'Stephen King's IT' How's the dvd? (1 Viewer)

[Inspector Hammer!]

I watched this last weekend on Sci-fi and got the urge to buy the dvd, but how is it? Extra's, picture quality etc...

Thanks.

 

[Matt Harrison]

Overall its not a bad DVD, definately worth a buy if your a fan.

The picture isnt anything to complain about really, decent transfer. I would say 3/5 if anything.

The commentary is not bad either. The only thing I didnt like is having to change the disc over. We all get lazy though right?

Im pretty sure you can get it cheap now, So I know you like your horror films, John. You might aswell pick it up mate.

 

[Christian Preischl]

Extras: Only an audio commentary, but a pretty good one (includes John Ritter!)

2 major problems, though:

1) The disc is anamorphic widescreen even though "It" was filmed and composed for 4:3! I compared it to the 4:3 version, and they basically just stuck black bars on top and bottom which very often seriously cramps the picture.

2) There's a bit of footage missing. Originally, "It" was aired as two episodes. However, on the DVD Warner removed the end credits from part 1 and the opening credits from part 2. Unfortunately, when they removed the part 2 opening credits they also removed the scene that plays under them. And you still have to flip the disc after part 1, so the removal makes even less sense.

HTH,
Chris

 

[Inspector Hammer!]

:frowning:

Welp, so much for that. I'm not buying anything that's presented incorrectly.

Thank's, fella's.

 

[Mark Lucas]

Seems like they dropped the ball hard on this one.

 

[cafink]

I remember when IT came out on DVD for the first time. It's always been a favorite of mine, and I'd been anticipating the release for some time. Imagine how disappointed I was to hear about these inexplicable edits/alterations!

I went out and bought the laserdisc (via eBay) right away. It's an excellent set of discs, presented in the correct aspect ratio and containing both episodes in their entirety, complete with opening and closing credits. If you want your IT fix, you might consider doing the same.

 

[Mike_Richardson]

Warner's DVD is a disaster...they went 16:9 crazy on several TV mini-series that were shot in 4:3 (the Richard Chamberlain BOURNE IDENTITY and V: THE FINAL BATTLE being two of the others. Yes I know the original V was supposedly shot in 1.85, but FINAL BATTLE certainly didn't seem to be).

As everyone else mentioned, it's also cut -- adding further insult to injury.

I second Carl's laserdisc idea. I did exactly the same as he did once I realized the DVD was a joke -- and I'd recommend it highly!

 

[Damin J Toell]

As far as V: THE FINAL BATTLE goes, I wouldn't be surprised if they protected for 1.85:1 during production with an eye on inclusion in a possible European theatrical release, ala the original miniseries. This would be especially true if they considered cutting the original miniseries together with FINAL BATTLE as a single feature and wanted consistent framing.

DJ

 

[WillG]

I'm not sure about this. I remember watching the DVD of "The Final Battle" although, mostly the 1.85:1 did not present many problems, I remember in the opening titles on one of the parts there was a set of credits that stretched pretty high and I think I recall that the credit that was on top was partially cropped (or was very close to being cropped) But it makes me think that TFB was not supposed to be 1.85:1

The situation with "It" has been discussed many times, but I think there has been some debate on the AR in past threads. I have never seen the DVD, so I don't know if the matted framing presents problems. However, I did read somewhere that Tommy Lee Wallace originally wanted to shoot "It" in full blown 2.35:1 to nicely accomodate the number of people in the core group of friends in the story. That idea was abandoned due to "It" being a television miniseries, so Wallace shot it with 1.85:1 in mind. Don't remember where I heard it, Don't know if there is any truth to this, but I'm just throwing that out there.

 

[Damin J Toell]

The shooting of the miniseries (and protecting for 1.85:1) would have little to do with the titles. The titles would have been put together much later on, specifically for the 1.33:1 TV broadcast, no matter how the series was shot. If they planned on incorporating the miniseries into a theatrical feature, the TV titles would never have been used, anyway. It doesn't tell us much about what was going on during production.

DJ

 

[Jack Briggs]

Everybody: Since the feature in question was made for television, this thread has been moved to Software/TV Shows. Please pay attention to that sort of thing. Thanks.

 

[Marko Berg]

Click here for a thread from 2002 that examines in detail what is missing and otherwise wrong with the DVD release of IT. I'd wait for a new version.

 

[David Ruiz]

I thought I read somewhere that "IT" was released THEATRICALLY outside of the US in its widescreen form? Perhaps that's how they were able to make the DVD widescreen as well?

 

[Matt Harrison]

Yeah I remember that there was a debate that the disc was released correctly and then some saying it wasn't.

The film is a favourite of mine, so I bought it with the intentions that the movie was in fact in the correct ratio.

 

[Christian Preischl]

Well, it sure as hell wasn't released theatrically in Germany. I don't think it was released theatrically in the UK either. Can't speak for other countries. But maybe people were confusing it with Salem's Lot, which was in fact released theatrically outside the US, with more gore and drastically shortened.

I remember from the audio commentary that Tommy Lee Wallace actually wanted to shoot wide, because it's very hard to cram so many principal actors into one frame, but the network wouldn't let him.

Chris

 

[Marko Berg]

I never heard of this film getting a theatrical release either.

Even if we presume the feature was meant to be shown in widescreen, that does not change the fact the current DVD is several minutes shorter than it should be. Until this film is released correctly, NO SALE.

 

[Haden]

Funny thing about the commentary is at one point when John Ritter is commenting on Seth Green playing Harry Anderson's young self and John ponders whatever happened to that talented young actor. Jeez... when was this commentary recorded? Must have been pre-1999 unless Ritter totally missed Seth's rise to fame from the Austin Powers movies and Buffy episodes.

 

[Greg_S_H]

Probably pre-dated that, as Ritter was on Buffy once.

 

[WaveCrest]

Originally Posted by Marko Berg for a thread from 2002 that examines in detail what is missing and otherwise wrong with the DVD release of IT. I'd wait for a new version.

The thread link isn't working (it just goes to the HTF's forum folder index page). Was interested in reading about the DVD release.

 

[WaveCrest]

Was this linked HTF thread deleted?