Hellraiser BD Reviews

[dsman71]

Originally Posted by kidglov3s

I am so down, especially after recently watching the Image Blu-ray of Hellbound after all these years of avoiding it.

lol

LOL Richard Conte as Pinhead !!!

Obviously these are Thieves Highway credits

[NoirFan]

Originally Posted by dsman71

LOL Richard Conte as Pinhead !!!

Now that's a movie I'd see! A dapper Pinhead, no doubt.

[NoirFan]

Arrow told me that the box is limited to 5,000 copies.

[cakefactory]

Originally Posted by NoirFan

Arrow told me that the box is limited to 5,000 copies.

Oh, good, so it probably won't go anywhere for quite a while. I'll hope it goes down in price a bit. I like the first movie, I'd like to read that booklet, and the third is a guilty pleasure, but it's not worth 80 dollars to me, that's for sure.

[CptHowdy87]

I just recently watched Hellraiser and Hellbound and the first Hellraiser I'd give a 4/5 for picture quality but Hellbound I'd give a 2/5 for picture quality. Hellbound is by FAR the grainiest blu-ray I've ever watched and the picture, even in the most well-lit scenes is really not sharp at all. Not much better than an up-converted DVD.

Most people seem to hate the DNR done to Predator: UH Edition but I quite liked it for the most part. Predator used to look too dark, dull and full of grain but now it looks so amazingly clear and sharp. If the DNR was dialed down a few notches then I'd give it a 5/5. I'd love to see Hellbound, and quite a few other movies like Texas Chainsaw Massacre 2, given similar treatment. I know most film purists will disagree with me but it's just my personal preference. If Halloween, The Terminator and Robocop can look as good as they do now then just about any movie can.

[StingingVelvet]

Where is the thumbs down button...

[Rottweiler30]

When you find out let me know.

[redrunner97]

Originally Posted by CptHowdy87

Most people seem to hate the DNR done to Predator: UH Edition but I quite liked it for the most part. Predator used to look too dark, dull and full of grain but now it looks so amazingly clear and sharp. If the DNR was dialed down a few notches then I'd give it a 5/5. I'd love to see Hellbound, and quite a few other movies like Texas Chainsaw Massacre 2, given similar treatment. I know most film purists will disagree with me but it's just my personal preference. If Halloween, The Terminator and Robocop can look as good as they do now then just about any movie can.

[mzupeman]

You’re entitled to your opinion and I’m not going to try and change your mind, but I’ll sum up very quickly why people hate what was done to the Predator UHE, and would firmly detest such treatment if made to any other of their beloved films:

DNR removes detail. Humans look like wax figures as a result, and in motion, there’s even a kind of ghosting effect because of the ‘smearing’ DNR introduces when things are in motion. Also, Predator was never a bright and vibrant film. Brightening the contrast and boosting the color completely changes the tone of the film.

That’s it. That’s all there is to it. When it comes to excessive digital ‘processing’ of any film, of which many have undergone, Predator: UHE is probably the most extreme example there is… and most absolutely loathe it.

Leave the likes of Hellraiser and Texas Chainsaw Massacre alone.

[Rockercub]

Well, I definitely don't want every movie to get the Predator treatment. An older film should look just like that, an older film. But there is something about what CptHowdy87 is saying that strikes a chord with me. I would rather have an image with some DNR applied than an image that's overly grainy. A slight loss of detail, I don't notice so much, but all that heavy grain? And, again, I'm not talking about trying to make it look modern, just a better version of what it is. The whole Dressed to Kill debate comes to mind, where there's visible grain blanketing some scenes in the new Criterion disc. I much prefer the earlier discs where that isn't the case. Those discs still look like film to me, but the grain seems to have been handled better, at least in my non-professional opinion.

As to Hellbound, I just took a look at it and noticed what initially appeared to be some similar issues (although I'd probably give it a higher rating of 3/5), but on closer inspection of some of the caps, I'm wondering if this isn't an issue of compression artifacts. Some of the "grain" looks a bit blocky to me, but I'm only just starting to get the gist of making such distinctions. Anyways, let's hope that the new Arrow release looks better (yes, StingingVelvet, I decided to go ahead and pre-order it ).

[StingingVelvet]

I think subtle DNR can be used well here and there. The 60's Bond movies, frozen grain aside, look pretty damn good despite the DNR for example. I was mostly "looking for a thumbs down" because he used Predator as a good example, which is probably actually the wooooooorst example.

I basically think you should use all the tools in your arsenal to make a quality looking image, but it should never LOOK processed. Predator looks processed as hell. Bond looks slightly processed, but not too bad. Arrow's stuff looks perfect lately, so we shall see how their Hellbound turns out.

[mzupeman]

You make a good point. It's been said somewhere before that even some of what people considered to be film-like presentations on blu still have a minor amount of DNR used. That may not be so true nowadays, but who knows.

[Ray Jackson]

I bought the part 1 and 2 double pack at Best Buy for $10 yesterday.

Watched the first one last night.

The transfer is unlike anything I've ever seen on blu-ray before. The colors and detail are actually okay imo...I was expecting worse. But my god, the white specks...the white dots or whatever you call them. The majority of the transfer is infested with white dots. I've never seen anything like it on a modern-day color transfer before.

What is that about?

...were they using a damaged negative or something?

I don't remember white dots on the dvd I used to own.

How can this be?

[TripleHBK]

Originally Posted by Ray Jackson

I bought the part 1 and 2 double pack at Best Buy for $10 yesterday.

Watched the first one last night.

The transfer is unlike anything I've ever seen on blu-ray before. The colors and detail are actually okay imo...I was expecting worse. But my god, the white specks...the white dots or whatever you call them. The majority of the transfer is infested with white dots. I've never seen anything like it on a modern-day color transfer before.

What is that about?

...were they using a damaged negative or something?

I don't remember white dots on the dvd I used to own.

How can this be?

Image Entertainment's philosophy on Catalog titles is to get the cheapest print possible and slap it on a disc with no cleaning/remastering. The Anchor Bay disc (which can be found for around $8 used) uses a MUCH better print and looks superior in every way. It also comes with a bunch of extras. If you aren't getting Arrow's box set release, go buy the Anchor Bay Release.

[Ray Jackson]

Originally Posted by TripleHBK

Image Entertainment's philosophy on Catalog titles is to get the cheapest print possible and slap it on a disc with no cleaning/remastering. The Anchor Bay disc (which can be found for around $8 used) uses a MUCH better print and looks superior in every way. It also comes with a bunch of extras. If you aren't getting Arrow's box set release, go buy the Anchor Bay Release.

I can accept a soft transfer that doesn't look great from a detail standpoint.

But there's absolutely no excuse for a relatively modern film transfer to look like a damaged black and white print from the 1930s.

I went through this thread and I'm surprised that more people weren't screaming bloody murder about the white specks on part one.

...it's freaking ridiculous.

[TripleHBK]

Originally Posted by Ray Jackson

I can accept a soft transfer that doesn't look great from a detail standpoint.

But there's absolutely no excuse for a relatively modern film transfer to look like a damaged black and white print from the 1930s.

I went through this thread and I'm surprised that more people weren't screaming bloody murder about the white specks on part one.

...it's freaking ridiculous.

It's been a while since I watched it, but I don't believe the Anchor Bay disc has those problems. The reason no one has mentioned them is because there has always been someone like myself saying "Go buy the Anchor Bay Edition" very few people bothered to pick up Image's release of part one since it was so widely panned from the get go. So again... if you like the first film, go buy the Anchor Bay disc, it's superior in every way.

[Ray Jackson]

Originally Posted by TripleHBK

It's been a while since I watched it, but I don't believe the Anchor Bay disc has those problems. The reason no one has mentioned them is because there has always been someone like myself saying "Go buy the Anchor Bay Edition" very few people bothered to pick up Image's release of part one since it was so widely panned from the get go. So again... if you like the first film, go buy the Anchor Bay disc, it's superior in every way.

I'll probably do that at some point.

But this is a double pack, so I don't want to get rid of it since it has Hellbound as well.

...I've always hated the idea of being stuck with more than one copy of something.

The sad thing is that the transfer actually looks pretty good, aside from the white spots.

[Dylan34]

Originally Posted by Ray Jackson

I'll probably do that at some point.

But this is a double pack, so I don't want to get rid of it since it has Hellbound as well.

...I've always hated the idea of being stuck with more than one copy of something.

The sad thing is that the transfer actually looks pretty good, aside from the white spots.

The AB disc is fantastic. I recommend getting it if it's still available. I heard it was out of print ever since the Image disc was released but I'm sure it can be found somewhere.

[Dylan34]

Originally Posted by StingingVelvet

I think subtle DNR can be used well here and there. The 60's Bond movies, frozen grain aside, look pretty damn good despite the DNR for example. I was mostly "looking for a thumbs down" because he used Predator as a good example, which is probably actually the wooooooorst example.

I basically think you should use all the tools in your arsenal to make a quality looking image, but it should never LOOK processed. Predator looks processed as hell. Bond looks slightly processed, but not too bad. Arrow's stuff looks perfect lately, so we shall see how their Hellbound turns out.

The bond films look decent but the frozen grain is bothersome to me anyway. The sad fact is that they were already done in 4K and won't be getting a redo in the near future if ever. They may be the very best they'll ever be now. If they were done today, they wouldn't have that digital processed look IMO. Mastering as come a long way in the last 7 years.

[PuppetMasterBlu]

Originally Posted by Ray Jackson

I'll probably do that at some point.

But this is a double pack, so I don't want to get rid of it since it has Hellbound as well.

...I've always hated the idea of being stuck with more than one copy of something.

The sad thing is that the transfer actually looks pretty good, aside from the white spots.

If you went region free both of those blu-rays would become obsolete. That Arrow set from the UK shall be mine!