Scanners (1981)

[HotRats]

Originally Posted by rickah88

You can please some of the people, all of the time.
You can please all of the people, some of the time.
Never both!

The quote attributed to Lincoln is:

"You can fool all of the people some of the time, and some of the people all of the time, but you cannot fool all of the people all of the time"

I make no comment as to appropriateness

[ijustblumyself]

Strawman argument seems to be in full effect here. Why can't some people be dissatisfied with the colour timing of a new release?

Personally I'm not entirely sure how I feel about Criterion's PQ as of right now, but I don't think condescension and vague put-downs are the best way to discuss a problem.

[tenia]

Originally Posted by Roy Batty

As a side note, I really hate how quickly these debates turn into a pissing contest, instead of what they should be: a joint effort in trying to figure out the truth.

Sadly, many people seem more interested in "winning".

Fortunately, when you catch back the past 5 pages in one shot, you can still get a lot of info in between all the "I'm right you're wrong" posts.
But true, one needs to read between the lines.

[Pecker]

Originally Posted by ijustblumyself

Strawman argument seems to be in full effect here. Why can't some people be dissatisfied with the colour timing of a new release?

Personally I'm not entirely sure how I feel about Criterion's PQ as of right now, but I don't think condescension and vague put-downs are the best way to discuss a problem.

I'm not sure how it's a strawman argument, but by-the-by.

For me, I'd always like every Blu-ray Disc to look exactly as the director intended.

However, whilst that's a static position in itself, the real-world situation is that not every disc will look like that. In those instances some people appear to have a simple on/off switch, and if it doesn't (in their view) look like the director intended, they won't buy it.

I'm a little different - I'll weigh up how it looks (and how far 'off' it looks) vs the standard of the DVD, or previous Blu-ray Disc release, taking into account factors like cost and how much I like the film.

In this instance - I already have a copy of Scanners on UK Blu-ray Disc which looks fine, was cheap, and which doesn't look a million miles away from what DC has agreed to for Criterion. The Criterion is expensive, and it's not in my Top 100, so I'll stick with what I've got. If it was in my Top 10, or if the UK disc looked like an upscale, or if the Criterion were cheap, or looked significantly different, I'd maybe shell out the extra.

People, particularly on t'internet, appear to prefer black and white, as opposed to the shades of grey which most of us live with. Each disc is either a work of art which every self-respecting film fan must own, or a 'POS'. "It's teal!", "It's been DNRd to death!", "The image is swamped with EE which makes people look nuclear!".

There's never anything in-between one extreme and the other.

Steve W

[The Film Expert]

Originally Posted by ijustblumyself

Strawman argument seems to be in full effect here. Why can't some people be dissatisfied with the colour timing of a new release?

Personally I'm not entirely sure how I feel about Criterion's PQ as of right now, but I don't think condescension and vague put-downs are the best way to discuss a problem.

Armchair Experts shouldn't be shooting their mouths off and criticizing something they know nothing about. They don't know what Scanners is supposed to look like, they can't make up any arguments against the Blu-ray unless they have a film print or saw it theatrically and somehow remember exactly how it looked.

The director of the film has supervised this transfer and signed it off with his approval, I'm sure he will know more about his own film than people who think that they are qualified to judge what a film should look like because they spend most of their time browsing internet boards and using terminology used by experts which they know nothing about.

If they don't like how the film should look then they should buy the Second Sight disc and just be quiet.

-The Film Expert

[saprano]

Originally Posted by ijustblumyself

Strawman argument seems to be in full effect here. Why can't some people be dissatisfied with the colour timing of a new release?

Personally I'm not entirely sure how I feel about Criterion's PQ as of right now, but I don't think condescension and vague put-downs are the best way to discuss a problem.

It happens all the time with any bluray where someone doesn't like the PQ. Then we're called complainers and people who nothing about PQ and shouldn't be commenting on it. This was also said in the BTTF thread. And the PQ on that movie is complete $hit. Maby it's the people who think the PQ was good knows nothing.

But yeah, Scanners has pretty average PQ. Nobody is going to change my thoughts on that or tell me i'm not in a position to know that.

[ijustblumyself]

Originally Posted by Pecker

I'm not sure how it's a strawman argument, but by-the-by.

For me, I'd always like every Blu-ray Disc to look exactly as the director intended.

However, whilst that's a static position in itself, the real-world situation is that not every disc will look like that. In those instances some people appear to have a simple on/off switch, and if it doesn't (in their view) look like the director intended, they won't buy it.

I'm a little different - I'll weigh up how it looks (and how far 'off' it looks) vs the standard of the DVD, or previous Blu-ray Disc release, taking into account factors like cost and how much I like the film.

In this instance - I already have a copy of Scanners on UK Blu-ray Disc which looks fine, was cheap, and which doesn't look a million miles away from what DC has agreed to for Criterion. The Criterion is expensive, and it's not in my Top 100, so I'll stick with what I've got. If it was in my Top 10, or if the UK disc looked like an upscale, or if the Criterion were cheap, or looked significantly different, I'd maybe shell out the extra.

People, particularly on t'internet, appear to prefer black and white, as opposed to the shades of grey which most of us live with. Each disc is either a work of art which every self-respecting film fan must own, or a 'POS'. "It's teal!", "It's been DNRd to death!", "The image is swamped with EE which makes people look nuclear!".

There's never anything in-between one extreme and the other.

Steve W

I'm pretty much in the same boat as you. I own many blu-rays which I know don't have outstanding PQ, but I'm still glad that they're in my collection.

As for the film, I haven't seen it in a long time, but I'm still not decided on which edition to buy. Being in Australia, the local BD seems to be a fairly reasonable option; it's cheap, same as the UK, and not majorly different to CC's in terms of quality.
But in saying that, a director approved transfer does hold some weight. I just find the choice of colour timing odd. A movie like Se7en was made with a definite colour palette in mind, but with a film like Scanners I really don't know if that is the case (I know I'm going to be accused of being a troll, but I'm simply stating an opinion). In saying that I think the contrast, compression and brightness is superior on Criterion's BD.

Might even buy the German BD, as it seems to find a nice middle ground.

[lolwut]

Originally Posted by mar3o

I cannot fathom how anybody can compare these shots side-by-side to the blu-ray.com Criterion shots and not think somthing is wrong with the Criterion release. Seriously. These Criterion shots look seriously bad.

[Show spoiler]

Look at the suspended lights in the Criterion release - they're dim and dull.


This shot is just ridiculous on the Criterion. It's completely green and dull.


This shot has far more visible detail in the German release compered to the Criterion.

This looks like a cloudy dark day on the Criterion.

The shot of the sunrise on the Criterion looks like it was shot in current-day China with all the smog.

Wow, the Criterion release really does look bad. Way too underexposed and less detailed.

[balthazar_bee]

Some of the earlier transfers look a bit blown-out at times (the RSO icon in the fire picture isn't obscured in the CC version, and the overhead fluorescent lights), and in any case we should be careful assessing detail levels, since the blu-ray.com caps aren't completely true representations of the blu-ray's full HD image.

As a current Region A man exclusively, I'll be buying it, but might be less inclined if I already owned another.

[HD Goofnut]

Originally Posted by brasil

You can get the German Supkultur Scanners blu ray for about $28 shipped from Amazon de.

Subkultur's Scanners IMO is better than Second Sights because it doesn't have the DNR/Autoclean/compression/whatever flaws that Second Sight has, is brighter than Criterion's, but not a bright as the overly bright Second Sight.

Think I'll pick this up and maybe get Criterion's at some point, too.

https://www.blu-ray.com/movies/Scanners-Blu-ray/60128/

Yep, it certainly is a gorgeous transfer.

If anyone wants more caps of this DE disc I can post them tonight. Just let me know.

[MifuneFan]

The term "Director approved" has unfortunately lost a lot of credibility. It's certainly not a marker of guaranteed accuracy, which is why it's silly to make a blanket statement about it being accurate just because the director supervised it. Go back to The French Connection, The Exorcist, Thief, and many others for references as to why that's the case. The only thing we know is it's what the director wants the movie to look like now. In not so many words, that would be considered revisionism.

Sometimes, it's not even what the director wants I bet. Supervised often means just dictating some instructions over the phone, as was the case with Night of the Living Dead (1990). The results there were nothing like what cinematographer Frank Prinzi told them over the phone, and he was very displeased with it, yet TT touted it as being supervised by him.

The good news here is that there are other transfers available overseas if you don't care for the CC disc. I'd also say that the CC edition doesn't even look that bad to me personally. I just think some outside shots look like they were filmed in some smog-filled part of China when compared to the same shots from other discs.

[KowalskiVideo]

Originally Posted by HD Goofnut

Yep, it certainly is a gorgeous transfer.
If anyone wants more caps of this DE disc I can post them tonight. Just let me know.

Yes it is, here are some more caps:

[balthazar_bee]

Just for giggles, if anyone's got Universal's Halloween 2 release, it'd be interesting to compare the clips of Scanners from Terror in the Aisles to these releases.

[MifuneFan]

Originally Posted by KowalskiVideo

Yes it is, here are some more caps:

Those look really great

[Oscar Rothman]

Originally Posted by brasil

You can get the German Supkultur Scanners blu ray for about $28 shipped from Amazon de. That's less than Criterion's.

Subkultur's Scanners IMO is better than Second Sights because it doesn't have the DNR/Autoclean/compression/whatever flaws that Second Sight has, is brighter than Criterion's, but not as bright as the overly bright Second Sight.

Think I'll pick this up and maybe get Criterion's at some point, too.

https://www.blu-ray.com/movies/Scanners-Blu-ray/60128/

That's cool, but it's not director approved edition.

[HansEpp]

So here it is folks:

Somebody asked Subkultur at their forums (http://dirtypictures.phpbb8.de/subku...-t4699-90.html) about their release of Scanners and why it looks so radically different from the criterion release.

What they basically said was: They licensed a protection master* from MGM and also had a german release-print (which they did not use, except for reference). Since both were very similar they decided to go with MGM master. I guess no other company worldwide has used this specific master before or after. They also said, that Mr. Cronenberg did not want to give an interview for the film (he said something like, everything he wanted to say about this movie he did a long ago). So they can't tell if what they got is "true" to the directors intentions. But they decided to go with the MGM master since it was very close to their release print. They also provided screenshots of the 35mm print they had!

35mm Print (untempered, raw scan):


Subkultur Blu-ray:


*PROTECTION MASTER: General term for a master copy made as a long term protection or insurance against loss, damage or fading of the original.

[nagysaudio]

Criterion looks the best. DE has a blown out contrast and maybe some sharpening.

[saprano]

Originally Posted by HansEpp

So here it is folks:

Somebody asked Subkultur at their forums (http://dirtypictures.phpbb8.de/subku...-t4699-90.html) about their release of Scanners and why it looks so radically different from the criterion release.

What they basically said was: They licensed a protection master* from MGM and also had a german release-print (which they did not use, except for reference). Since both were very similar they decided to go with MGM master. I guess no other company worldwide has used this specific master before or after. They also said, that Mr. Cronenberg did not want to give an interview for the film (he said something like, everything he wanted to say about this movie he did a long ago). So they can't tell if what they got is "true" to the directors intentions. But they decided to go with the MGM master since it was very close to their release print. They also provided screenshots of the 35mm print they had!

35mm Print (untempered, raw scan):


Subkultur Blu-ray:


*PROTECTION MASTER: General term for a master copy made as a long term protection or insurance against loss, damage or fading of the original.

The plot thickens.

Thanks for this.

[The Film Expert]

I'm not an expert when it comes to this stuff but it looks as if both the German and Second Sight Blu-rays also have edge enhancement.

http://caps-a-holic.com/hd_vergleich...ess=#vergleich

The Criterion Collection Blu-ray is the one to get in my opinion.

[HansEpp]

Originally Posted by The Film Expert

I'm not an expert when it comes to this stuff but it looks as if both the German and Second Sight Blu-rays also have edge enhancement.

http://caps-a-holic.com/hd_vergleich...ess=#vergleich

The Criterion Collection Blu-ray is the one to get in my opinion.

Not a fair comparsion. You are referring to a processed shot (optical copied transition of two shots). These kind of shots always lose details and often create these halos, which armchair experts might confuse with edge enhancement. Maybe Criterion recreated the transition digitally, who knows? Maybe you Mr. Film Expert?

BTW: I already wrote that the Criterion is a bit more detailed, but the problem(s) I am talking about are the colors and the contrast.