Halloween 4K UHD (1978)

[dcx4610]

Originally Posted by HeavyHitter

Anyway, back to the actually transfer of this release. I watched it projected last night and it looked like watching an actual new film print (this is THE hope/goal of the format for me at the end of the day with catalog titles). Excellent presentation. Good compression and grain intact as the disc looked very analog. Brightness, highlights, color, etc. nicely done.

Same. That's always my hopeful expectation with older films. I simply want them to look as close to the original film print as possible.

Watching Halloween, it feels like I'm watching a fresh, crisp film print from 1978 in 2018.

Something like Blade Runner defies all expectations and looks like a brand new movie but Halloween looks how it should. Unless you are a mono purist, I think it's a near-perfect release.

[questrider]

She clearly states, "It was the bogeyman." She says "It" in a more breathy voice while stifling tears but if you read her lips it's quite apparent what the line is.

The line is at 1:33:

Halloween (1978) The Death of Michael Myers - YouTube

[dcx4610]

Originally Posted by questrider

She clearly states, "It was the bogeyman." She says "It" in a more breathy voice while stifling tears but if you read her lips it's quite apparent what the line is.

The line is at 1:33:

Halloween (1978) The Death of Michael Myers - YouTube

There is no "It" at the beginning. It sounds like "What's the boogeyman?" but she's saying "Was it the boogeyman?"

She's asking a question to Loomis. His response wouldn't make sense otherwise. Close captioning on the DVD, Blu-ray and 4K all confirm "Was it".

[monstermidget]

As as others have said, she definitely says "it was the bogeyman".

[bradnoyes]

Yeah, even though my ears always hear "What's the boogeyman?", it's clear the line is (or is supposed to be) "it was the boogeyman." Since the "it" is basically unspoken my brain translates "was the boogeyman" (which makes no sense) to "what's the boogeyman", which barely makes any more sense since she's not asking a question and it doesn't jibe with Loomis' response. It's just what I hear.

She's definitely not saying "Was it the boogeyman?" The emphasis on was makes it clear she's not asking a question. She's just confirming in her own mind what Tommy has been telling her all night: it was the boogeyman.

Anyway, it's definitely a weird ass scene because of how she delivers the line and my interpretation is probably completely wrong.

[monstermidget]

Not to be that guy, but I think her delivery of the line is great, with the context of what just happened. Always loved it, and then Donalds cool, almost offhand response, perfectly encapsulating his whole "I've always known he was evil" mentality. A great final exchange.

[Geoff D]

Yeah, the delivery is perfect if you understand what it is she's saying, that she's become a believer: "it was the boogeyman". Loomis' reply doesn't work nearly as well if she's aksing a question IMO, as you say the almost offhand nature of it is almost like "welcome to the club, honey".

[BNex99]

Originally Posted by dcx4610

Same. That's always my hopeful expectation with older films. I simply want them to look as close to the original film print as possible.

Watching Halloween, it feels like I'm watching a fresh, crisp film print from 1978 in 2018.

Something like Blade Runner defies all expectations and looks like a brand new movie but Halloween looks how it should. Unless you are a mono purist, I think it's a near-perfect release.

That's the problem. It looks like a pristine theatrical print from 1978 with an awkward attempt at a late 90s sound mix.

Going along with what others have said, having the correct original mono soundtrack for the film is not about "remembering how it sounded 40 years ago." It's about seeing and hearing the film as closely as possible to the way the filmmakers originally presented it, whether it's your first time or 20th time.

I'll be the first to admit that we sometimes go overboard here talking about "original mixes." Sometimes an original LCRS Dolby Stereo track is reformatted to 5.1 with a little EQ-ing and filtering, and it sounds fine. But with Halloween, the remix is legitimately revisionist in spots, so an option for the way it originally sounded should be a given on a format that can hold multiple audio tracks.

Compounding the issue here is that there is a mono track, it's not the original track, this already happened on at least one previous release, AND it was corrected on a subsequent one, and NOW the error has been repeated.

It's not the end of the world; it's just a movie. But it is a careless mistake and a little frustrating.

Hope that makes some sense

[Martoto]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

Yeah, the delivery is perfect if you understand what it is she's saying, that she's become a believer: "it was the boogeyman". Loomis' reply doesn't work nearly as well if she's aksing a question IMO, as you say the almost offhand nature of it is almost like "welcome to the club, honey".

Yeah. He's finally in the company of someone who understands. She's telling him what he's been trying convince people of all day.

And Tommy too. His warning is what she's referring to. "[Tommy was right].It was the boogeyman."

[monstermidget]

Exactly. As much as I like Christopher lee I don't think he had the chops do play the role with the kind of nuance Donald did. Peter Cushing may have, but it was just as well I think that they both turned the role down.

Donald was a really special actor who definitely doesn't get the credit he deserves ( maybe snobbishness about the Halloween franchise has played a part in that), especially with regards to his range. He could play anything. His performance in The caretaker was brilliant but the performance in Wake in Fright is incredible.

[RoboDan]

I really can't come to grips on how so many movie lovers here in this very forum have such a hard time understanding why it is important for movies (especially those being re-released on a prestige format like 4K UHD) to contain the 'original' audio track as an option. Even more so, some members who get so upset about it, they state their ridiculous case on why it shouldn't be included, and that us 'purists' should just move on.

Why are so called 'film fans' so quick to dismiss what importance an original sound mix is for a film, and whether it should or shouldn't be included in a package? Especially when there wasn't any space limitations to include said track?

I wonder what the response would be to these same people when fans ask for the 'original theatrical releases' of the Original Star Wars Trilogy. I guess they'd say "Who cares dude, We got the NEW & IMPROVED versions. It's mixed better, so to hell with those old versions!"

[brian9229]

Um, yeah, I'm just gonna back out of here...

[crissrudd4554]

I’ve always heard the line as ‘What’s the boogeyman?’ but after reading this discussion it does make more sense for it to be ‘It was the boogeyman’. When you think about ‘What’s the boogeyman?’ just comes off as a totally random question for someone to ask someone who just ran into a strangers house and shot someone. Sure we as the audience might understand her asking that but in the context of the scene it just makes very little sense. Watching the scene again ‘what’s’ to my ears now definitely sounds like ‘was’. The ‘It’ is just poorly delivered. I guess in the end it was just a bad take.

Originally Posted by BNex99

That's the problem. It looks like a pristine theatrical print from 1978 with an awkward attempt at a late 90s sound mix.

This will be more apparent if Universal ever does a Jaws UHD though to be fair the Jaws BD has the correct original mono so hopefully the correct mono will too be carried over to the UHD should they do it.

[Geoff D]

The "it" definitely gets lost but hey, give the girl a break, she just avoided getting butchered by Austin Powers.

[RoboDan]

[Blu Balls]

Call me crazy, but I like the 35th Anniversary blu ray better than the 4K. Colors have more pop, there's great detail, and it doesn't suffer from the darkness effect brought on by HDR.

[HeavyHitter]

Originally Posted by Blu Balls

Call me crazy, but I like the 35th Anniversary blu ray better than the 4K. Colors have more pop, there's great detail, and it doesn't suffer from the darkness effect brought on by HDR.

What darkness effect are you referring to?

[JohnCarpenterFan]

I don't get the desaturated and "black and white" complaints about the daytime scenes at all. I think some people's settings or TV are out of whack.

[HAL9K]

Originally Posted by Blu Balls

Call me crazy, but I like the 35th Anniversary blu ray better than the 4K. Colors have more pop, there's great detail, and it doesn't suffer from the darkness effect brought on by HDR.

Have you seen the 4K vs 35th Blu comparison video? The 4K has more pop, detail, and a brighter image in EVERY shot. Even the caps-a-holic screens confirm this.

[Blu Balls]

Originally Posted by HeavyHitter

What darkness effect are you referring to?

HDR seems to create a shadowy effect that isn't apparent on blu ray. Light sources look brighter while everything else is a darker shade to amplify this effect. The opening scene in A Quiet Place is a great example of this. When the family is scavenging in the store, compare the blu ray to the 4K. That's how Halloween looks when the kids are teasing Tommy outside of the school. It's like watching through a filter that's designed to boost contrast, but stifles clarity in the process, due to darkening the picture. Maybe it looks less noticeable on a super bright LED, but on an OLED it is quite recognizable.