPPER (1960) Blu? (1 Viewer)

[Dick]

Any improvement?

 

[[email protected]]

http://www.dvdbeaver.com/film2/DVDReviews30/jack_the_ripper_blu-ray.htm

 

[haineshisway]

Any improvement over WHAT? It's the same thing they released last year and it's HORRIBLE.

 

[TheSteig]

I love it ! Sure it doesn't look super glossy / polished ,but adds to the charm and atmosphere of the B&W movie that probably doesn't have the best film elements , making it a late night and stormy day fun !

 

[Dick]

Any improvement over WHAT? It's the same thing they released last year and it's HORRIBLE.

That's what I am trying to find out -- did Severin do any tweaking due to the negative reviews? I'm pretty sure you're right, but until I get verification from someone who can provide us with a comparison, I'll reserve judgment (although I won't order it yet).

 

[haineshisway]

What? Are you serious? They did NOTHING but release it again. I don't get it, really, I don't. There's no "tweaking" this piece of merde. What exactly would they tweak? This is a head scratcher to me, sorry, Dick.

 

[Dick]

What? Are you serious? They did NOTHING but release it again. I don't get it, really, I don't. There's no "tweaking" this piece of merde. What exactly would they tweak? This is a head scratcher to me, sorry, Dick.

Be nice, now, Bruce.

 

[John Morgan]

I think they may have licensed it from Alpha.

 

[TheSteig]

You guys must have had really high expectations. Its not Alpha Video quality, but its not glamorous either. They made the most of what they had. And it's better than nothing at all.

 

[haineshisway]

Here are MY expectations: Ask me to pay twenty to thirty bucks for something, deliver me a professional product. There was zero attempt by Severin to clean up any of the 35mm print - while a print is never optimal for a transfer, they could have at least put it through a clean-up - it is riddled with scratches, cue marks, dirt, splices - it's horrible, sorry, and if that somehow meets your expectation, that's wonderful. The comparison to Alpha is actually pretty apt in this instance and that goes triple for the UK version.

 

[TheSteig]

I watched it just today and the vertical lines and specks MAINLY appear in the first few moments - easily the worst part viewing the film. Then throughout the presentation there's more vertical lines here in there. That being said, the high contract and scenes which are clear and free of debris is easily the best looking of any release. Whatever work they did do, did not remove the debris but what can you really expect
My expectations for an obscure film that wasnt taken care of was spot on. We are not talking about Universal studios monster movies.
The release is as professional as it gets, and frankly, you sound like an entitlement type that expects perfection when a film like this cannot meet your needs.

 

[Dan_Shane]

The release is as professional as it gets, and frankly, you sound like an entitlement type that expects perfection when a film like this cannot meet your needs.

He is entitled to his money's worth. It's not being provided in this case.

 

[haineshisway]

Could not say it better than Dan Shane.

 

[bigshot]

If they had advertised it as being flawed but the best element they could source, I wouldn't have felt let down by this. But they didn't say anything at all about print quality. It was originally sold only on Black Friday, so there were no reviews of it, and if you waited for a review, it wouldn't be available for sale any more. I can't help but think that was deliberate.

 

[TheSteig]

He is entitled to his money's worth. It's not being provided in this case.

And how do you know that ? Because Severin did what they could with an obscure movie with poor film elements and spend a lot more money than we did buying the product. Its his opinion, Its really unfair to expect every single movie to look smooth and polished. Everything depends on the shape of the elements, look at Arrows City of the Walking Dead or some of the obscure Code Red Blu rays or the recent Rituals from Scorpion releasing, which still has problems in the last 30 minutes but it still is an improvement over the DVD. Think they didnt put any effort ? They all do, and nobody but the labels know whats really going on behind the scenes of their products, and there are reasons why images look as they do. A lot of movies are in bad shape but they are being released anyway for fans of the movies. I suppose they could just say the hell with it not both releasing anything at all

 

[bigshot]

They could say up front that the elements were rough but it's all that exists, not make people buy it to find that out.

 

[Winston T. Boogie]

I have it but have not watched it yet. The reason I bought it was that as I understood it, this was the best way to see the picture. I thought that I had heard no good elements existed for it and so this blu-ray would be the best version we would see.

I have not followed at all what was done to "restore" it or give it some sort of new digital polish. Basically, I just wanted to see the film.

With something like this or the recently released blu-ray of Rituals I go in curious as to what the end result will be. If the company releasing the blu-ray announces up front though that what they are releasing is going to be the best they could do with what they had to work with I think you have to consider that in how you grade the end result.

 

[Douglas R]

I ordered this before reading this thread or the previous one and the disc arrived today. Gosh! What can one say other than it's quite a mess.

I have the UK release version on an Italian DVD which is framed more correctly at 1.66:1 and looks better than the Blu-ray version on Severin which is obviously a full frame PAL to NTSC conversion, displaying considerable motion blur. The censored extras are also practically unwatchable compared to the Italian DVD. I've yet to watch all of the US version but again, I've seen far better picture quality on most DVDs. I've not previously had the commentary track from Jimmy Sangster etc., so at least I'm pleased to have that.

 

[Nick*Z]

Junk in/junk out. Severin's discs suffer from horrendous age-related artifacts, coupled with chroma bleeding in the UK version, edge effects, dirt/scratches/speckling to the point of utter distraction, woefully sub-par contrast, and elevated grain. No attempt has been made even at basic clean-up and image stabilization. While it is most assuredly true no archival original film elements have survived, there are a myriad of digital tools today that can - and have - worked wonders on print masters, delaying - and in many cases - reversing, if not eradicating, the ravages of time.

Haineshisway and I do not see eye to eye on many hi-def releases discussed on this message board, but in this case, his outrage and contempt is not only well warranted but absolutely spot on.

We are in 2019, folks. Blu-ray is no longer in its infancy. Neither are the 'expectations' of the avid - or even average film buff! So, the age of mediocre mastering - or, in this case, merely slapping titles to disc, simply to advertise a disc release, is OVER!

Or rather - should be. A catalog title this deep - and this good - would and should appeal to collectors first, and, with clever marketing and word of mouth, build its audience outward from that fan base. Severin's hi-def transfer does not cater to this niche...or, in fact, anyone with a pair of eyes.

Badly done is still badly done - period!