Spacehunter: Adventures in the Forbidden Zone (1983)

[GKintz]

It's no secret that Sony has an outstanding preservation team who work diligently to scan all of their assets.

Twilight Time recently hinted that GUN FURY (1954) is planned on being released on 3-D bluray later in 2017. That 3-D restoration was from Sony.

[MifuneFan]

Posted March 6th

Originally Posted by Robert Furmanek

Sony does not have a 3-D master but the 35mm left/right elements survive.

Wording matters. Do you really think Robert would word it as these elements "surviving" if Sony had left/right HD scans available right now? Seems he would have worded that quite differently to me. Unless you believe Robert is wrong here? Perhaps Mr. Furmanek can chime in and clarify?

[revgen]

Originally Posted by kidglov3s

As Spacehunter was a single strip movie (like the other 80s 3D movies, with both left and right squeezed together top/bottom), its not hard to imagine that the raw scan was of both eyes, from which they would've developed just one of the eyes for the HD master. Kind of like how the old Friday 13th Part 3 DVD was the left eye and the later one was the right eye. It seems like it would entail extra work not to scan both eyes of a single strip movie, even if you only intend to use one.

Spacehunter wasn't filmed in single-strip. It was filmed in Dual-35mm.

The prints that went to theaters were single-strip, but they were flawed because the lab didn't know how to properly transfer two separate 35mm elements into a single-strip print.

Needless to say, any 3-D blu-ray release of Spacehunter from the dual-35mm elements will look better than anybody has ever seen it.

If Bob Furmanek says no 3-D master has been created, then that means they only scanned one "eye" and not both.

[kidglov3s]

Originally Posted by revgen

Spacehunter wasn't filmed in single-strip. It was filmed in Dual-35mm.

The prints that went to theaters were single-strip, but they were flawed because the lab didn't know how to properly transfer two separate 35mm elements into a single-strip print.

Needless to say, any 3-D blu-ray release of Spacehunter from the dual-35mm elements will look better than anybody has ever seen it.

If Bob Furmanek says no 3-D master has been created, then that means they only scanned one "eye" and not both.

Shit, I hadn't read that anywhere.

EDIT: Yup, says right here on pg 10 of this press document from Columbia:
http://www.cinepix.ca/downloads/26/S...hotography.pdf

"Two seperate negatives"

[mar3o]

So back to square one then. It's looking like this movie will never get a proper 3D release.

[El_Fez]

On the other hand, I'm thrilled to get this on disc. I loves me some eighties cheese, and this was the smelliest of Limburger. While coming from Mill Creek means that we'll be lucky to get a front end menu let alone any extras, at least it'll only cost me five bucks.

[Ben_C]

Loved watching this as a kid (taped of the tv)! Seemed like such a cool film back in the day.
Shame about the lack of 3D, as although it doesn't bother me, plenty of people seem to want the option of watching it in 3D. Maybe it's just one of those lesser known films we should just be grateful to see get any kind of release on blu.

Would also love to see a release of Starchaser: The Legend of Orin. Saw that in 3D at the cinema when it came out.

[Interdimensional]

Originally Posted by revgen

Spacehunter wasn't filmed in single-strip. It was filmed in Dual-35mm.

The prints that went to theaters were single-strip, but they were flawed because the lab didn't know how to properly transfer two separate 35mm elements into a single-strip print.

Needless to say, any 3-D blu-ray release of Spacehunter from the dual-35mm elements will look better than anybody has ever seen it.

If Bob Furmanek says no 3-D master has been created, then that means they only scanned one "eye" and not both.

Having raw scans for archival purposes, and having a digital 3-D master created are two different things. Greg says they've scanned L/R elements, so I wouldn't doubt that. Of course it's still possible that official sources can relay wrong information and misunderstandings do occur. Cost aside, it makes a lot of sense to scan both at once, regardless of immediate plans.

Originally Posted by Ben_C

Would also love to see a release of Starchaser: The Legend of Orin. Saw that in 3D at the cinema when it came out.

Starchaser at least has been digitally mastered in 3D, so when that comes to blu ray there will be no excuse.

[revgen]

That's strange. If both elements have been scanned, then why not create a 3-D master?

[MifuneFan]

Furmanek said they weren't, I'd trust his word.

[davidthenikonuser]

Originally Posted by Buscemi

OAR or cropped like the DVD and 2-D screenings were (I'm not having the debate again where someone tries to claim this was always a 1.85 film)?

Found this in the trivia for the film,

While it was common for 3-D movies to also be released simultaneously in flat versions, the two versions of this movie were shown at different ratios. 3-D prints were projected at 2.35:1, while flat prints were only 1.85:1. Thus, the flat widescreen DVD version from Columbia TriStar is correctly presented at 1.85:1 and not 2.35:1, as erroneously listed on the DVD case.

[Pussycat, Pussycat]

Originally Posted by davidthenikonuser

Found this in the trivia for the film,

And yet movies such as Comin At Ya!, Jaws 3D, The Man Who Wasn't There, Friday The 13th Part 3, Parasite and Treasure of the Four Crowns all were shot in 2:35.1 and yet you're stating that Spacehunter wasn't shot in this format? I definitely don't buy this at all. If you believe in the two print format, then why do they look so terrible on VHS or on television? The reason...they were shot anamorphically to go along with that 3D process and it was the only way at that time to shoot it. Spacehunter I remember looked mirky and lifeless along with the fact that it was cropped to hell when I first saw it on HBO way back when.

A good example of your so-called point is the DVD edition of Bird On A Wire which on the back does state the correct OAR of 2:35.1 and I can confirm it because I saw this movie when it came out theatrically. Yet, the DVD itself is only 1:85.1 and the reason it is in this format is because it was shot in Super 35 which you can go both ways without losing too much. The Laserdisc of The Abyss was also this way when it was first released and you couldn't tell the difference. Avatar is another great recent example of this.

Also, I would not go by what IMDB.com states because some of their info is in dire need of corrections. They had Wonder Boys which is a movie that runs an 1 Hour and 51 Minutes.... 5 minutes shorter than real time. Until Mill Creek provides real accurate info and there is plenty of time for that to come to light, I'm not buying into the fact that this was a 3D movie not shot in 2:35.1.

[Interdimensional]

Originally Posted by revgen

That's strange. If both elements have been scanned, then why not create a 3-D master?

Well, if I had both scanned, I'd certainly create a 3-D master, but it's not up to me. They would have to be processed and aligned, and Sony may have seen no immediate demand. If there's any digital cleanup required, you have double the work, and the L/R images have to match in terms of colour/contrast values. There may be some advantage to having both eye views to work from in selecting the view that works best in 2d, but it is also worth doing for archival purposes.

Spacehunter is dual strip, however it may be assumed that for single-strip films, both eye views have been scanned, since they're both on the same negative.

It doesn't necessarily follow that the studios have then taken that material and used it to create a digital 3D master. Should we assume that 3D masters have been created for films like The Creeps and Friday the 13th 3D? Again, they certainly should be created.

[Interdimensional]

Originally Posted by Pussycat, Pussycat

And yet movies such as Comin At Ya!, Jaws 3D, The Man Who Wasn't There, Friday The 13th Part 3, Parasite and Treasure of the Four Crowns all were shot in 2:35.1 and yet you're stating that Spacehunter wasn't shot in this format? I definitely don't buy this at all. If you believe in the two print format, then why do they look so terrible on VHS or on television? The reason...they were shot anamorphically to go along with that 3D process and it was the only way at that time to shoot it. Spacehunter I remember looked mirky and lifeless along with the fact that it was cropped to hell when I first saw it on HBO way back when.

A good example of your so-called point is the DVD edition of Bird On A Wire which on the back does state the correct OAR of 2:35.1 and I can confirm it because I saw this movie when it came out theatrically. Yet, the DVD itself is only 1:85.1 and the reason it is in this format is because it was shot in Super 35 which you can go both ways without losing too much. The Laserdisc of The Abyss was also this way when it was first released and you couldn't tell the difference. Avatar is another great recent example of this.

Also, I would not go by what IMDB.com states because some of their info is in dire need of corrections. They had Wonder Boys which is a movie that runs an 1 Hour and 51 Minutes.... 5 minutes shorter than real time. Until Mill Creek provides real accurate info and there is plenty of time for that to come to light, I'm not buying into the fact that this was a 3D movie not shot in 2:35.1.

According to American Cinematographer, "the photography was done in standard ratio for eventual television use, but composed for the Techniscope widescreen image for theatrical release as a single strip system" (3D).

[davidthenikonuser]

LOL. All this angry over a movie. I was just posting some info I found.

Originally Posted by Pussycat, Pussycat

And yet movies such as Comin At Ya!, Jaws 3D, The Man Who Wasn't There, Friday The 13th Part 3, Parasite and Treasure of the Four Crowns all were shot in 2:35.1 and yet you're stating that Spacehunter wasn't shot in this format? I definitely don't buy this at all. If you believe in the two print format, then why do they look so terrible on VHS or on television? The reason...they were shot anamorphically to go along with that 3D process and it was the only way at that time to shoot it. Spacehunter I remember looked mirky and lifeless along with the fact that it was cropped to hell when I first saw it on HBO way back when.

A good example of your so-called point is the DVD edition of Bird On A Wire which on the back does state the correct OAR of 2:35.1 and I can confirm it because I saw this movie when it came out theatrically. Yet, the DVD itself is only 1:85.1 and the reason it is in this format is because it was shot in Super 35 which you can go both ways without losing too much. The Laserdisc of The Abyss was also this way when it was first released and you couldn't tell the difference. Avatar is another great recent example of this.

Also, I would not go by what IMDB.com states because some of their info is in dire need of corrections. They had Wonder Boys which is a movie that runs an 1 Hour and 51 Minutes.... 5 minutes shorter than real time. Until Mill Creek provides real accurate info and there is plenty of time for that to come to light, I'm not buying into the fact that this was a 3D movie not shot in 2:35.1.

[MifuneFan]

Talk about being triggered, wow.

[8traxrule]

It was NOT "common 3-D movies to also be released simultaneously in flat versions," if you went to an indoor theater they showed it in 3D ONLY- and they DIDN'T have any greedy upcharges for it. Some 2D prints were made but ONLY for drive-ins since they couldn't show 3D. (The original pan and scan video release of Friday the 13th Part 3 is obviously transferred from a scope 2D print, as you can see the oval-shaped changeover cues.)

[Monroville]

Originally Posted by davidthenikonuser

LOL. All this angry over a movie. I was just posting some info I found.

No, no, no... you are looking at this wrong. I find it fan-tastic that people are standing up and arguing so much for (of all movies) SPACEHUNTER.

[mar3o]

I agree that it's great to see so many people defending Spacehunter's 3D presentation, but there's no reason for jumping down somebody's throat just for posting a bit of information.

The price is dirt cheap on Amazon right now and I still refuse to buy it. No 3D, so sale. As far as I'm concerned, they might as well have released it cropped to 4:3. The lack of 3D cripples this film. Some 3D films are still pretty great in 2D since they are filmed well and are well-written. This one isn't. Most of the fun is in watching the set design in 3D. It does have a couple cool action scenes but again it's got 3D all over it. Look at the early battle scene when they steal the women, or the "game" Ringwald's character plays late in the film, dodging tons of obstacles that are clearly layered to maximize the 3D effect. Or the scene with the mutants in the water with all those layers of depth. Half the film has objects pointing at the camera.

[Pondosinatra]

Originally Posted by mar3o

I agree that it's great to see so many people defending Spacehunter's 3D presentation, but there's no reason for jumping down somebody's throat just for posting a bit of information.

The price is dirt cheap on Amazon right now and I still refuse to buy it. No 3D, so sale. As far as I'm concerned, they might as well have released it cropped to 4:3. The lack of 3D cripples this film. Some 3D films are still pretty great in 2D since they are filmed well and are well-written. This one isn't. Most of the fun is in watching the set design in 3D. It does have a couple cool action scenes but again it's got 3D all over it. Look at the early battle scene when they steal the women, or the "game" Ringwald's character plays late in the film, dodging tons of obstacles that are clearly layered to maximize the 3D effect. Or the scene with the mutants in the water with all those layers of depth. Half the film has objects pointing at the camera.

Maybe fiddle with the color settings and close one eye while watching to approximate 3D???

Oh wait! I got it. Get two TV sets and split the feed to both.....set one to a significant green tinge, set the other one to a significant red tinge, find one of those old crappy cardboard 3D glasses - and enjoy!