Fright Night (1985) (30th Anniversary Edition) (Limited Edition) - SOLD OUT

[Thomas Irwin]

Originally Posted by Brett C

Nobody said or implied it was junk or trash, but it has issues not present in the same companies previous release. Whether one sees them or cares is another story.

https://forum.blu-ray.com/showpost.p...postcount=2886

[thephantomcat]

Nobody said or implied it was junk or trash, but it has issues not present in the same companies previous release. Whether one sees them or cares is another story.Today 01:01 AMBrett C

Originally Posted by pinballmaster

Is there an email address we can start emailing about the defects? Maybe if enough people inquire we can get replacements?

It's pretty clear some people are going to extremes based on a few alleged screens.

[Brett C]

Originally Posted by thephantomcat

It's pretty clear some people are going to extremes based on a few alleged screens.

You did not see anything wrong, so why care about what someone else thinks? If I got into an uproar about every little thing I did not like being said on these boards I would have a stroke!

I am very particular on AV quality, some would say too much, but I posted some info on a tech issue, however slight it maybe, for others like minded.

It is a decent release,(the EPK extra is worth the purchase alone) and if it was the only one I had and I watched it on a TV, it would be a non issue. I only posted the findings for those that own both releases and large screens and they can decide for themselves if I am nuts or if they want to keep the original disc.

On that note, yeah I am tired of this discussion and hopefully it gets back to it's regular broadcast.

[#Darren]

Originally Posted by bruceames.

I'm here 100% for the posts on the transfer itself and how it compares to the other releases. Positive or negative I want to read them and thanks to what has been brought up so far. This is a technical forum and feel free to babble on about how we should be thankful we don't have to watch it on a 19" CRT, how it's better than the DVD, etc. But I will be overlooking those obvious comments because they serve me no purpose at all.

Agreed. And if there should be any valid "complaints" about what is posted in this thread, it would be all the mindless "mine shipped" posts. Would be great if mods auto deleted these garbage posts.

[thephantomcat]

Originally Posted by Brett C

You did not see anything wrong, so why care about what someone else thinks? If I got into an uproar about every little thing I did not like being said on these boards I would have a stroke!

I am very particular on AV quality, some would say too much, but I posted some info on a tech issue, however slight it maybe, for others like minded.

It is a decent release,(the EPK extra is worth the purchase alone) and if it was the only one I had and I watched it on a TV, it would be a non issue. I only posted the findings for those that own both releases and large screens and they can decide for themselves if I am nuts or if they want to keep the original disc.

On that note, yeah I am tired of this discussion and hopefully it gets back to it's regular broadcast.

I am not in an uproar and I care what others think no more than you do. I only posted that I see nothing while someone with a 47" screen claims to be able to see it. This leads me to believe the issue lies elsewhere.

[Brett C]

Originally Posted by thephantomcat

I am not in an uproar and I care what others think no more than you do. I only posted that I see nothing while someone with a 47" screen claims to be able to see it. This leads me to believe the issue lies elsewhere.

Enjoy your disc, it is good to see so many people that like this film!
I have been a fan since I saw it in the theater back in 85.

[thephantomcat]

Originally Posted by Brett C

Enjoy your disc, it is good to see so many people that like this film!
I have been a fan since I saw it in the theater back in 85.

Thanks. You, too. I discovered this movie many years later as I was a child when it was originally released. I put on the disc nd since discovered a instance of Macroblocking when the windows are shattered in the basement. I imagine it must be more pronounced on a 100" projection.

[Seymour]

Originally Posted by Thomas Irwin

https://forum.blu-ray.com/showpost.p...postcount=2886

Geez, people take things so literally around here sometimes. Yeah, I'm literally going to throw it in a junk pile (or I'm implying it's junk) without even watching it first. Notice I did preface my offhand remark with "Haven't watched the new version myself yet, but based on all the comparison screenshots going around...".

[Thomas Irwin]

Originally Posted by Seymour

Geez, people take things so literally around here sometimes. Yeah, I'm literally going to throw it in a junk pile (or I'm implying it's junk) without even watching it first. Notice I did preface my offhand remark with "Haven't watched the new version myself yet, but based on all the comparison screenshots going around...".

Well, I never doubted you'd eventually watch it - after all, you did pay for it. For the same reason, I don't expect you simply to discard it in any fashion. It just seemed a bit more - by my interpretation anyhow - of "guilty until proven innocent". I was just hoping the disc would get a fair and unbiased trial.

[BrandonJF]

Originally Posted by Ruined

I reviewed the 23:17 pant leg scene several times on my monitor and the main thing I notice is the new transfer is brighter and has a LOT more film grain. I paused it in several spots, watched in motion and saw no more macroblocking than the original release on the pause. Bitrate seems to run 29mbps-35mbps on this scene. The old transfer has less motion in the frame because some of the film grain is filtered out.

It doesn't really look like macoblocking to me. I don't even know what I'd call it. If I had noticed it when not looking for it, I would've assumed it was due to my projector's motion enhancer. It's like judder in one section of the image. As the camera pans, there is one area that seems to "jump" for a second. It took me multiple viewings through the identified section to find it. It's really not a big deal and was never made out to be a big deal. It's just an observed difference between the two releases, just like all of the positives that have been pointed out.

[Ray O. Blu]

So, I haven't opened my copy of this version yet and judging by the last few pages, this appears to be the biggest letdown in Blu-ray history.

I plan on starting a makeshift, safely-controlled fire in a small metal trash can in my backyard so that I can make a video of the burning of this release that I can send to SAE & TT to exhibit my displeasure with the handling of the transfer.

My question is this:
Can anyone recommend a decent camera to use for this purpose, because I'm afraid that if I don't go about it properly, my video could include macroblocking and digital anomalies and the hypocrisy of that juxtaposition would be quite embarrassing?

[EvilResident]

Originally Posted by Ray O. Blu

So, I haven't opened my copy of this version yet and judging by the last few pages, this appears to be the biggest letdown in Blu-ray history.

I plan on starting a makeshift, safely-controlled fire in a small metal trash can in my backyard so that I can make a video of the burning of this release that I can send to SAE & TT to exhibit my displeasure with the handling of the transfer.

My question is this:
Can anyone recommend a decent camera to use for this purpose, because I'm afraid that if I don't go about it properly, my video could include macroblocking and digital anomalies and the hypocrisy of that juxtaposition would be quite embarrassing?

It would be best to go analog, just to be sure. Surely you have a 35mm camera lying around? Then you could do a 4k scan and transfer it to a 50gb dual layer blu-Ray. Make sure you have a high enough bitrate and lossless audio. And don't you dare mess with the color timing or your original intent will be ruined. Also, make sure you use practical fire. None of that CGI crap.

Oh and you also can't use an eco case. And for goodness sake use the original poster art! Ah, screw it, make a steelbook.

[ditcin]

Well. I received the 30th Anniversary release. I'm very happy with the sound, and PQ. If I slightly turn up the saturation, and adjust the contrast the picture pops.

I'm selling the German Blu if anyone is interested.

Also, yes I have complained to theater managers about the quality of films at time complaining about both picture quality and even audio.
The answer usually (for PQ) is usually it what they were sent.

The same holds true for TT, they only get what the studios supply.
Why isn't anyone contacting Sony/Columbia? Why isn't anyone pointing the finger towards them?
In the early days of Home Video (early 80's) I remember that Columbia/RCA was know for having transfers with an orange umber tone. Another studio tech I knew said actors look like they have a sunburn in all their transfers. (Agnes of God was a prime example) We laughed, but it was true.

Truthfully, I seems more people here are probably of the age being introduced to FRIGHT NIGHT on home video. To which they never saw it in the theater. They are used to how it has looked in various home video presentations (including cable). I know when I first got my first Beta copy it look far better (more color saturation and deeper contrast) than the 35mm presentation I saw in the theater - yet it was very different. The laserdisc edition was similar in saturation but more detailed than the Beta.
The first DVD was similar to the laser but even more detailed.

Many would say if the director was involved the transfer would be fine -not always the case. Look at the way Friedkin ruined THE EXORCIST. Directors are just people and not all have the best memories, they get old and confused or don't really care - or worse, they try to jump on the train popularity and what's currently in vogue and make changes to be hip and make their aged film more accessible to a younger audience; perhaps in hope to rekindle a career. On the other had I've dealt with directors who have even confused endings and unfilmed material between films.

With so many hands in the pot and so many levels that DVD/BD runs though it's a miracle any film is released right.
Add to the equation execs who don't care and aren't staples of the company, who don't know their product or library and chaos ensues.

It has been stated that you can get 10 people from around the U.S. who originally saw GONE WITH THE WIND and each will argue about the color they saw. One reason is that the original Technicolor prints were produced in different locations around the country and in the process the water in that location was used to wash the print in the developing. The mineral content in the water in that given location affected the process and yielded a variation in the finished product - so, in the end each person what correct in what they saw, but different.

In any case yes, I do have German BD up for sale

[Filmmaker]

Originally Posted by thephantomcat

I see no macroblocking in any of the scenes mentioned. 55" Samsung LED. I don't see any the entire film. I don't see how a problem can be visible on a 100+ in screen and a 47" screen, but not a 55" screen. I honestly think this is a non existent issue.

It's definitely there, and I can clearly see it on a smaller monitor than you're using (a 50" LG plasma). Having said that, I still (barely) feel that the new transfer's virtues outrank it's failures, so I went ahead and sold off my original.

Originally Posted by BrandonJF

It doesn't really look like macoblocking to me. I don't even know what I'd call it. If I had noticed it when not looking for it, I would've assumed it was due to my projector's motion enhancer. It's like judder in one section of the image. As the camera pans, there is one area that seems to "jump" for a second. It took me multiple viewings through the identified section to find it. It's really not a big deal and was never made out to be a big deal. It's just an observed difference between the two releases, just like all of the positives that have been pointed out.

Exactly. It's almost like random parts of the image want to stay where they are for a half-second while the rest of the image is properly panning, and it takes them a beat to "jump" to where they should be. It just makes everything kind of "pulse" oddly for a moment or two.

[Ruined]

Originally Posted by BrandonJF

It doesn't really look like macoblocking to me. I don't even know what I'd call it. If I had noticed it when not looking for it, I would've assumed it was due to my projector's motion enhancer. It's like judder in one section of the image. As the camera pans, there is one area that seems to "jump" for a second. It took me multiple viewings through the identified section to find it. It's really not a big deal and was never made out to be a big deal. It's just an observed difference between the two releases, just like all of the positives that have been pointed out.

This I did see. The new transfer appears to have slightly more judder than the old version on slow pans. But that is not macroblocking. I am not sure what it is. If it was macroblocking you'd be able to pause it and see the artifact.

either way it is so minor I can't believe anyone would prefer the old release which appears to have less accurate color, darker, less film grain, and less detail. The old versions has deficiencies for the duration of the movie, as opposed to a few potentially questionable scenes on the new one.

[luis figo]

Originally Posted by Ruined

This I did see. The new transfer appears to have slightly more judder than the old version on slow pans. But that is not macroblocking. I am not sure what it is. If it was macroblocking you'd be able to pause it and see the artifact.

either way it is so minor I can't believe anyone would prefer the old release which appears to have less accurate color, darker, less film grain, and less detail. The old versions has deficiencies for the duration of the movie, as opposed to a few potentially questionable scenes on the new one.

Why do you think the color is accurate in the 30th anniversary?
I think the detail looks slighty better but the color seems more accurate in the original Twilight release. The skin tones look too pale and unnatural in the new release.

[Ruined]

Originally Posted by luis figo

Why do you think the color is accurate in the 30th anniversary?
I think the detail looks slighty better but the color seems more accurate in the original Twilight release. The skin tones look too pale and unnatural in the new release.

I am using a hardware calibrated pro monitor so I am pretty certain my display has very accurate color.

with that being said, it the skin tones look to have a red push in many scenes with the old version. Combine that with the lower brightness level and it just has a boosted contrast look to me. the new version is less contrasty but it looks more realistic as a result imo. The new version looks color corrected to me, as it appears more color neutral.

[Bluebolt]

Originally Posted by Ruined

This I did see. The new transfer appears to have slightly more judder than the old version on slow pans.

There is definitely this odd instability on the new release, only visible in motion., like a pull-down problem of the sort that should not be there with 24p.

[slimdude]

This is exactly like The Pied Piper of Hamelin...If it wasn't for one person, NOBODY would've notice this alleged compression issue (whatever the hell that is). So why all of a sudden, it's such a big deal to everybody now! There is not a damn thing that anybody can do about it. As I've said before, if you don't want the blu-ray, resell it. Problem solved. For those who already have the first blu-ray release, this is what you get. If you're going to keep the blu-ray, stop complaining!

[Ruined]

Originally Posted by slimdude

This is exactly like The Pied Piper of Hamelin...If it wasn't for one person, NOBODY would've notice this alleged compression issue (whatever the hell that is). So why all of a sudden, it's such a big deal to everybody now! There is not a damn thing that anybody can do about it. As I've said before, if you don't want the blu-ray, resell it.

Nah, aside from this weird motion issue in a few scenes the new version completely blows away the old one in PQ in more than one way. It may not be perfect but overall a big improvement.