Scream Factory Blu-ray Discussion Thread

[Seymour]

Originally Posted by jthefrank

Could be a timeframe thing too. Compare the output of Scream and Synapse. One has to get 3-5 titles out a month, the other gets 3-5 titles out a year.

Of course, Arrow has a pretty similar type of release schedule (to Shout/Scream), and their Motel Hell blu-ray looks wonderful.

[jthefrank]

Yeah, Arrow is interesting because they were taking all sorts of flak a couple years ago, when their output was slower. Now they're releasing stuff like crazy, and getting mostly great results.

[Goldensuitcase]

Originally Posted by dsman71

Anyone else think image quality should be the number one focus ? If it id budgetary why not spend more on restoration and less on extras ?

Yes! I do love the extras but a lot of time those are put on the backburner till I have a lot of free time. To me, the image/audio are leagues above anything else. I would rather have a barebones yet beautiful looking blu ray than a commentary w/interviews and deleted scenes and a subpar transfer.

[Member-222782]

What, exactly, is the issue with Motel Hell? I thought it looked decent. Someone brought up Plasma vs. LCD/LED TVs and how compression problems could be more apparent on the latter. I have never experienced the blockiness/pixelization that most people bring up and it's probably because I have a Plasma TV. It's either that or just the fact I don't actively look for flaws when watching Blu-rays. I also keep in mind that many of these little exploitation flicks won't ever receive the kind of treatment that, say, Lawrence of Arabia gets, so my expectations are always in check.

[Hellraiserfan]

Originally Posted by dsman71

Maybe its time Scream Factory do somewhat fewer extras and concentrate on better picture quality. Extras are all fine and dandy and Im appreciate it when they are ported over from a previous DVD release, but Id rather have excellent (five star) ***** HD PQ - but it seems like we arent getting the best of both worlds here. We get tons of extras which I know collectors love, but we get a subpar HD presentation (Motel Hell). Im sure that there are reasons for why some titles have a lackluster image...maybe it depends on the elements - with MGM , they are only getting what is handed to them and they arent spending the money to do more restoration because the budget could be going toward all of those extras. This is pure speculation and guess work though
Anyone else think image quality should be the number one focus ? If it id budgetary why not spend more on restoration and less on extras ?

Same here. I became disinterested with extras quite a few years ago and it would be great if more fans told SF on their Facebook page that they would rather have better transfers than extras. Sadly that won't happen because it seems like most are more into extras than the movie itself.

[TripleHBK]

Originally Posted by cine74

What, exactly, is the issue with Motel Hell? I thought it looked decent. Someone brought up Plasma vs. LCD/LED TVs and how compression problems could be more apparent on the latter. I have never experienced the blockiness/pixelization that most people bring up and it's probably because I have a Plasma TV. It's either that or just the fact I don't actively look for flaws when watching Blu-rays. I also keep in mind that many of these little exploitation flicks won't ever receive the kind of treatment that, say, Lawrence of Arabia gets, so my expectations are always in check.

That was me, and like you I also have a Plasma tv and rarely see any of the problems many others mention, certainly not to the degree many people complain about them at least. I've backed up my entire Movie collection and so I am quite well versed in the areas of compression and the problems they can exhibit, however problems that are frequent on LCD displays rarely if ever show up on my Plasma. I really do think that limitations in LCD technology are at least partially responsible for the problems that some people claim to see that others do not.

[RandyK]

Originally Posted by cine74

What, exactly, is the issue with Motel Hell? I thought it looked decent. Someone brought up Plasma vs. LCD/LED TVs and how compression problems could be more apparent on the latter. I have never experienced the blockiness/pixelization that most people bring up and it's probably because I have a Plasma TV. It's either that or just the fact I don't actively look for flaws when watching Blu-rays. I also keep in mind that many of these little exploitation flicks won't ever receive the kind of treatment that, say, Lawrence of Arabia gets, so my expectations are always in check.

I'm the same way. I have a 50" plasma and 42" LED and I haven't noticed any issues on either of them (haven't watched much on the LED lately but that'll change when I take it back to school with me). When I'm watching a movie, all I'm focused on is watching it, not looking for errors (I'm going to be looking under microscopes for a living, don't want to do that with my hobby).

I'm not going to admit they don't have problems, but since I can't see them, I'm not going to worry about them.

[cropsy]

Arrow produce alot of extras and good transfers, so do others and so should scream. With that said i don't have problems with many of screams releases that others seem to, theres some quibbles here and there but they are always value for money imo though a few of their recent titles have been a bit extras light recently.

[Stefan1]

I recently watched SF's Lifeforce (Great wild movie) but the PQ was terrible....it was so grainy and blurry I was expecting crystal clear bluray transfer...is this the "compression" people are talking about?

[Marsupial Werewolf]

Originally Posted by dissention

Absolutely.

I received Motel Hell yesterday, watched it with a friend (who hated it) last night & she asked what was wrong with the disc. And my friend is someone who is content watching AVI files...from a thumb drive...on her Westinghouse television.

The finale is nearly slaughtered itself by poor compression; it's really bad this time. In terms of compression, I'd say this is easily their worst release. It looks hazy in certain scenes.

Thank you. You saved me some cash.

I'll look into getting the Arrow release some day instead.

[jthefrank]

Originally Posted by Stefan1

I recently watched SF's Lifeforce (Great wild movie) but the PQ was terrible....it was so grainy and blurry I was expecting crystal clear bluray transfer...is this the "compression" people are talking about?

No, but judging by the number of newer high-budget movies in your collection it might just be the shock of going from those contemporary titles to an older, Cannon-produced 1980s lower budget title.

[spawningblue]

Has anyone actually compared the Scream and Arrow release of Motel Hell, as some seem to think the Scream release looks fine? I know this movie didn't look great on DVD either, and had a hazy look to it. Is there a screen caps comparison anywhere showing how superior the Arrow release looks? I find it hard to believe that Arrow's release would look that much better. It may look slightly better, but I doubt Scream's release would be almost uwatchable like some on here saying while Arrow's release apparently looks amazing. Some films are just going to be grainier than others, and not look as good due to the film stock, lighting, ect. used. I could see Scream's compression hurting the transfer a little, but I doubt it would be a night and day difference like some on here seem to be implying, unless Scream used a totally different transfer which doesn't seem very likely.

[theprestige85]

Originally Posted by jthefrank

No, but judging by the number of newer high-budget movies in your collection it might just be the shock of going from those contemporary titles to an older, Cannon-produced 1980s lower budget title.

I'm used to films that are pre 00's so it's always a shock for me when I see an ultra glossy non atmospheric picture like that shown in a new Marvel Film or something. Looks dodgy, mate.

[Seymour]

Originally Posted by spawningblue

[Show spoiler]Has anyone actually compared the Scream and Arrow release of Motel Hell, as some seem to think the Scream release looks fine? I know this movie didn't look great on DVD either, and had a hazy look to it. Is there a screen caps comparison anywhere showing how superior the Arrow release looks? I find it hard to believe that Arrow's release would look that much better. It may look slightly better, but I doubt Scream's release would be almost uwatchable like some on here saying while Arrow's release apparently looks amazing. Some films are just going to be grainier than others, and not look as good due to the film stock, lighting, ect. used. I could see Scream's compression hurting the transfer a little, but I doubt it would be a night and day difference like some on here seem to be implying, unless Scream used a totally different transfer which doesn't seem very likely.

Honestly, I haven't seen one person say that there's a night and day difference between the two. But like you said, some films are grainier than others, and Motel Hell is crazy grainy. Is it hard to imagine that the Arrow release looks more natural and filmic, and the Shout version just looks noisy?

[Marsupial Werewolf]

Originally Posted by spawningblue

Has anyone actually compared the Scream and Arrow release of Motel Hell, as some seem to think the Scream release looks fine? I know this movie didn't look great on DVD either, and had a hazy look to it. Is there a screen caps comparison anywhere showing how superior the Arrow release looks? I find it hard to believe that Arrow's release would look that much better. It may look slightly better, but I doubt Scream's release would be almost uwatchable like some on here saying while Arrow's release apparently looks amazing. Some films are just going to be grainier than others, and not look as good due to the film stock, lighting, ect. used. I could see Scream's compression hurting the transfer a little, but I doubt it would be a night and day difference like some on here seem to be implying, unless Scream used a totally different transfer which doesn't seem very likely.

People are saying the Scream's disc is plagued by compression artifacts. As I have seen that in a number of their releases, I can believe it.

The transfers may in fact be similar, as the compression issues in question don't have anything to do with the elements used.

[spawningblue]

Originally Posted by Seymour

Honestly, I haven't seen one person say that there's a night and day difference between the two. But like you said, some films are grainier than others, and Motel Hell is crazy grainy. Is it hard to imagine that the Arrow release looks more natural and filmic, and the Shout version just looks noisy?

Well several have said Arrow's transfer looks excellent/ amazing, while one description of the Scream transfer was this,

"I received Motel Hell yesterday, watched it with a friend (who hated it) last night & she asked what was wrong with the disc. And my friend is someone who is content watching AVI files...from a thumb drive...on her Westinghouse television.

The finale is nearly slaughtered itself by poor compression; it's really bad this time. In terms of compression, I'd say this is easily their worst release. It looks hazy in certain scenes."

That is pretty much a night and day difference. So yeah, I would like to see the difference myself, that's all. Some people just aren't used to how some of these low budget flicks look. I believe the Arrow transfer may look better, I just doubt it's that much of a difference. So people saying the Scream transfer looks awful probably wouldn't think much of Arrow's either I would assume.

[spawningblue]

Originally Posted by MattFini

People are saying the Scream's disc is plagued by compression artifacts. As I have seen that in a number of their releases, I can believe it.

The transfers may in fact be similar, as the compression issues in question don't have anything to do with the elements used.

I've barely noticed any of the compression issues, so if minor compression is the only issue I'll survive.

[Marsupial Werewolf]

Originally Posted by spawningblue

I've barely noticed any of the compression issues, so if minor compression is the only issue I'll survive.

That's great. But it doesn't take away from the fact that they're there.

[jlk5844]

Originally Posted by BLUgrass

My preferred genre of horror are monster/giant killer animal movies, followed by haunting/possession movies, alien/abduction movies, and then serial killer/slasher movies. I do love a good slasher though.

Would love to see Fire in the Sky get a blu ray release, although it doesn't really seem like a Scream Factory type of movie. I am also pretty ignorant to which studio holds the rights and whether or not they are a studio that licences to Scream/Shout

Warner has it so, ergh, the best we can hope for is a Warner Archive release. It recently got a new DVD release under WA, so it isn't looking too good.

[Ill_Be_Back]

Arrow likely used the same transfer for Motel Hell, it does have some hazy scenes but has great detail too. I guess a comparison will be up soon enough to show the differences.