Gremlins (BDInfo & Screencaps) - Page 2

Originally Posted by wnorris

Because they paid for it, just like they did with Twilight...

Originally Posted by Dave Mack

Twilight I totally understand. Current hot movie with sequel on way. Gremlins...????!?!?!?!?

(This is no way reflects on the quality of the film itself mind you. Just as a business decision)

I can see the boardroom...





"We need some more hot exclusives. Twilight did very well. What's next? Anyone?"


"How about Gremlins?"


{crickets....}

Originally Posted by Spanbauer

Did they transfer this off of VHS?

Originally Posted by Evangelo2

How long will this be a Target exclusive for? I imagine getting Gremlins for 12.99 in November off Amazon or something. These Agreements aren't for Target to indefinitely be the only store to carry this, right?

Originally Posted by nut bunnies

I think there will be a double dip. They had this and Goonies finished and partially printed, but then they started doing a remaster so they decided to just throw it at Target.

Originally Posted by Stevie76

70:s and 80:s movies often looks soft like this depending on stock and budget.
Deal with it folks

Originally Posted by nut bunnies

They had this and Goonies finished and partially printed, but then they started doing a remaster so they decided to just throw it at Target.

Originally Posted by Dave Mack

if there hadn't been that statement by joe dante about them having done a version which he the saw and went "woah!" about and a 2nd version done I don't think anyone would think anything. but i wouldn't past a studio if they had pressed some copies already to do something with them other than just chuck them. not saying it is likely, just possible...

Originally Posted by Kram Sacul

Maybe Xylon or someone can do a comparison with the broadcast HD version.

Originally Posted by Cliff Stephenson

Like Michael Corleone circa Godfather III... Just when I thought I was out.

Of, let's line up the facts, because it's easier to weed through than conjecture (although the conjecture will be all that follows this release throughout its life).

It's already been established in this very thread that the Gremlins Blu-ray has a last modified date of July 2009, meaning these discs weren't pressed until August 2009.
Dante's comments are from back in April (the report is from the set of The Hole and that finished principal photography back at the end of February, so you actually have to attribute this conversation to February or earlier) and at that point he's confirmed that "We've been involved quite a lot" and "I've seen the (new) transfer. We did them over."
It's not, "we're planning to do" or "we're just starting to do." It's "THIS IS DONE."

So why would anyone assume, given that the newer, better transfer was already completed before this Blu-ray was created, that the discs just released to Target are something that's been sitting around in a warehouse somewhere for years (which we know is impossible given the dates on the discs themselves)?

And by the way, Dante never says that he saw a version of the Blu-ray and when "Whoa." Dante attributes Warner and Amblin for delaying the originally planned release because they knew they "can make it look better." He never says he saw the original transfer at all.


When did Xylon become the Messiah? It's like a bizarre Children of the Corn "And just as the Blue Man was offered up unto He Who Walks Behind the Rows, so shall be the unbelievers!" You can't compare two still images from two different mediums and come to any sort of rational conclusion about the hows and whys of the finished product. Were they sourced from the exact same transfer? Was the same element used for all versions? Was the same telecine equipment used for each version? Have you accounted for the fact that the broadcast version is probably a 1080i HDCAM or HDCAM SR while the Blu-ray is a completely different 1080p24 HDCAM SR and the DVD is a downconverted DigiBeta? Were all of the different versions handled by the same dub or post house? Is the broadcast version processed in anyway? What was the original camera used to shoot the film? What film stock did they utilize? Who approved the transfer (or transfers if there have been more than one- Braveheart has had at least three high def transfers that I know of in the past 14 years)? Were the any special demands by those who approved? There are so many variables to these different releases that to be able to make definitive declarations about the quality of one versus the other is impossible. No matter what screen shots Xylon or anyone else posts, anyone with free will and a knowledge of and desire to actually enjoy films should be able to see that this is a great release of Gremlins. Is it too dark? I don't know... compared to what- a 35mm presentation that might have been projected too brightly? I saw a new print of Ghostbusters recently and the Blu-ray is not as blown out as people would have you believe. While I used to find these screen shots interesting and amusing, I now find them virus-like and incredibly dangerous.

And while I'm at it, let me just get this out of the way. Anyone who tells you they remember how something looked theatrically 5, 10, 20 or more years ago is full of s#!t. The last new movie I saw that was shot on film and projected on film was The Hangover. I couldn't have told you a week later exactly how that movie was supposed to look from shot to shot. And if I did, what could I explain... how a 3rd, 4th or 5th generation dupe (and probably a high-speed one, at that) looked projected? When someone tells you that "this scene was really grainy theatrically" what they're most likely actually saying to you is, "my expectation is that this scene should be grainy, so I guess I remember it being grainy. But it's not grainy, so the studio has obviously botched it because my memory of a 4 second moment from 7 years ago can't possibly be wrong."

Sorry to unload all of that, but it's been a while since I wanted to be here. I just think more and more people are missing the forrest for the trees and it seems to be getting worse and worse.

Originally Posted by Cliff Stephenson

When did Xylon become the Messiah? You can't compare two still images from two different mediums and come to any sort of rational conclusion about the hows and whys of the finished product.

Originally Posted by ChrisPC

With all the 30-and 40-something movie buffs on this site, you would think maybe they went to a theater sometime in the '80s. I did, and remember loads of grain! I grew up in a small town, and we got some pretty bad prints sometimes. If they weren't too grainy, they were usually scratched all to heck...

Originally Posted by Kram Sacul

You're right, we can only guess why they look different. The point though is to see how they look different and Xylon and others who can post frame grabs are invaluable in that regard.

Originally Posted by Jason One

Yeah, paku noticed that Rieper's Labyrinth caps were too dark, which can make the colors look oversaturated. It looks like the same thing happened with his Gremlins caps.

Compare this shot (Rieper's) with this one (Blu-ray.com).

Originally Posted by Kram Sacul

You're right, we can only guess why they look different. The point though is to see how they look different and Xylon and others who can post frame grabs are invaluable in that regard.

Originally Posted by ToddUGA

Those shots over at Blu-ray.com look about what I thought this film would look like on blu-ray. Grain looks intact and there doesn't appear to be any DNR or EE present. I have a feeling that this is probably a pretty good representation of what the original source material looks like. I think I'm going to pick this one up.

Originally Posted by Mark Booth

Am I the only one that,
A) Has only a passing interest in this film.
B) Doesn't plan to spend more than $15 for it IF I do buy it.
C) Is almost ready to go get it at Target just to satisfy my own damn curiosity on how good/bad it looks?



Mark

Originally Posted by wnorris

It's supposed to be released by Warner in Canada on Oct. 13. I don't believe Warner has ever issued a release to Canada exclusively, as far as I know. So my guess is that even thought it isn't announced yet, it will street in the US on Oct. 13 as well.

Originally Posted by robertc88

Doesn't seem like the score matches the review.

He says as much in his review for what I bolded in your post. Opinions I've read from folks who have watched it says the score is too low!

Originally Posted by robertc88

No, I got it and haven't opened it. I got it cause I knew it would be gone quickly just like WOZ Emerald was.