Which full screen version of 'Evil Dead' has the best picture quality? (1 Viewer)

[david cro]

I've just bought 'The Book Of The Dead' but would also like a full screen version of the film so I have the best of both worlds. Should I go for a copy of 'Anchor Bays' original 1999 release (I believe there are five different covers for this title), or 'Elite Entertainments' special edition which I believe was released later that same year. Picture quality is my only concern and perhaps sound, as I have all the extras with the new release.

 

[Joe_C]

Why, may I ask, do you even need a full screen version of the film when you have the infinitely superior Book of the Dead version?

 

[Patrick McCart]

The BOTD edition is a new "tilt-and-scan" version of the movie.

After transferring the film from the 16mm negative, Sam Rami had the image re-framed when needed.

This was intended from the beginning, but the technology wasn't around for it until now.

 

[Brian Lawrence]

Everything I read at the time these discs where released, indicated that the Anchor Bay disc had better picture quality. I have never seen the Elite disc but the Anchor Bay movie only dvd looked pretty good to my eyes when I watched it.

 

[Matt_Marlow]

I own both the Elite and Anchor Bay full frame versions. I think the Anchor Bay DVD has a slightly better transfer. For sound, maybe I'd choose the Elite, but only if I had to make a choice, because there's very little difference.

 

[Sam Hatch]

I'd go with the Elite transfer as the better one. In another recent thread I mentioned one early scene in which the red 'Lazy Mary' truck is zooming at the camera.

On the AB full-frame, the red hood is polluted with nasty purple pixels worming all over it. The Elite has a nice, solid red hood. The Elite also has great, deep blacks -- and the moon mattes on both discs are less obvious than on the new version.

I'm actually a bit disappointed that I picked up the old AB version. I had heard it had the better transfer, but I think owning just the Elite version and the Book of the Dead would have sufficed. But I guess the more Evil Dead, the better.

For only twelve or thirteen bucks, the Elite is a winner!

 

[Scott H]

Why, may I ask, do you even need a full screen version of the film when you have the infinitely superior Book of the Dead version?

The BotD version stinks. Literally and figuratively
Based on the sum of everything I've read, except for extras the BotD release is an inferior version. It is not OAR and the Elite transfer is widely regarded as superior.

 

[Josh_Hill]

The BoTD is superior. The picture and sound are great and the extras are top-notch, not to mention the awesome packaging.

 

[David Von Pein]

not to mention the awesome packaging.

You mean OTHER than the fact that something crawled inside each case and died??!

 

[Ken_McAlinden]

The image qualities of the original Elite and Anchor Bay discs are closer than some reviews may indicate, but what it boils down to empirically is that the original Anchor Bay edition costs less, has somewhat better video compression, but lacks the 5.1 soundtrack (it is 2.0 pro-logic, IIRC). The Elite costs more, has a few more compression artifacts, contains the 5.1 soundtrack In addition to a 2.0 pro-logic. The Elite also has several extras, but unless there are differences between the still galleries which I have not gone through yet, I think they are all reproduced on the new Anchor Bay releases.

Regards,

 

[Jerry Gracia]

Patrick,
This sounds very suspicious...how do you know this?
I find this a little hard to believe.

 

[StevenA]

It seems the Elite disc is actually much cheaper now than the old Anchor Bay. The Elite can be had for 12 or 13 dollars, not bad for a highly-regarded SE.
I have the BOTD but also want one of the full-frame versions (the new 1.85:1 transfer is not really definitive, and perhaps there is no definitive AR for this film). If one of them had the original mono sountrack that would decide it for me, but it seems neither do :frowning:

 

[Andy Kim]

I noticed this thread in another forum and thought that some people here might be interested:
Its a comparison between the BOTD and Elite's version w screenshots.
http://216.218.169.43/msgboard/messa...tml?1015804241

 

[Adam Lenhardt]

Jerry, it's a well known fact that this film had an OAR of 1.37:1 (being such a low budget affair). The tilt-and-scan process is also well-known. Andy Kim has posted a link to one AB comparsion (use links at bottom of the link)
Wheither you now consider 16x9 to be the OAR (like 2:1 could be considered the OAR for Appocolypse Now Redux) or not is up to you. Personally, I'm for the 1.33:1 version, but I'm not a huge fan of the flick anyway, so it doesn't matter.

 

[Scott H]

Jerry, it's a well known fact that this film had an OAR of 1.37:1 (being such a low budget affair).

Adam, I agree on the OAR. I believe it was 1.37 or 1.33:1.

But be aware that there is no difference in cost between filming 1.85 or 1.33:1 (unless shooting 3-perf 35mm, in which case filming 1.85:1 would be a 25% savings on raw stock over 1.33:1). So, it's not about cheap. Just what you compose for.

 

[Sam Hatch]

I just noticed the missing Band-Aid box in the Book of the Dead version last night. It's funny, because not only is the joke ruined -- but if you click on the commentary tracks, both of them mention the box gag and how they like it. Guess that's why it was left off the frame in the new version...

Oops!

The packaging was worth the thirty dollars alone, and the Fanalysis was another great addition -- but I think I'll stick with the full-frame version for future viewings of the film itself. And the picture looks much clearer on the Elite disc anyhow.

 

[Adam Tyner]

I disagree that the Evil Dead was intended to be seen only at 1.37:1, as Sam Raimi always intended for the film to be shown theatrically. Bill Warren's excellent The Evil Dead Companion, a book in which Sam Raimi and company participated heavily, says in no uncertain terms on page 82 that the film was composed for 1.66:1.

 

[Rich Malloy]

The BoTD is superior. The picture and sound are great and the extras are top-notch, not to mention the awesome packaging.

This is simply not so!
Put aside the "tilt and scan" issue if you wish, 'cause in every other way the Elite transfer is better than the new Anchor Bay transfer. If you don't believe me, go to the following thread and scroll down to Hollow Man's post - he's put some comparison screengrabs from both versions:
http://www.dvdtalk.com/forum/showthr...3&pagenumber=3
As you can plainly see, the new Anchor Bay version is far less detailed and vivid (plus, IMO, it's in the wrong aspect ratio).
My question, however, is whether there's any difference between the original Anchor Bay release (the bare bones, full-frame one) and the Elite release. Mondo Digital claims the original Anchor Bay is superior, whereas DVD FILE claims they are identical. Any help?

 

[Jerry Gracia]

Wheither you now consider 16x9 to be the OAR (like 2:1 could be considered the OAR for Appocolypse Now Redux) or not is up to you.

I do not consider 16x9 to be the O.A.R.

I believe the O.A.R. would be that of which the director first and foremost intended for theatrical projection.

In the case of EVIL DEAD, I will admit, I don't know what went on there...so perhaps you guys are right in this case.

But for Apocolypse Now, it is clear that the only reason the film is not in its proper 2.35:1 aspect ratio is because of technical restraints involving the standard household aspect ratio of 1.33:1 television.

But that's a whole new thread...

 

[StevenA]

My question, however, is whether there's any difference between the original Anchor Bay release (the bare bones, full-frame one) and the Elite release.

That's what I want to know, too. And also what is the difference in the soundtracks on these two discs.