The Evil Dead - October 11th, 2010

[SymbioticFunction]

Evil Dead was theatrically released in widescreen so "a director dicks about with their film after 20 or so years" isn't really the case here.

[KubrickFan]

Originally Posted by SymbioticFunction

Evil Dead was theatrically released in widescreen so "a director dicks about with their film after 20 or so years" isn't really the case here.

I really, really doubt that's the case, because they had to tilt the 1.85:1 extraction several times to create a 'decent' looking widescreen version.

[blu_sharpy]

Originally Posted by Alkaline

Alright so I just commented on the Anchor Bay U.S. release blurb on the main page how I dig that cover art, but I'm definitely digging this more.

Oh, and pretty sure McCrutchy is right on the Army of Darkness business. Optimum for the most part just ports existing 5-star (and not so hot) transfers.

It was not ported. They worked in conjunction with MGM which is why their logo appears on the case and on the disc.

[Alkaline]

Originally Posted by blu_sharpy

It was not ported. They worked in conjunction with MGM which is why their logo appears on the case and on the disc.

And again, I'm saying I suspect, as McCrutchy stated, that MGM did all the actual legwork on the master. Feel free to prove me wrong, but Optimum's way of operating has made itself pretty well known over the years.

[HotRats]

It was a long time ago but I have vivid memories of seeing Evil Dead several times at the same sleazy cinema and they never showed it in a ratio as wide as 1.85, it was either 4:3 or possibly 1.66:1. I don't much care whether Sam Raimi prefers the 1.85 version, the 4:3 open matte Elite DVD looks right to me so I'll be buying the US edition (which will probably be reissued in slight variations every year until blu ray ceases to exist). On the subject of Raimi, its about time A Simple Plan made an appearance on blu, could look great in HD

[SymbioticFunction]

Originally Posted by KubrickFan

I really, really doubt that's the case, because they had to tilt the 1.85:1 extraction several times to create a 'decent' looking widescreen version.

Originally Posted by HotRats

it was a long time ago but i have vivid memories of seeing evil dead several times at the same sleazy cinema and they never showed it in a ratio as wide as 1.85, it was either 4:3 or possibly 1.66:1.

^ Interesting. I never saw Evil Dead at the cinema. I'd guess that it wouldn't have been 4:3 as Raimi asked AB to release a widescreen version in order to "recreate the theatrical experience."

btw What does tilting the 1.85:1 print refer to? I'm confused by the 'tilt' terminology.

[octanejunkie]

I would imagine at the time that Evil Dead came out, there was all sorts of antiquated equipment floating around in cinemas. Its entirely possible that some would have a widescreen and others a full screen. I wouldn't be surprised if studios offered different aspect prints for different cinemas. Of course this is up for debate as we're talking about a film thats knocking on the door of 30 years old.
Also, here in the UK Evil Dead was considered a "video nasty", and had a very troubled release. God knows what kind of pirates and bootlegs were doing the rounds. But its things like this that make it such an interesting film.

As for the Blu-Ray. There is no denying Evil Dead's importance and relevance in the annals of horror cinema. Its revered the world over, and has had some great home theatre releases. I have the "Book Of The Dead" DVD edition on my shelf, and its one of the best special editions on the format in my opinion. It also contains one of the best, most entertaining commentaries i've ever heard on a disc.
I'm sure Sony won't disregard the high esteem that the film is held in, and i'd like to think they'll do the right thing. However, i guess they could release a vanilla disc, and then make us double dip for the "special edition"....

[SymbioticFunction]

^ Wouldn't surprise me if the US had seen a widescreen version theatrically, whilst the UK had only seen 4:3. What with UK firm Palace releasing Evil Dead at both the cinema and on video, at exactly the same time.

[Mobe1969]

Originally Posted by SymbioticFunction

^ Interesting. I never saw Evil Dead at the cinema. I'd guess that it wouldn't have been 4:3 as Raimi asked AB to release a widescreen version in order to "recreate the theatrical experience."

btw What does tilting the 1.85:1 print refer to? I'm confused by the 'tilt' terminology.

It means that the 1.85:1 frame is rotated (eg like /) on the film frame to try to get the required information in the un-naturally, non-intended aspect ration. Usually framing on a 4:3 source when shown theatrically is static, just chopping bits off the top and bottom. With revisionism BS like this they do what they want, and in no way replicates what it was like in the cinema.

And if this was seen at cinemas originally cropped other than 1.66:1, I'd be surprised if it wasn't just a mistake by the projectionist.

Seriously though I am so sick of this sort of revisionist crap. I dopn't know what is worse - ones where the directors give an OK probably without even seeing it, or ones like Predator where the director would not even have been approached.

[Eidolon]

Originally Posted by SymbioticFunction

Evil Dead was theatrically released in widescreen so "a director dicks about with their film after 20 or so years" isn't really the case here.

you're talking rubbish, but writing it as if its a fact.

Evil Dead has only 1 case of being screened theatrically widescreen (prior to the AB mess) as i understand it, and that was at a very small, early screening in 82. May have actually played under it's original title, but i'm not sure about that.
Cinemas are not now what they used to be. Bargain basement films like this and others such as Basket Case played in low tech cheap drive-ins and grindhouse cinamas, a world away from what we get now. Showing this stuff in 4x3 was common at the time. The net is full of rubbish telling you that Evil Dead and every other film ever made should be widescreen , but it's not true. Evil Dead was shot for 4x3, and that's how it should be seen


Evil Dead II did screen theatrically in matted widescreen, but the open matte version presented on the AB DVD is incorrect. Raimi actually did a handful of shots differently for the 4x3 version, but the AB DVD just opens the matte, without the correct altered angles where relevant. anyone who has an old vhs can check it. The most obvious one is the long profile shot of the car crossing the bridge. in the correct 4x3 version , its centrre of frame, in tyhe AB DVD open matte version, its near the top, when the shot was composed differently for the widescreen framing....

[SymbioticFunction]

Originally Posted by Eidolon

you're talking rubbish, but writing it as if its a fact. Evil Dead has only 1 case of being screened theatrically widescreen (prior to the AB mess) as i understand it, and that was at a very small, early screening in 82.

Thanks for helping to clear things up.

[Eidolon]

my Book of the Dead edition is perishing really badly. Drying up and cracking. As the film itself is worthless on this editon, I only bought it for the book so I'm not happy. I've been sticking it back together with liquid latex, but it hardly looks nice.

I understand this is happening to a lot of these?

[dvdmike]

Originally Posted by Eidolon

you're talking rubbish, but writing it as if its a fact.

Evil Dead has only 1 case of being screened theatrically widescreen (prior to the AB mess) as i understand it, and that was at a very small, early screening in 82. May have actually played under it's original title, but i'm not sure about that.Cinemas are not now what they used to be. Bargain basement films like this and others such as Basket Case played in low tech cheap drive-ins and grindhouse cinamas, a world away from what we get now. Showing this stuff in 4x3 was common at the time. The net is full of rubbish telling you that Evil Dead and every other film ever made should be widescreen , but it's not true. Evil Dead was shot for 4x3, and that's how it should be seen


Evil Dead II did screen theatrically in matted widescreen, but the open matte version presented on the AB DVD is incorrect. Raimi actually did a handful of shots differently for the 4x3 version, but the AB DVD just opens the matte, without the correct altered angles where relevant. anyone who has an old vhs can check it. The most obvious one is the long profile shot of the car crossing the bridge. in the correct 4x3 version , its centrre of frame, in tyhe AB DVD open matte version, its near the top, when the shot was composed differently for the widescreen framing....

Im sorry what? is was 1.66:1 in the UK on the few times it was shown and according to "The Evil Dead Companion" it was intended to be projected at 1.66:1

[SymbioticFunction]

The plot thickens? Bottom line is, do I have a problem with Raimi's 1.85:1 ratio of Evil Dead, having owned it on two vhs and another two subsequent dvd releases? Answer is a resounding 'no.' Luckily all those who feel differently can order the 4:3 version from the US.

[McCrutchy]

Originally Posted by dvdmike

Im sorry what? is was 1.66:1 in the UK on the few times it was shown and according to "The Evil Dead Companion" it was intended to be projected at 1.66:1

I find it hard to believe that a bunch of young American guys in the late 70s on a shoestring budget would have shot for widescreen in 1.66:1 (which is generally used in European productions). I think 4:3 seems the most obvious given the technical limitations, which would make 1.33:1 the correct video standard.

[dvdmike]

He shot 1.66:1 safe

[Mobe1969]

Originally Posted by dvdmike

He shot 1.66:1 safe

Yeah, exactly. But 1.66 is not 1.85. I'm pretty sure most cinema showings were likely 1.66:1. If they released it 1.66:1 I wouldn't complain. 1.85 though, with tilt cropping, no thanks.

[Alkaline]

Originally Posted by dvdmike

Im sorry what? is was 1.66:1 in the UK on the few times it was shown and according to "The Evil Dead Companion" it was intended to be projected at 1.66:1

I think the explanation for that is just that at that time in Europe/UK 1.66:1 was the standard "flat" widescreen ratio. Most movies that were shown 1.85:1 in the U.S. at the time were shown 1.66:1 in Europe, I think. This carried over with some European directors who later worked in Hollywood (e.g. Paul Verhoeven, who's preferred ratio for Robocop is 1.66:1, even though the Criterion dvd/laserdisc is still the only U.S. release to use that ratio). With Evil Dead I think it's reasonable to assume it was shown both full frame and matted at various theaters around the world. I'm guessing in its original run it shipped with a note explaining it was to be shown full frame and whether it was came down to the competance of the projectionist or something. Considering ED looks "acceptable" in 1.85:1 I'm sure 1.66:1 doesn't look bad since even less is lost.

[Eidolon]

as I already stipulated, it was generally shown 1.33:1 in fleapit/drive-in/grinshouse/indie venues. Whether Raimi shot it with 1.66:1 in mind is debateable and also a pointless debate.
Not all cinemas show stuff in the thier correct ratios, especially not on the aforementioned type, who often showed old beaten up prints or cut films for running length (making double bills fit into 3 hrs was a favourite reason for cutting films).
With 1.85:1 being standard on mainstream/big US cinemas, and the UK being somewhat more 'all over the shop' on ratios (not quite as standardized as people like to make out), it makes no sense for Raimi or any other American based filmmaker at the time to choose 1.66:1 as a ratio, and a lot of sense at the time to go with a 4:3, especially given the aggrivation and expense involved in shooting widescreen properly.
I know two people involved in the UK releases of Evil Dead, both theatrical and onto video/DVD, and they both confirmed from me it is OAR 1.33:1, or at least that's the ratio it was sent out in. If cinema's chose to soft-matte it or not, was up to the individual venue.
I started working in film & video in '93, and there was still a bit of 4:3 OAR stuff being filtered through at the time, although by then a lot of it had ventured into the shot-on-video-for-DTV release, bypassing the closing-down cheapo venues altogether.

[dvdmike]

What people forget is this is a NEW transfer, so the tilt pans and the bad framing could be gone for good