Twilight Time thread - Page 12

Why don't you maintain it by listing the upcoming titles in text, as to titles and dates of release? Although the graphics of the BRs are nice, it is not necessary. Otherwise, there is no way to really know when and what new titles will come out of Twilight Time. As it is, Screen Archives Entertainment is a bit slow in revealing much info when it comes to their upcoming Twilight Time releases on their website and its e-mail alert doesn't give much more than a month's lead time. If you think that you have to show the graphics, one possibility is to establish a link to where they would be available to be seen.

I don't have a thread here to maintain like this myself... but I wouldn't think the code has changed that much (if at all)... is it possible that you just made a typo? I've put some images in other posts for the avatar contests and it works pretty much the same as the old forum.

One thing I might suggest (if you aren't already doing it) is putting the URLs inside "" quotes as sometimes you get funky processing if it decides a / is the end of a forum html tag rather than part of the URL.

Just a thought.

YES! I was excited to see this movie listed in another site's "Upcoming Releases" list, and a bit disappointed to see it was an expensive (relatively), limited release. However, this is one of my five or ten favorite movies of all time, so I ordered it right away anyway.

I was also surprised to see that out of 330+ posts in this topic, very few are actually discussing the specific movies made by this company. I wonder if any separate topics were started, would the moderators mix them into this one? (I hope not, provided that discussions of the business model were kept out of the "title" topics.)

Have Twilight Time's release dates generally been accurate? Magnificent Men is scheduled for release on July 10.

There have been early, on time and late deliveries. Most of the titles I've pre-ordered have either shipped a few days prior or on time. The ones shipped early seemed to be either the Friday or Saturday prior to the official release. Only one or two (of mine) have been late.

Now it is a collector's item, especially the magnet.

I see Twilight Time Fright Night blu rays on ebay from 160 to 360. Is anyone that desperate?

While I'd like to own a copy...the amazon stream will do. That price is so absurd. I believe people arent even paying for the movie but are just paying for a "collectors item".

I should think the point would be they aren't paying - you think those sellers are actually selling copies at that price? Look again in three months - I guarantee you the same sellers will still be selling the same Blu-ray.

Yes, the insane thing is copies at that price ARE selling (don't see any for 360, but definitely up in the mid 100's).

Go to eBay and search "Fright Night Limited" and select only completed items.... Or just click the Link.

In the last month there are five that were put up for auction. All of them sold. The lowest one went for 130, and the highest for 160 (and they're all regular versions, not one of the 100 signed by the Director or anything.)

How does one find out the remaining number of units for a particular TT title?


Looks like "Mysterious Island" is gone too, as it no longer appears on the TT site.

Screen Archives posted an update/e-mail when it reached the "500 copies left" mark.

Did ya go and buy all of 'em left, the lot....?.....

No, ma'am... but that would've been a guaranteed money maker now, wouldn't it??? The one title I do not want to miss out on is "As Good As It Gets". I'm gonna start gathering change from under the couch cushions

Odd that no one has mentioned Cover Girl, http://www.blu-ray.com/movies/Cover-Girl-Blu-ray/45341/#Review:

I interpret film reviews is way, 'too grainy' means the pq is actually quite good and 'clean' means too much film grain scrubbing was used and not as good as it could of been.
The same reviewers applauds the grain reducing in Those Magnificent Men in Their Flying Machines and provides a link on the process used:
http://www.creativeplanetnetwork.com/the_wire/2009/07/13/illuminate-performs-restores-the-agony-and-the-

"employed sharpening and grain reduction processes to make those scenes look more acceptable to modern viewers."
Well at least it confirms the reason I have been claiming the overuse of filtering is for, 'modern' tastes. It also explains the EE I see with trees against the sky and sometimes planes against the sky (not to be confused with matte lines still I am sure some will do that anyway).

I have COVER GIRL. I did mention my thoughts on another site but neglected to post them here.

I actually have a quite FAVORABLE (or, as we say in Canada, "favourable" ) opinion of the COVER GIRL Blu-ray.

Specifically about the grain: while it is moderately prominent, I found it neither excessive or distracting. Since I would assume (as does everyone else) that the original camera source material isn't available, the source is likely some generations removed and that will cause a build up of grain. The common fix for excess grain is DNR which, as we know, not only fixes excess grain but "fixes" fine detail by scrubbing it away. So I find the grain perfectly tolerable and much preferable to the bad alternative.

Also likely related to the multi-generational source is the excess contrast since, just like grain, contrast will build up when film is copied. And the contrast here is excessive.

Many have said they find the transfer too dark. I do not. People talk of the "brightness" of the 2003 DVD as if brightness is automatically a virtue. Most home video transfers over the last generation have been overly bright. COVER GIRL is a movie that takes place in a night club...and the back stage of a night club...and a music hall at night....and a diner at night...and a city street at night. Why should this be bright? The only real daylight scenes would be the very brief section toward the end of the movie with Gene Kelly and Phil Silvers travelling on a truck to an army base. In my opinion the brightness of this transfer is appropriate and it protects the highlights rather than being overly bright and bringing up shadow at the expense of blown highlights.

I think the colors are just fine and I found no unusual color shifting.

I think this is a good transfer.

It's not reference. It's not excellent. It's not on the high end of what we've seen from Twilight Time.

This is a good transfer of a 1944 movie. If you are a Rita Hayworth fan (like me), owning this was an easy decision. If you just like the dubious "thrill" of limited editions, you might spend your $30.00 somewhere else.

I advise everyone to read the article so they can see its various points. The article is VERY specific about what sharpening and grain removal scenes were done - the OPTICALS and ONLY the opticals - as the article states up front, their goal is not to manipulate the film's original photography - one can of course argue that opticals are not part of the original negative but a degradation thereof. So, Wuther, you can go on about what they did to the OPTICALS only, nothing else. The reviewer was applauding the results they got in the opticals, and actually the results are impressive.

Robert Harris gives the Magnificent Men Blu-ray a thumbs-up:

http://www.hometheaterforum.com/t/322170/a-few-words-about-those-magnificent-men-in-their-flying-machines-in-blu-ray

And the Cover Girl Blu-ray a big thumbs down:

http://www.hometheaterforum.com/t/322169/a-few-words-about-cover-girl-in-blu-ray

Wrong!! The word 'only' is not used anywhere in the article, it's not even implied! It's just given as an example of their processing and the exact same way Lowery has used it to justify his strong dislike of film grain as in 'License to Restore' and in every interview he has ever given. Nor is it a coincidence that they follow Lowry's attitude that they know better then the dead director and cinematographer and boost of their 'fixes', of course for 'modern viewers'. Whats next? Pancake makeup?

Here's Harris on American Graffiti: I'm seeing no problems whatsoever.

And you can count on me writing that anytime he is used as 'proof' of something, count on me mentioning his defense of To DNR a Mockingbird as well. I will take Grover Crisp (current) preference of full film grain (or near) over lovers of easy automatic filtering any day of the week.

People can read the article and interpret it how they like. You interpret it the way you do because it helps you. If you think there would be an iota of anything but the finest of grain in a 65mm negative then you know nothing of large format films - it was the POINT of shooting in large format - the lack of grain and the extreme clarity. But it's all okay - you obviously know best and also know everything. I think everyone here understands that

I think he needs a new set of eyes if he actually believes the COVER GIRL transfer to be a "2". I remember the film looking less than stellar years back on laserdisc -- this is 10 times better than that, even if it's never going to reflect the condition he's hoping it should be in. Naturally, though, one RAH condemns something, it will be repeated as gospel throughout the internet community. which is a shame.

I would rate them quite the opposite.

Cover Girl looks great! It looks like a modern scan, with excelent grain reproduction and accurate colors.

On the other hand, TMMITFM looks heavily processed with grain removal and subsequent sharpening applied.
Edited by AlexBC - 7/18/12 at 12:16pm

I'm glad to see some more love for COVER GIRL.

There is a small but fearless group of Blu-ray viewers who dare to admit that they like the transfer .

I greatly appreciate the technical knowledge that Robert Harris has brought to the discussion. It has been a great education for all of us. He speaks with authority on the mechanics of film processes. However, as a reviewer of Blu-rays, I find his opinions no more valid than anybody else's opinion. Sometime I agree with him. Sometimes I don't. That's normal. That's fair. We all have opinions and we shouldn't be afraid to share them. However, as much as I truly consider him the authority on technical film processes, I can't consider him (or any other single reviewer) the final authority on the look of a transfer. He's made his share of major boners. We all have...so I don't mean that in an unkind way.

The problem is that people who have great respect for his technical knowledge will assume he's the "last word" on all things Blu-ray.

If RAH wants to rate COVER GIRL as 2 out of 5, that's his fair and honest opinion based on his viewing. I have no problem with that. I don't believe that anybody has to like what I like.

It only becomes a problem when folks are so deferential to his opinion that they deny themselves the opportunity to see this film on Blu-ray. There are people sticking with their nice "bright" 2003 DVDs because they figure it's not worth the upgrade. I suppose some people even bought PATTON because he (initially) loved it. His opinion is as valid as any of a hundred opinions.

Lord knows that I don't always agree with Robert Harris. We'll never see eye-to-eye on Bram Stoker's Dracula. But that said, his experience and knowledge typically lends his opinion more weight than most of those other hundred opinions you mention.

And that's the problem.

That reminds me....anyone hear of a Cotton Club release in the works?
Would love to have a BD.

And what is your background, exactly?

Thanks for asking.

I spent most of my life building gas turbine aircraft engines. Most people rarely ask so I appreciate your interest.

But I don't really know what that has to do with anything.

The problem is this: RAH brings a wealth of knowledge about film processes but he's a very average BD reviewer. He's no better or worse than a hundred other guys. But because people respect his film knowledge, they think his BD reviews have some special import. But they don't. He's gets some right, he gets some wrong.

However people make decisions based on his BD reviews. That's not his fault. It's their fault.

And that's the problem.

I must be in the distinct minority. If TT offers a BR, I just order it because I want it and never wait for anyone's review.

I agree to some degree, but there's value to maybe waiting to hear other opinions before buying. So at least if it's a movie I *really* have been looking forward to as was the case with "Mysterious Island," I pre-ordered. But in other cases, such as with "Journey To The Center Of The Earth," I wanted to wait until I heard a number of consistent opinions pro or con before picking it up as that title has never been very high up on my want list and if it was a mediocre transfer/release, I would have been happy to stick with the old dvd release. I'm of this attitude regarding *all* Blu-ray releases though - especially those coming from certain notorious studios like Universal. Thus, there's a few favorite titles I've picked on release day before hearing opinions and have been hugely disappointed and a number of titles I would have liked to have to lesser degrees that I've skipped because of negative word-of-mouth.