Originally Posted by DavidHir
Perhaps, but the Blu-ray uses an older scan and the grain is not well compressed via MPEG-2 giving a "noisy" look. I would love to see a new Sleepy Hollow transfer and encode. The film grain would look much more natural even if it was a grainy movie, but not holding my breath with Paramount.
I understand and a new transfer with new special features would be a bonus.
But, at least Sleepy Hollow has no changes to the film's look itself and I would sooner have this old transfer from Paramount then a new revisionist one.
In the same token, I would have preferred Sony to have used the older HD Dracula master rather than what we have now. I would imagine so would others knowing what unfortunatley transpired.
What concerns me these days, is that directors are more tempted to fix their old films with the advances in new technology.
I remember an interview with Roman Polanski about 12 years ago from Scene By Scene which is on Youtube now in four parts, where he said with new technology he could make the effects in Rosemary's Baby so much better. But thankfully so far he has avoided that.
Worst scenario, I would only agree with a revision if the original was included. Not that a revision is something ideal, because they set a bad precedent in the industry.
And the technology is even better now. But me, I prefer a film untouched. No unncecessary digital alteration. Just a nice transfer. Worst case scenario, I don't even care if the print looks dirty. I would sooner go a for quality looking dirty film print than a super clean altered look print.
I am so used to dirty prints because in the UK we would see film at the cinema where they were sent to our smaller theatres after there USA box office run. This was in the 70's and 80's.On subject, but slight change to the above context :
Whoever has this Blu Ray and thinks it is not digitally altered, then please go to the scene at time stamp 126:46
on the player. Press pause and look.
It is the crypt scene and part of Lucy's husband has his moustache, left eye and hair badly digitally altered. It looks unbelievably bad. It makes no sense that these artifacts could be elements on the original film. That's the worst example in that scene and I am shaking my head even all these years later! How the.... did they not realise something is badly wrong.
Also the scene where the younger looking Drac meets Mina on the streets of London. Please take a look at the shots where you see the back of his hair.
All I can say, is that how the hell was this approved? It looks odd and so out of place. What were they trying to achieve. If they wanted to darken the film then fine but this?
I heard the argument the crypt scene looks better now, but the digital noise kills it for me.
I do admit some scenes do look good comparatively but others ruin the experience. Once noticed the flaws are impossible to ignore.
Why oh why did they do this? Nothing needed to be fixed. And why the strong defense of some in the business that this is the best it has looked? It has nothing to do with offence or disrespect to Sony/Zoetrope but the reality of the issue.
I always thought honesty was a virtue not a crime.
These alterations were never part of the original film period and should not be there. And a new transfer is badly needed. The parties involved can keep their heads in the sand and ignore us, but the problem won't go away.