FEAR CITY (Shout Factory)

[Benoit Blanc]

Originally Posted by robw285

the uncut version has locked French subtitles.

Are you absolutely sure about that? Can anyone else confirm the French subtitles are locked?

the mess that was made with The Cooler

What mess?

[latehong]

Originally Posted by Benoit Blanc

What mess?

Crappy, PAL speed-up video, crappier audio. Even the director himself openly said he's strongly against the result (before he actually saw the Blu-ray, to be fair, but read below).

Here are some of the comments from the UK thread:

Originally Posted by Fat Phil

Holy hell. From a technical standpoint, this is a very poor release. I'm almost certain it runs at the wrong speed. The movie should be approximately 1:41 but the blu-ray clocks in at just under 1:38 which is practically identical to the running time of the old UK Tartan DVD which of course would have had the PAL speed-up. Oh, and just for giggles, 101 films have listed the running time on the cover as 138mins

The master even looks like the one used for that DVD back in 2004. Just manky all around - flat, sapped of any meaningful textural detail and with poor colours. There's also some minor print damage and slight telecine wobble but unlike those the other issues I mentioned, those two things weren't detrimental to my experience.

Comparing the blu-ray with the Tartan DVD - Even using what looks like the same master, the blu-ray obviously gets a bump from the new encode. That's not to say it's good, cause it's not, but it does away with the blockiness that plagued the DVD and some minor additional detail is allowed to resolve as a result. I've included a quick comparison so you can see what i'm talking about (photos, not screengrabs so don't read too much into colour/contrast etc).
https://www.screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/126671
See Bill Macy's crow's feet or the line of his lower lip for example.

Positives then - It's not a total waste of money because, IMO the new feature length making of doc (clocking in at nearly two hours) that 101 have gone to the trouble of producing is worth the asking price alone. Nearly everyone of note (including William H Macy, Baldwin, Kramer etc) have sat down to share their recollections. It's a testament to their fondness for the movie. The included booklet also looks nicely put together though I've yet to read it.

And the movie itself, oh baby, it still packs a real punch. Phenomenal performances all around (The "It's a boy!" scene remains a gut wrenching slice of cinema) and Wayne Kramer's always had a sensibility as a director that i've enjoyed. It was a real blast revisiting it again after all these years.

Don't get me wrong, this will be my go-to presentation of the movie until something better comes along. The included extras (both legacy and new) plus the fact that it offers a better presentation than my DVD means that it stays on my shelf but wait for a sale or even wait for a new release anywhere else in the world that utilises a new scan if you've got patience.

Originally Posted by nmac320

Just watched this. The picture is terrible in bits and decent in others. The sound in some scenes however is next level bad. Any scene with a car is so tinny and distorted it completely ruins the scenes. Pretty bad when one of the major scenes involves a car. I’ve sent them a tweet to ask if there is a fault with the disc. The picture I can except may be the master (although director says different) but the quality of the sound is ridiculous.

Originally Posted by bluemax65

As the director and co-writer of THE COOLER, I haven’t yet seen 101’s Blu Ray, but if DVDBeaver’s screen captures are anything to go by, I can assure you this is NOT how our film looks. We shot THE COOLER on Super 35mm, applying a bleach bypass process to the IP. James Whitaker was the cinematographer and he shot the hell out of the film. The theatrical prints are stunning with extreme highlights, strong blacks and solid colors. The film in no way looks like the screen captures that I’m seeing on DVD Beaver’s site. Not even the so-so version playing right now on HBO in HD (in the U.S.) looks this way. The film was chemically color timed and no digital intermediate was done. Digital intermediates were still in their infancy and I wasn’t happy with the DI test results from a few of the early providers (Technicolor, etc.). The HD master was done back in early 2003 – supervised by James Whitaker and myself. We were never thrilled with the results because our bleach bypass process was baked into the IP and not the negative. We used the neg for the HD master and tried to approximate the bleach bypass look as best we could. But since this wasn’t a DI suite, the approximated look had its limitations. That being said, the HD master was always acceptable looking with rich colors, deep blacks and a fair amount of contrast. It NEVER looked the way these image captures do. I commend 101 for going to great lengths to make a superb retrospective documentary on the film (which in of itself is probably worth taking a shot on the disc), but hearing that the transfer is likely substandard 1080i and 25fps is hugely troubling to me and clearly unacceptable. I’m discussing with 101’s Phillip Escott what our options are. As the filmmaker I simply cannot endorse this presentation if DVD Beaver’s screen captures are accurate – which is a huge shame since I collaborated closely with Phillip on the extras. Since I don’t have the 101 disc in hand yet, I can’t condemn the image and sound until I witness it for myself – but I’m not optimistic given the negative feedback on this board. If it's as bad as I'm reading here, I hope 101 does the right thing and recalls the disc. Lionsgate holds the U.S. distribution rights and, as far as I know, have shown no interest in a domestic Blu Ray release. If and when they do take an interest in the film, I'm hoping they spend the money to go back to the film's neg and allow us to do a new 4K transfer. I'll check back in here when I've personally viewed the disc. If you want to see what THE COOLER should look like, image quality wise and closer to the theatrical presentation, jump over to my Facebook page where I have posted some production stills: https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?f...type=3&theater

Best - Wayne Kramer

The said DVD Beaver review

[robw285]

Originally Posted by Benoit Blanc

Are you absolutely sure about that? Can anyone else confirm the French subtitles are locked?

What mess?

I have the French Blu-Ray, the theatrical version has removable French Subtitles but the uncut version has locked French subtitles.

[Eastmancolor]

Originally Posted by AndrewFM

I got the 101 films disc today. Think the movie is likely the same versions Shout put out - however, while the uncut version plays in the correct aspect ratio, on my set up the main theatrical cut plays full 16x9, which is to say the 1.57 ratio is stretched to fill the whole image, so everything looks fat and distorted. The uncut version is my preferred choice so it’s not a big deal to me, but it seems like someone ****ed up somewhere.

The problem with 101's uncut version is the image for the uncut inserts is squeezed, not to mention the aspect ratio for the rest of the feature is wrong as it should have been 1.85 not 1.57. The default standard release cut, which is stretched out and distorted, is unwatchable. This needs a recall.

[Benoit Blanc]

Originally Posted by robw285

i have the french blu-ray, the theatrical version has removable french subtitles but the uncut version has locked french subtitles.

ok.

[Benoit Blanc]

Originally Posted by latehong

Crappy, PAL speed-up video, crappier audio. Even the director himself openly said he's strongly against the result (before he actually saw the Blu-ray, to be fair, but read below).

Here are some of the comments from the UK thread:







The said DVD Beaver review

Bloody hell, that's a mess, alright. Thanks for all the info.

[LeSamourai.]

Originally Posted by Eastmancolor

The problem with 101's uncut version is the image for the uncut inserts is squeezed, not to mention the aspect ratio for the rest of the feature is wrong as it should have been 1.85 not 1.57. The default standard release cut, which is stretched out and distorted, is unwatchable. This needs a recall.

I ordered via HMV click and collect and am glad I have not yet picked this up. Thank you.

[Darren75]

Managed to cancel my 101 order. It was due to arrive tomorrow but hadn't actually been dispatched yet.

That was close.

[raphph]

Literally came to this thread whilst watching this movie to see if anyone had noticed or complained about the UK 101 Films release being stretched in the Theatrical Version aspect ratio. What a mess. Also two version of the film on the same disc without branching? What an encoding mess…

[Met]

Skipping the 101 Films release and not paying the crazy prices for the Shout release...

[Curator]

I preordered this on Amazon but shipping seems to now be delayed indefinitely. Wonder if 101 has put a hold on it or advised of issues? Would be good to have a statement from them about the problems that have been raised above and if they intend to address them.

[LeSamourai.]

Originally Posted by Eastmancolor

The problem with 101's uncut version is the image for the uncut inserts is squeezed

How much of the run-time do the inserts account for?

Originally Posted by Eastmancolor

not to mention the aspect ratio for the rest of the feature is wrong as it should have been 1.85 not 1.57.

Does this mean that a portion of the frame is cropped/less image is visible than what was originally released, or that more of the frame is visible than the intended aspect ratio?

[balthazar_bee]

Originally Posted by LeSamourai.

How much of the run-time do the inserts account for?

You can check it out here: https://www.movie-censorship.com/report.php?ID=962085

I have the disc that has forced French subtitles on the unrated version, so I almost always opt for the theatrical cut. The differences constitute more of a curiosity than a substantial move in quality one way or the other.

Originally Posted by LeSamourai.

Does this mean that a portion of the frame is cropped/less image is visible than what was originally released, or that more of the frame is visible than the intended aspect ratio?

The framing looks fairly natural in its boxy form, maybe a bit roomy at the top and bottom; I never got the sense that we were losing any information on the sides.

[LeSamourai.]

[Show spoiler]

Originally Posted by balthazar_bee

You can check it out here: https://www.movie-censorship.com/report.php?ID=962085

I have the disc that has forced French subtitles on the unrated version, so I almost always opt for the theatrical cut. The differences constitute more of a curiosity than a substantial move in quality one way or the other.



The framing looks fairly natural in its boxy form, maybe a bit roomy at the top and bottom; I never got the sense that we were losing any information on the sides.

Many thanks for your reply, friend.

[LSK]

Originally Posted by i-kari

I don't usually see big difference in caps, but care to explain what I should be looking for here? People are saying the 101 is stretched, but in those caps the Shout is wider?

Yes, it's the Shout version in those caps that are wider, so I too have no idea what people are on about.

[Nitroes]

The 101 gets a fairly good review https://www.blu-ray.com/movies/Fear-...353933/#Review

I already have the Australian disc but I might update now.

[Curator]

Watched the 101 release and enjoyed it a lot. I simply couldn't discern the stretching issue on the theatrical cut that a lot of people are talking about, and I was looking for it going in having read this thread. I'm normally quite sensitive to even slight aspect ratio distortions so I'm positive I would have spotted something as wildly stretched as has been suggested in this thread. If it's there then it's either not as noticeable as to make it unwatchable or perhaps variable TV settings are handling it differently.

The uncut version is a more jarring watch because the inserts are standard definition and definitely not the same ratio as the rest of the film.

[LSK]

I bought the 101 and watched the uncut version last night. I liked the film but those inserts didn't look too good and I didn't feel they were essential to the film.

The 1.66:1 ratio looked good on this version and I checked the TC afterwards and found, in the scenes I checked, that picture information was the same in the frame. There's a particular scene around six minutes in, where the framing in both versions cuts off the top of a head in this scene and this leads me to believe that the 1.78:1 framing could be stretched. I saw a few other scenes with that framing and if it is indeed stretched it's not something that bothers me.

[russweiss1]

I purchased the 101 release after I read a few people complaining about the AR. I've found that minor things tend to get blown out of proportion in this forum so I generally don't pay much attention. If it's a title I want I'll see for myself.

[snipemonkey]

Originally Posted by russweiss1

I purchased the 101 release after I read a few people complaining about the AR. I've found that minor things tend to get blown out of proportion in this forum so I generally don't pay much attention. If it's a title I want I'll see for myself.

Same. I went ahead and ordered it, if only because I don't care about the R-rated cut, but also because this is not a title I expect to see get another release any time soon. I'll be happy to be wrong on that, but I'm not waiting another decade because I decided to skip it yet again.