First and foremost, I want to make it clear that I am not personally attacking anyone in Zoetrope, Sony or Robert Harris!!!!!!!!!!!! I merely want to give some customer feedback which I am entitled to do. I am discussing the art
Originally Posted by kdssrugby
I know this joke is made endlessly, but why won't this thread die? Can we put a nail (or a stake) through it? At least until a remastered copy appears.
I get your point of view kdssrugby, but I think the studio that released this has to be held accountable. I only recently went Blu Ray and bought this film. It is a film I have very fond memories of and had a huge impact on me when I saw it at my local cinema. As I am a recent buyer of BSD in BD format, I want to express my concerns to Sony. How can there be time limit on complaining about a product that I have only recently viewed in this format. It is still commercially available.
On my properly calibrated tv, it is the only film I own that has some scenes especially when Jonathan is exploring the castle that are so dark even watching in a darkened room.
Being a regular cinema goer, this is the only film that now looks way different to how it appeared in the cinema, VHS, DVD. How come every other movie I own looks so similar to how I saw it at the cinema except this one?
So when I initially watched BSD at the cinema, I should have walked out and asked for my money back, because it was too bright as we are told. Sorry Mr cinema manager but I want my money back as it does not look dark enough.
Believe me, the story did not suffer at all and everyone enjoyed it on it's theatrical run. It was scary.
And why did not Zoetrope inform us as early as 2002 that the Superbit was wrong without even mentioning the 1999 DVD?. They could have expressed their disdain. But, they kept quiet about it until 2007. So another 5 years 2002-2007 of watching an incorrect version by their standards? This Blu-Ray is ok for someone who has never seen this film before, but for those who are so used to seeing it a certain way for 15 years, it takes away from the whole experience.
It is almost as if I am being told that at the time I bought the DVD then Superbit, I should have hated the film in those formats. And if we all held out for an ultimate version then this film would not have done well on the home theatre market at the time. A Blu Ray was made because of this film's previous popularity. Sony are running a business, and would have seen that previous sales made this new transfer commercially viable.
Another point I want to raise is that if the new Special Edition DVD can handle the darker version, then so could previous DVD versions. It is the same technology after all. Sony could have easily put a message on the back of the DVD case from it's first incarnation saying that this film may appear dark but that is the way it was intended to be seen. Yet they chose not to with the DVD or Superbit.
A Blu-ray is there for improved picture quality that is all, and to more authentically resemble film element.
Maybe if I had a 100 inch screen would those darkened scenes be more discernable, but how many have that size.
The scene with the drops coming out of the bottle in the castle before Jonathan gets seduced by the vampire brides is ridiculously crushed. Only two drops register. But I said before, on the director's commentary, he refers to the droplets and there is an accompanying sound effect with each of the drops going up.
And the digitised black crush as well as artifacts. Ironic for a film shot with no digital effects. And how about the original burned in subs as an earlier poster pointed out. I don't remember computer generated ones on earlier versions.
Now onto Mr Robert Harris who I respect, admire his incredible knowledge and really enjoy his insights. Here is a quote Mr Harris gave to Dave Mack on Home Theater Forum 10/03/07 :" As far as what something looked like when it played at one's local cinema in 1992...
One more time...
Local cinemas don't matter. They generally provide a visually corrupt image in terms of color, density, focus and content. On top of that, they generally run poor quality prints. Local cinemas are the worst places to attempt to judge film."
Mr Robert Harris should bear in mind that most of us see a film locally. If a local cinema does not matter than box office would suffer greatly as would the continued success of our cinema. In fact, local cinemas here in the UK brought in the lion's share of the UK box-office for Bram Stoker's Dracula. I remember how packed my local cinema was for that film on different days.
And as I mentioned previously, whatever films I saw at the local cinema looked the same on DVD. Remember, that nowadays films come to home video very quickly so memories are fresh so to speak. When Bram Stoker's Dracula came to VHS not too long after it's UK cinema run, it resembled what I saw in the theatre just the picture quality was not as good being video tape. And in my lifetime, I sometimes saw a film in the most expensive London cinema and then saw it again at the local theatre. And they looked identical in terms of quality.
As it is 3 out of 4 local cinemas in my area have closed now because of the lousy multiplexes and the multiplex wrongly publicising that the local cinema is inferior. So people in my area stopped supporting that beautiful local institution and jumped out of the frying pan into the fire. Gorgeous buildings too that have been gutted to make room for a nightclub or expensive apartments!
If local cinema " Does not matter ", then why do some famous British actors and a recent Oscar winner believe it does? The last local cinema left in my area which is the Cineworld in Hammersmith, London was almost closed down but a campaign was started to save it, and actors including Colin Firth want to save this local institution. Here is the link should anyone want to read it for themselves :http://webcache.googleusercontent.co...w.google.co.uk
If this cinema in Hammersmith closes down, then I only have the multiplex left on a local level where the petrol pump attendant at my local Shell station also moonlights as a projectionist. He also was the cashier and served me my popcorn before he went to the screen the film!!!!
I live in London, but to go to a top of the range cinema in London's West End (Leicester Square ) is such a costly undertaking. A ticket per person is around close to $20 minimum, then parking is about $5 per hour plus cinema food and drinks adds on roughly $40 ( for 2 people ). So just for 2 people the cost is more than $100. Cinema never used to be that expensive to see a film, but now the modern multiplexes want to squeeze the viewer dry.Under no circumstance am I implying that I am even remotely as accomplished or have anywhere near the same level of knowledge as Mr Harris in the field of cinema!!!
I am just making an observation. We fans do our best to support the art form, and if we abstained from going to a local cinema because the film may be viewed as it was not intended then that would harm the film-maker and his ability to make future films.
Sadly the film industry in general only cares about the financial figures and I am assume that this reality would not be lost on a film director like Francis Ford Coppola.I am maybe sticking my head out for the chop,but feel that being honest is the better option in my limited life-experience. And even the negative comments some people have given Bram Stoker's Dracula Blu Ray have actually made me think of this film more than any other. As they say, there is no such thing as bad publicity!