Scanners (1981)

[I KEEL YOU]

Originally Posted by Oblivion138

He didn't say he likes it because the director likes it. Only that, in this case, he agrees with the director that it looks good. To NOT share a different director's sentiment regarding a completely different release is not hypocrisy...it's just a matter of taste.

Here is what he said a couple of pages back:

I am going with this version purely on the fact that the Director was involved with the transfer and could it be that this was the intended original look, but was never released this way.

He even goes so far as to directly say that the current "director approved" factor outweighs the "original look" factor. I wonder how you're going to defend him this time, but I'm sure you'll find a way since you're agenda buddies and all.

[mdonovan]

Originally Posted by lolwut

The Hulu version looks much better than the Criterion (brightness/color-wise). Obviously the Blu-ray has more detail and better compression, but man that is unnaturally dim. I don't care about clipped highlights if it looks like that - not even close to reality, where fire and lights are actually bright.

You need to watch the actual disc before commenting ... It looks amazing.

[DaveyJoe]

Originally Posted by Bad Sandwich

This. Many/most who assert the reductive "whatever the director likes" maxim seem to mean it with the implicit conditional "...so long as the changes don't violate my arbitrary conception of acceptable". Thus you wind up with Star Wars tinkering - yuck/Who turned out the lights in Scanners - A-Ok!, which is fine, but just acknowledge it isn't as cut and dry as "Director likey" and personal preference does usually enter the equation.

And I wish some people would admit that they prefer the tinkered look of the DVD generation with boosted contrast, saturation, and a magenta push, whether or not that was the original vision.

Originally Posted by Mansinthe

watched the movie on a calibrated projector (108 inch screen) and was really happy with the release. it does look pretty good. but it does look different from other cronenberg criterion releases.. but i actually liked the look of it!

and the whole "green" issue isnt half as bad as people make it sound after judging some screenshots on their mostly non calibrated TN panels....


by the way if you got a halfway decent TV setup its easy to "correct" the colors the way you like it.

There's no green push in the Criterion.

[Mr Kite]

Originally Posted by I KEEL YOU

Here is what he said a couple of pages back:



He even goes so far as to directly say that the current "director approved" factor outweighs the "original look" factor. I wonder how you're going to defend him this time, but I'm sure you'll find a way since you're agenda buddies and all.

Yes and?????

I have gone with the director on this one as I think it looks great. Also this "He even goes so far as to directly say that the current "director approved" factor outweighs the "original look" factor" same thing really............but as no one can remember the original look...........................

[Bad Sandwich]

Originally Posted by DaveyJoe

And I wish some people would admit that they prefer the tinkered look of the DVD generation with boosted contrast, saturation, and a magenta push, whether or not that was the original vision.

That doesn't really have anything to do with what I said, but sure, those people should totally admit that! This very instant!!

[DaveyJoe]

Originally Posted by Bad Sandwich

That doesn't really have anything to do with what I said, but sure, those people should totally admit that! This very instant!!

Sure it does, we're talking about personal preference and the artist's intent on home video. Some people are quick to assume the brighter, more colorful version is correct, but that's not always the case. Look at the Godzilla thread.

[HD Goofnut]

Originally Posted by DaveyJoe

Sure it does, we're talking about personal preference and the artist's intent on home video. Some people are quick to assume the brighter, more colorful version is correct, but that's not always the case. Look at the Godzilla thread.

Whether Cronenberg approved the Criterion version or not it has some obvious filtering going on top of the muted contrast and green tint. This was made clear in my comparisons.

[DaveyJoe]

Originally Posted by HD Goofnut

Whether Cronenberg approved the Criterion version or not it has some obvious filtering going on top of the muted contrast and green tint. This was made clear in my comparisons.

It's obvious there was some tinkering, Cronenberg didn't use any reference print for color. I proved that there was no green tint, outside of the lab shot, with the vectorscope images, several others agreed with me. There was also tinkering on the Subkultur disk in regards to brightness and contrast, and possibly draining the green out of the lab scene.

[Mansinthe]

i wonder how many people that complain did actually watch the criterion disc on a calibrated setup...

[DaveyJoe]

Originally Posted by Mansinthe

i wonder how many people that complain did actually watch the criterion disc on a calibrated setup...

Why do that when you can freak out viewing screen shots on an uncalibrated PC monitor?

[slimdude]

For those who've paid $29.00 for Scanners on release day, wish you could have waited! Now it's on sale at Amazon for $19.99. I am going to order it.

[HD Goofnut]

Originally Posted by slimdude

For those who've paid $29.00 for Scanners on release day, wish you could have waited! Now it's on sale at Amazon for $19.99. I am going to order it.

I paid $19.99 on release day from Barnes & Nobles.

[jdw89]

Thinking hard about getting this ...

[captainjoe]

Originally Posted by jdw89

Thinking hard about getting this ...

You should

[Mr Kite]

Originally Posted by jdw89

Thinking hard about getting this ...

Go for it, it's a fantastic release.

[Goremeister100]

Originally Posted by Mansinthe

i wonder how many people that complain did actually watch the criterion disc on a calibrated setup...

Keep fooling yourself that it actually makes a difference and that you didn't waste 200 bucks getting it calibrated. A calibrated tv isn't going to change the fact that this release has been tinkered with to death and looks nothing like it did when it was released.

[MifuneFan]

Originally Posted by Goremeister100

Keep fooling yourself that it actually makes a difference and that you didn't waste 200 bucks getting it calibrated. A calibrated tv isn't going to change the fact that this release has been tinkered with to death and looks nothing like it did when it was released.

Yes, we all know people are paying $200 to calibrate their TV just to watch Scanners

[Mr Kite]

Originally Posted by Goremeister100

Keep fooling yourself that it actually makes a difference and that you didn't waste 200 bucks getting it calibrated. A calibrated tv isn't going to change the fact that this release has been tinkered with to death and looks nothing like it did when it was released.

I believe the director had a hand in that.

How do you know it wouldn't make a difference as it certainly does.

[jetthead]

Originally Posted by slimdude

For those who've paid $29.00 for Scanners on release day, wish you could have waited! Now it's on sale at Amazon for $19.99. I am going to order it.

Oh wait...

Originally Posted by HD Goofnut

I paid $19.99 on release day from Barnes & Nobles.

So did I

[Oblivion138]

Originally Posted by HD Goofnut

I paid $19.99 on release day from Barnes & Nobles.

Yep...I paid $18 on release day with my B&N membership.