Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'DVD' started by Bill GrandPre, Jul 11, 2006.
It was filmed in Super 35, so there's lots of information in the frame that wasn't transferred to anamorphic 2.35:1 theatrical prints (and lots of room for framing errors when going back to the negative or interpositives for video masters).
Yes, but David's comment was a direct response to Bill's assertion that the framing discrepancies might be due to misprojection at a commercial theater. As David explained, a scope print, unlike a flat one, contains no visual information that isn't meant to be projected onto the screen. Even if it was shot Super35, which does involve capturing extraneous visual information, the release prints would be anamorphic. If there was an error in framing the anamorphic release print from the orginal Super35 master, then it would have to have occured at the studio level, long before the local theater received the print. That means it's not really a projection problem.
...and you know I'm going to have to buy it! It's not that important, but I wonder if they'll do the individual covers. Why does a guy like Tarantino so rarely do commentaries when all he does his talk about movies? I want to hear him talk about the movies I love! ry
We just saw POTC in SF and it looked like the top of the frame was off. People's heads were cut off here and there...
The framing I'm not bothered about. The washed-out look of the transfer is what bugs me the most about the R1 10th anniversary edition. The original anamorphic R2 edition got the balance just perfect, with more vibrant colour and a wider contrast range that still retains the crushed shadow detail inherent to a movie shot on such slow stock. But the Artisan 10th anni edition reduced the contrast to such a degree that the already-fragile black level got ruined. I've got both editions, and I can't see myself going for another version anytime soon. I'd have bought the cancelled DVHS edition in a heartbeat though.
An anamorphic print can certainly be misframed a bit top and bottom, but to see MORE image at both top and bottom on the 35mm print vs. the original laserdisc/DVD letterboxed transfer definitely indicates the transfer was at fault. I'm not certain the actual HD transfer of RESERVOIR DOGS is at fault- I think something went wacky with the black levels when they did the standard-def downconversion. If they do a better downconversion with correct black levels, and offer the original theatrical sound mix as a viewing option, I'd be willing to pick this up. Vincent
the last dvd came out 5 years ago
Not exactly, Lionsgate is jumping the gun a little bit because the 15th Anniversary is actually 2007, whereas Artisan kept delaying their 10th Anniversary Disc so it came out late in '02. It'll actually be closer to four years.
OK, but still...it's a quality control issue then. No one viewed it before it went to pressing?
News from davisdvd.com http://davisdvd.com/images/covers_big/reservoirdogs.jpg
Oh, hell yes! I will be picking this up.
Interesting artwork, I may just have to pick this up as well.
So I wonder if they bothered to fix the soundtrack... Vincent
I don't think the 10th Anniversary Edition was DD EX and DTS ES, so it's quite possible.
Are all the features carried over from the previous 2-disc ann. set? Also, what's the verdict on the transfer... any news how that's being handeled?
.....This seems to be the only info as of yet but it does say "newly remastered"....now exactly what that truly means is anyone's guess, if they just fix the horrible black levels from the last HD Transfer & fix the 5.1 remix or include the original 2.0 track (as has been mentioned by many many many others) I would think about buying it.
Look at this digipak & discart, it's awesome! http://davisdvd.com/images/discs/reservoirdogs.jpg
Same goes for me.
Meh, it looks too gimmicky and flimsy to me.