What's new

Blu-ray Review While we wait for a full HTF Blu-ray Review of Alfred Hitchcock: The Masterpiece Collection Blu-ray (1 Viewer)

Kevin EK

Reviewer
Senior HTF Member
Joined
May 9, 2003
Messages
3,103
Bruce, I'm happy for you to post your full reactions here.

My full review thread will simply add a summation of the extras and descriptions of each of the 15 movies in the set. But in so doing, we're talking about a LONG review. On the other hand, I'm not known for being short-winded...
 

Robert Harris

Archivist
Reviewer
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Feb 8, 1999
Messages
18,311
Real Name
Robert Harris
Originally Posted by haineshisway /t/324817/while-we-wait-for-a-full-htf-blu-ray-review-of-alfred-hitchcock-the-masterpiece-collection-blu-ray-limited-edition-recommended#post_3995684
I've posted in the separate threads but will consolidate here for anyone who cares. Please keep in mind, these are films I know intimately - not only because I've seen them countless times from the time of their release on (for the 50s films), but because I've owned dye transfer prints on every single film that was printed that way. The caveat is I have only spot-checked each transfer, watching about thirty minutes of each film at different points.
So: Vertigo: Exactly as Mr. Harris states to the letter. Color off in the main titles at one point (not quite sure how it happened but it's obnoxious). And the handful of other problematic shots, but as he said, 90% of it looks pretty terrific - and unfortunately, that only makes the other 10% look even worse than it is. But what looks good looks VERY good and the color in 90% of the transfer is pretty damn accurate. I'll be watching it in its entirety soon.
The Man Who Knew Too Much: Terrible. There is no way around this. Let me start by saying it's a huge step up from the grotesque DVD in the velvet box. Let me finish by saying I don't find it sharp at all - in fact, it's clear from frame one that this is not off the VistaVision negative or anything close to it. The color pulsing is so odd it's not to be believed, actually. The bazaar scenes are completely faded. I had to laugh when someone said that's what the skies should look like in that kind of place. No. They should be blue - they were always blue. Otherwise at its best its middling and at its worst it's truly awful. A major botch job and I'm afraid not the only one in this set.
Marnie: It doesn't matter what you watch this on. Something clearly went wrong somewhere in this transfer. If I had to posit a guess, I think they used the DVD transfer from the velvet box, used some DNR then put back in, well, can't call it grain, so just call it that ugly black crawling stuff and snow - yes, Mr. Wrigley called it right. This is a disaster. Dye transfer prints on this film were wonderful, whether you like what Mr. Hitchcock and Mr. Burks were doing or not. The street scenes at Marnie's mother's are just awful - they should be extremely sharp. And the color has been futzed with from the DVD color - you can see just how much very clearly in the pages of the credits and in the car ride towards the end of the film - the rear projection plate should be almost all gray with the rain - and here it's anything but that. But nothing works in this transfer and whatever they've done it has exacerbated the diffusion in a way that is grotesque. Shame on Universal for trying to spruce up something that was fine for DVD but hardly befitting something called The Masterpiece Collection in a little year called 2012. I now have to keep the velvet box.
Torn Curtain: Can't agree with Mr. Harris on this one. Same transfer as the DVD (at least to my eyes) and it just doesn't look great to me. A new, fresh transfer off the actual camera negative would have produced a perfect Blu-ray. As it is, we're left with something a little sharper than the DVD, but not nearly enough. The problem is the DVD actually looked fine - but when you hi-def it suddenly you can really see the story, and, again for me, it's not what it should be. Not a disaster like Marnie of The Man Who Knew Too Much, but a disappointment nonetheless. It has nothing to do with the way it was filmed - you either like that or not - but the transfer is not up to 2012 snuff, at least not for me.
I'll be checking the others tomorrow.



Bruce, I'm going to have to agree with you on Marnie and Torn, and adapt my scores. This is what occurs when eyes go from Man to anything else. They tend to look better, and you're overtaken by a forgiving mood. Marnie used to look magnifucent in dye transfer. RAH
 

Scott Merryfield

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Dec 16, 1998
Messages
18,864
Location
Mich. & S. Carolina
Real Name
Scott Merryfield
JohnMor said:
Huh.  I think I got a foreign set by mistake.  My set arrived today and the back clearly states: "Perfect Hi-Def Picture!"  I'm not sure what language that is.  Can anyone here translate what that means for me?  It's right smack dab in the middle and in bold lettering, so I think it's meant to be seen and comprehended. 
That's the language of false advertising, John.
 

JohnMor

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2004
Messages
5,157
Location
Los Angeles, CA
Real Name
John Moreland
Originally Posted by Scott Merryfield /t/324817/while-we-wait-for-a-full-htf-blu-ray-review-of-alfred-hitchcock-the-masterpiece-collection-blu-ray-limited-edition-recommended#post_3995719
That's the language of false advertising, John.

Thanks Scott. I always naively hope that is becoming a dead language, like Latin or proper English.
 

Richard Gallagher

Reviewer
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Dec 9, 2001
Messages
4,275
Location
Fishkill, NY
Real Name
Rich Gallagher
Kevin,

Thanks for your evaluation of this set. I already have the Blu-ray of North By Northwest, so I may go for the U.K. set. At the current rate of exchange it is $149 plus shipping. Or maybe I'll just wait and see how this shakes out.
 

Virgoan

Supporting Actor
Joined
Jan 14, 2007
Messages
540
Location
Oakland CA
Real Name
Ron Pulliam
Richard Gallagher said:
Kevin,
Thanks for your evaluation of this set. I already have the Blu-ray of North By Northwest, so I may go for the U.K. set. At the current rate of exchange it is $149 plus shipping. Or maybe I'll just wait and see how this shakes out.
I pre-ordered the UK set months ago. Back when the set was recalled to correct some errors, I got a notification that the UK set was, likewise, being held up until fixes could be made. I expected the box to have been shipped this week. However, this past Sunday, I received another note that the set is being delayed until mid- to late-November. As the U.S. set is now out, I'm perplexed by the UK holdup. I'm hoping that someone "over there" is going to make some more corrections to the problematic discs.
Not holding my breath, though.
 

Carlo_M

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Oct 31, 1997
Messages
13,385
Ugh now I'm getting de-motivated from ordering the set. When you drop nearly $200 on something it better be damn near perfect. I think I'll wait for the singles...
 

Nelson Au

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Mar 16, 1999
Messages
19,040
FYI, I didn't want to seem like I was posting this info all over the place, but in the other Hitchcock thread and bargain thread, I posted that I bought the Hitchcock set at Costco for $163.99. That's a bit more then the UK set and you do get NxNW. I thought it was worth it. Far better then Amazon's price and I was able to pick it up right away.
 

haineshisway

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Oct 26, 2011
Messages
5,561
Location
Los Angeles
Real Name
Bruce
The Birds: Well, in a word - spectacular. So far, the best transfer in the set. Perfect color, perfect contrast, sharp, and better than it has ANY right to be, given the huge number of opticals. In the end, one can sit in one's home and posit guesses about what tools were used to do this transfer but you know what - it doesn't matter and who cares, because the ONLY thing that matters is the result, and the result here is absolutely stunning. The dye transfer release prints were wonderful on this title but this looks every bit as good as they did and probably even better, at least on my TV (fifty-five inch Samsung LED) - I'd love to see this Blu-ray on a bigger projection set-up but for me this is great work and for as many brickbats are hurled Universal's way (many deserved, some not so much), when they get it right they deserve all the kudos in the world. I spot-checked a lot of the film, including the major attacks - it's amazing. The only minor, and I mean MINOR nit to pick and only for extreme purists who know the film REALLY well, the final shot has basically had the little bit of color that was there drained from the image - it's fine, not bothersome, and I went with it. You can see the little bit of color that should be there in the velvet box transfer. If they'd only let Mr. Harris come in and fix the 10% of Vertigo that's problematic we'd have at least two perfect transfers in this set. But I have yet to see some of the other important titles.
Here's an interesting little factoid since most here didn't see The Birds during its initial run - but Universal insisted that Hitchcock put a "The End" over the very end of the final shot - that's how the release prints are. I can't swear that none of the home video versions don't have that, but at some point they went back to the original way - no "The End" just the fade out, which is much better. My first 16mm IB Tech print had "The End" but then I managed to get just the final shot without it and I slugged that in.
The Trouble With Harry - most of it's very pretty to look at, and most of it's very sharp, but I'd be interested to know what the element was - there's nothing to really complain about, but I kept thinking it could maybe look a bit better. I wonder if Mr. Harris knows if this was transferred from the VistaVision negative. It's pleasing as it is, though.
 

Cineman

Second Unit
Joined
May 30, 2011
Messages
482
Real Name
David B.
haineshisway said:
Marnie: It doesn't matter what you watch this on. Something clearly went wrong somewhere in this transfer. If I had to posit a guess, I think they used the DVD transfer from the velvet box, used some DNR then put back in, well, can't call it grain, so just call it that ugly black crawling stuff and snow - yes, Mr. Wrigley called it right. This is a disaster. Dye transfer prints on this film were wonderful, whether you like what Mr. Hitchcock and Mr. Burks were doing or not. The street scenes at Marnie's mother's are just awful - they should be extremely sharp. And the color has been futzed with from the DVD color - you can see just how much very clearly in the pages of the credits and in the car ride towards the end of the film - the rear projection plate should be almost all gray with the rain - and here it's anything but that. But nothing works in this transfer and whatever they've done it has exacerbated the diffusion in a way that is grotesque. Shame on Universal for trying to spruce up something that was fine for DVD but hardly befitting something called The Masterpiece Collection in a little year called 2012. I now have to keep the velvet box.
Maybe this has already been asked and answered, but do you or anyone else suppose someone at the helm thought they were "helping" to obscure the (imo) intentionally obvious painted back drops and rear screen projections in Marnie, to 'help" them look a little less obvious by adding grain, black crawling stuff, snow and whatever else is present now that wasn't there in previous incarnations of the movie?
I know there is still controversy in some corners about whether or not Hitchcock wanted those backdrops and rear projection effects to be obvious in order to impose a sense of artificiality to the film. I wonder if someone at the Blu-ray controls thought they would fuzz up the picture as much as possible in a misguided effort to better preserve the Hitchcock quality brand.
I'm reminded of actor/producer Warren Beatty's famous story about how he worked so hard to make the gunshots and certain other sound effects in Bonnie and Clyde *pop* in stark contrast to the rest of the movie a la Shane only to have the projectionist at one of the premieres "fix" the problem by mapping out a detailed hi-low chart for adjusting the sound levels at the "appropriate" moments in the film in order to achieve a more consistent level throughout. Meanwhile, Beatty had been sitting at the screening wondering why the gunshot sounds were so subdued.
:confused:
 

haineshisway

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Oct 26, 2011
Messages
5,561
Location
Los Angeles
Real Name
Bruce
Cineman said:
Maybe this has already been asked and answered, but do you or anyone else suppose someone at the helm thought they were "helping" to obscure the (imo) intentionally obvious painted back drops and rear screen projections in Marnie, to 'help" them look a little less obvious by adding grain, black crawling stuff, snow and whatever else is present now that wasn't there in previous incarnations of the movie?
I know there is still controversy in some corners about whether or not Hitchcock wanted those backdrops and rear projection effects to be obvious in order to impose a sense of artificiality to the film. I wonder if someone at the Blu-ray controls thought they would fuzz up the picture as much as possible in a misguided effort to better preserve the Hitchcock quality brand.
I'm reminded of actor/producer Warren Beatty's famous story about how he worked so hard to make the gunshots and certain other sound effects in Bonnie and Clyde *pop* in stark contrast to the rest of the movie a la Shane only to have the projectionist at one of the premieres "fix" the problem by mapping out a detailed hi-low chart for adjusting the sound levels at the "appropriate" moments in the film in order to achieve a more consistent level throughout. Meanwhile, Beatty had been sitting at the screening wondering why the gunshot sounds were so subdued.
:confused:
It would boggle the mind to think they were that silly. My thinking is - older transfer, use DNR to smooth it out add back grain (this film should not have such pronounced grain EVER), but something went horribly wrong beyond the ridiculousness of doing what they must have done. This is a four-star travesty and should be recalled immediately - color should be fixed, and the camera negative used.
 

Matt Hough

Reviewer
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Apr 24, 2006
Messages
26,151
Location
Charlotte, NC
Real Name
Matt Hough
Originally Posted by Adam Gregorich /t/324817/while-we-wait-for-a-full-htf-blu-ray-review-of-alfred-hitchcock-the-masterpiece-collection-blu-ray-limited-edition-recommended#post_3995321
Thanks for all the time you put into this. The Man Who Knew Too Much is one of my favorites so its too bad that it looks so bad. There are a lot of other titles out competing for my $$ right now, so I will see what Universal will be doing about it (if anything) before I take the plunge.

That's exactly my plan. I don't want to fiddle with replacements later, so I can wait and see if anything is going to be done (several months of waiting if need be) about the poor transfers. I have all of the DVDs (and the NxNW and PSYCHO Blus) and can watch them if I need a Hitchcock fix.
 

WadeM

Supporting Actor
Joined
Aug 11, 2006
Messages
964
Adam Gregorich said:
Thanks for all the time you put into this.  The Man Who Knew Too Much is one of my favorites so its too bad that it looks so bad.  There are a lot of other titles out competing for my $$ right now, so I will see what Universal will be doing about it (if anything) before I take the plunge.
Both Marnie and The Man Who Knew Too Much are key titles for me. That's why I'm in a similar boat.
 

Paul_Warren

Supporting Actor
Joined
Oct 15, 2002
Messages
518
Location
London, England
Real Name
Paul
Had to cancel my masterpiece edition with amazon I really want to buy it as some of the packaging is good & most of the movies are classics but I cannot justify spending £100 on something which also has several flawed transfers especially Marnie I really like that movie its tragic the way Universal have handled this release ALL titles should be as good as they can be regardless of budget this is one of those projects which should be however much it cost to make it right not however little it cost to get it out for Holiday 2012 buying season!!
Shocking way for Universal to treat Hitchcock's work they should be ashamed. Universal please do the right thing cancel for a year or so go back to the vaults fix everything possible & you will sell way more units over a longer period of time & not need to rework these again which is surely better economics than make a 2012 release date for studio politics & ambush the unsuspecting consumer with a mixed bag of Hitchcock!
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Latest Articles

Forum statistics

Threads
356,813
Messages
5,123,610
Members
144,184
Latest member
H-508
Recent bookmarks
0
Top