Night of the Living Dead (1990) - Out of Print

[Clark Kent]

Originally Posted by Cortiz

I'm just a casual fan of this film, and I've only seen it a couple of times throughout the years. So I don't know what the movie is suppose to look like colorwise. But "what if" all this time, the DVD color timing was incorrect and this new BD has the correct intended look?

There is a lot of inference if you examine the quotes by Savini, that control of the movie was partially taken out of his hands in the post-production phase of the movie by the studio and possibly Romero himself. I don't think anyone really imagined at the time of release that the colors should be anything but what the DVD looks like. What happened of course over the past twenty years since its release, is huge growth in the zombie fanbase and dozens of movies with a darker and grittier approach to the creatures.

It looks to me like someone with a modern appreciation of those attitudes towards zombie movies, decided to color correct the transfer. I'm not saying it was a graceful change, clearly it could have been handled more subtly by the digital colorist.

[AgentOrange]

Originally Posted by thephantomcat

There is no such thing as breaking even in the business world. It's a waste of time and productivity and would be considered "lost revenue."

So you've never heard of a break-even analysis or BEP?

[slimdude]

Originally Posted by Seymour

In the end, a refund is all we're gonna get, I think. We can all pretty much agree that Sony isn't going put any money into this, and TT is certainly not going to blow their entire profit margin to fix it, so that's pretty much it.

Sony is not going to invest anymore money into this release at all, because if they were, Sony wouldn't had sold the copyrights, and release the blu-ray themselves. Initially, Night of the Living Dead (1990) was a low budget movie, and the cost to fully restore it wouldn't be worth the money, time and effort.

[thephantomcat]

Originally Posted by AgentOrange

So you've never heard of a break-even analysis or BEP?

That's just a fancy way of saying "breaking even". Haven't you ever heard of lost revenue?

[Whirlygig]

Originally Posted by thephantomcat

There is no such thing as breaking even in the business world. It's a waste of time and productivity and would be considered "lost revenue."

Ok, we'll keep going. Assume that it is true they "break even" at 1500. What does break even mean? I'm assuming they are including their own wages in the costs of production. Its not like nobody would get paid for their time. And people have said this is a very small company, so it's not like some cigar chomping CEO will be pounding fists on the table if his gross operating profit for the year is not exactly the target percentage he set at the end of the previous fiscal year. Or is that the case?

But even if that is the case, there is a thing that all that "wasted time and productivity" would actually buy them here, making it no such thing as a waste at all -- excellent word of mouth and customer loyalty. They say you can't buy that, and yet, this situation allows them to do just that.

[Blu Titan]

Originally Posted by Clark Kent

There is a lot of inference if you examine the quotes by Savini, that control of the movie was partially taken out of his hands in the post-production phase of the movie by the studio and possibly Romero himself. I don't think anyone really imagined at the time of release that the colors should be anything but what the DVD looks like. What happened of course over the past twenty years since its release, is huge growth in the zombie fanbase and dozens of movies with a darker and grittier approach to the creatures.

It looks to me like someone with a modern appreciation of those attitudes towards zombie movies, decided to color correct the transfer. I'm not saying it was a graceful change, clearly it could have been handled more subtly by the digital colorist.

Great points Clark . The biggest problem imo is that the change was made (if this is intentional) to scenes clearly filmed in the middle of a sunny day and the result of the darkening/changes are poor (once again, imo). Obviously, TT was not involved with that decision/error. But other questions do remain.

[Seymour]

Originally Posted by slimdude

Agreed.

Fixed.

[thephantomcat]

Originally Posted by slimdude

Sony is not going to invest anymore money into this release at all, because if they were, Sony wouldn't had sold the copyrights, and release the blu-ray themselves. Initially, Night of the Living Dead (1990) was a low budget movie, and the cost to fully restore it wouldn't be worth the money, time and effort.

Yup. The whole reason Sony deals with TT as apposed to other companies is they don't have to deal with any bookkeeping, accounting messes. They just cash their check from TT and never look back. I'm sure that they're having to deal with this first thing Monday morning is going to have Sony very cranky.

[bboisvert]

Originally Posted by Cortiz

I'm just a casual fan of this film, and I've only seen it a couple of times throughout the years. So I don't know what the movie is suppose to look like colorwise. But "what if" all this time, the DVD color timing was incorrect and this new BD has the correct intended look?

Again:

Originally Posted by HyperRealist

BD


VUDU

That first screenshot isn't the "correct intended look." The frame in question occurs in realtime only 12 minutes after their arrival at the cemetary and there has been no indication (in visuals or dialog) that they were arriving at dusk. The sun is clearly shining through the kitchen window when she turns off the stove when entering the house. There are shadows on the porch from sunlight. This is all literally 2 minutes before that truck pulls up.

There are still birds chirping on the soundtrack when that truck pulls up. This scene has always been during the day -- in the theaters, VHS, DVD, everything.

No way is that top pic correct. No way.

[AgentOrange]

Originally Posted by popeflick

What action past a full, unquestioned refund is that? Your post is so full of suppositions I don't know where to start.

Ummm. A replacement with the actual correct color?

I very well might take advantage of the refund, but I would obviously prefer it if they actually stood behind their product. I'm not demanding a replacement "yesterday", but I certainly would hope that in time (say a week or two) - they will look into it and possibly get the ball rolling on a replacement. If that is out of the realm of possibility then I expect a full and honest explanation of what happened.

Also unless they are refunding me shipping (highly unlikely), then at minimum even if I took advantage of the refund I would be out the shipping costs both ways. So it's still a loss for me, as well as them.

[whitesheik]

Originally Posted by Joshinator1989

Highly unlikely. I own a copy of the Workprint and even with all the dirt and scratches.. it still shows more color than the Blu-ray.

You "own" a copy of the work print? Really. Or do you mean you own a copy of the work print on tape or DVD? Do you know what a work print is? Do you? Just in case you don't, a work print is an UNTIMED one-light print and has nothing to do with what the final film will look like.

[Blu Titan]

Originally Posted by AgentOrange

Ummm. A replacement with the actual correct color?

I very well might take advantage of the refund, but I would obviously prefer it if they actually stood behind their product. I'm not demanding a replacement "yesterday", but I certainly would hope that in time (say a week or two) - they will look into it and possibly get the ball rolling on a replacement. If that is out of the realm of possibility then I expect a full and honest explanation of what happened.

Also unless they are refunding me shipping (highly unlikely), then at minimum even if I took advantage of the refund I would be out the shipping costs both ways. So it's still a loss for me, as well as them.

I am hoping this is an error with the transfer (Sony's part). If the new look, is what Sony wants, then there's nothing TT can do about it. Twilight Time is offering a refund. Thus, anyone really upset about it can get their money back.

[thephantomcat]

Originally Posted by Whirlygig

But even if that is the case, there is a thing that all that "wasted time and productivity" would actually buy them here, making it no such thing as a waste at all -- excellent word of mouth and customer loyalty. They say you can't buy that, and yet, this situation allows them to do just that.

You're right. You can't buy customer loyalty because either a person is reasonable and patient, or fly off the handle before they've even gotten their product. People on this very page have stated they are returning the product without opening it even though they've been told they can watch it get a refund with an opened product and some have even stated they're going to try and cancel their order before it's even shipped.

This isn't an example of how to handle customer service. It's a textbook case of consumer hysteria.

[retablo]

Originally Posted by Blu Titan

Great points Clark . The biggest problem imo is that the change was made (if this is intentional) to scenes clearly filmed in the middle of a sunny day and the result of the darkening/changes are poor (once again, imo). Obviously, TT was not involved with that decision/error. But other questions do remain.

Day for Night has been around since the beginning of filmmaking. Not saying it's correct, or even correct in this case, but it's nothing new.

[popeflick]

Originally Posted by AgentOrange

Ummm. A replacement with the actual correct color?

I very well might take advantage of the refund, but I would obviously prefer it if they actually stood behind their product. I'm not demanding a replacement "yesterday", but I certainly would hope that in time (say a week or two) - they will look into it and possibly get the ball rolling on a replacement. If that is out of the realm of possibility then I expect a full and honest explanation of what happened.

Also unless they are refunding me shipping (highly unlikely), then at minimum even if I took advantage of the refund I would be out the shipping costs both ways. So it's still a loss for me, as well as them.

Having worked at one of the larger studios around town, I feel pretty confident in the following: Sony would prevent TT from going back and doing the tweak themselves most likely for legal reasons pertaining to their specific contract and possibly other, 3rd parties.

In short, I would be VERY SURPRISED if the onus isn't ONLY on Sony to make any type of fix. And with that in mind, they're going to look at the $90k check they've already gotten and not give two whips about anyone or anything said on these forums and others.

With that in mind, offering a full unquestioned refund is the only thing TT can most likely provide. Their hands are most likely tied in this regard, contractually (remember Sony won't allow for produced extras).

So they've already done all they can, the only follow up is their passing along what Sony tells them about the change, and this is important, if they even can or will. From my reading this transfer was done a few years ago (2005ish?). The person who produced it might no longer be there. If that's the case it becomes a paper trail to follow and their legal affairs department will more than likely say "we sold it for you at $90k so we wouldn't have to chase paper trails like this. Sorry." That's what they do.

So TT has more than likely delivered, like it or not.

[AgentOrange]

Originally Posted by thephantomcat

That's just a fancy way of saying "breaking even". Haven't you ever heard of lost revenue?

Do you even know the difference between revenue and profit? Obviously not.

If they had to do a replacement program, it wouldn't be "lost revenue". It would be an additional expense. There is a difference.

The revenues from those 3000 sales are already booked. If they were keeping their books properly (which a very small operation might not bother doing), right now they should be exploring recording an "expense reserve" to possibly account for future expenses related to a potential replacement program.

[bboisvert]

Originally Posted by retablo

Day for Night has been around since the beginning of filmmaking. Not saying it's correct, or even correct in this case, but it's nothing new.

Agreed, but it definitely isn't correct in this case.

In fact, the shot of the truck happens at the 13-minute mark. At 21 minutes, there's an actual dissolve from the sunny day to the sun setting, indicating it's *now* getting to be nightfall.

[Blu Titan]

Originally Posted by bboisvert

Agreed, but it definitely isn't correct in this case.

In fact, the shot of the truck happens at the 13-minute mark. At 21 minutes, there's an actual dissolve from the sunny day to the sun setting, indicating it's *now* getting to be nightfall.

I agree. Specially when the Sun is beaming off Ben's head and there are still strong shadows, even with the darkening effect.

[thephantomcat]

Originally Posted by AgentOrange

If that is out of the realm of possibility then I expect a full and honest explanation of what happened.

Also unless they are refunding me shipping (highly unlikely), then at minimum even if I took advantage of the refund I would be out the shipping costs both ways. So it's still a loss for me, as well as them.

You want to know that someone screwed up and that "this will never happen again." Translation: You want someone to be punished and publically shamed. Also so that it's a loss for them.

[Whirlygig]

Originally Posted by thephantomcat

You're right. You can't buy customer loyalty because either a person is reasonable and patient, or fly off the handle before they've even gotten their product. People on this very page have stated they are returning the product without opening it even though they've been told they can watch it get a refund with an opened product and some have even stated they're going to try and cancel their order before it's even shipped.

This isn't an example of how to handle customer service. It's a textbook case of consumer hysteria.

I didn't say you can't buy that, I said that "they" say you can't, and here is a chance to do so. Yes, some people have overreacted -- customers will do that. Let them return their discs in a knee-jerk response, who cares. They apparently didn't care much in the first place. If TT comes through with a replacement on this, everyone who does really care will change their tune to one of gratitude.

You'll have two groups of people going forward -- ones who really cared, and love TT even more as a result, and ones who never really cared to begin with and will say things like "oh boy, another TT release, can't wait to see how that turns out". The former will reply, "TT has proven that they will stop at nothing to ensure the highest quality product possible". All rational people will realize the latter group are just being children. Life will move on. If they do nothing, those children will have more of an effect on their reputation than otherwise -- even if a full refund is offered, they won't be able to completely shake the hesitance with which people will approach them going forward.