House: Two Stories (1986-1987) (Limited Edition)

[JohnCarpenterFan]

Originally Posted by mhb2862

On the subject of Blood and Black Lace, there was apparently sufficient evidence the film was shown in both aspect ratios. Arrow chose 1.66:1 over 1.85:1 because they thought that was more accurate to how the film was originally framed. Some people agree and some disagree, but there's no objective evidence saying one is more "accurate" than the other. It's similar to the Night of the Living Dead aspect ratio debate, except we can ask the director, and Romero has given his definitive answer on that one. Should Arrow have included more than one aspect ratio for Blood & Black Lace? Absolutely. Was the one that they did include incorrect? Not at all, despite the opinions of some reviewers.

If you read the evidence Pro-B provided then you'd realize that the issue isn't the 1.66:1 ratio, it was the framing used. The framing used was intended for 1.85:1 (which was matted from the true 1.66:1) which resulted in cropped information at the sides. If Arrow used a 1.66:1 version using the actual 1.66:1 framing then the release would have been fine.

Example:



Let's pretend that the above is Blood and Black Lace, the 1.85:1 framing is in the blue outlined rectangle, the 1.66:1 is in the red. If Arrow wanted to present it in 1.66:1 then they'd use the red. If they wanted 1.85:1 then they'd use the blue. They shouldn't use the blue if they want 1.66:1 as it's already matted from the 1.66:1 framing.

[Nailwraps]

Slightly off topic, remind me again why Scream Factory couldn't include the uncut version of The Horror Show?

[mhb2862]

Originally Posted by JohnCarpenterFan

If you read the evidence Pro-B provided then you'd realize that the issue isn't the 1.66:1 ratio, it was the framing used. The framing used was intended for 1.85:1 (which was matted from the true 1.66:1) which resulted in cropped information at the sides. If Arrow used a 1.66:1 version using the actual 1.66:1 framing then the release would have been fine.

Going back and referencing the screenshots Pro-B pointed to, I concede that you are probably correct. Owning the release myself and not noticing the occasional wonky framing (because it's honestly fine most of the time), I didn't take much notice of the screenshots when I first read the review. Upon taking a closer look, re-reading the review, and taking your post into account, I've changed my opinion. A true 1.66:1 of B&BL would have more headroom. Sorry for the mix-up.

[GasmaskAvenger]

Bah I don't care. I just want the set in my hands, Lakeshore mandated goofs be damned.

[Show spoiler]Personally, I think none of the issues with the Arrow Lakeshore titles are as bad as what happened with Anchor Bay's Ghost in the Shell: Stand Alone Complex blu-ray sets.

[Wernski]

Originally Posted by StingingVelvet

I don't think it's a coincidence they're all from the same company, whether Arrow says they did these themselves or not. They mentioned in the Hellraiser III response that they often can't change what the studio wants, so maybe Lakeshore is insisting on the opened-up framing. Who knows.

I thought Creepshow 2 looked fine but Hellraiser III looked terrible, so it will be interesting see what I think here.

Why would the studio want the films to be misframed? I could see Lakeshore being the ones to misframe it, but can't imagine why they'd insist on Arrow not correcting it.

[iamnoone]

I doubt Lakeshore gives a crap about how the films are presented. As long as they got paid....

[StingingVelvet]

Originally Posted by Wernski

Why would the studio want the films to be misframed? I could see Lakeshore being the ones to misframe it, but can't imagine why they'd insist on Arrow not correcting it.

These are questions I can't answer, I'm just saying it cannot be a coincidence they're all Lakeshore titles. The studios do put limits on what the labels can do, it's in the contract, so it's just a hypothesis they couldn't fix it. The most believable thing to me would be Lakeshore remastered them all and the person they hired made the same mistake on everything, but Arrow says they did Creepshow 2 themselves, so... I dunno.

In any event, the main point here is it can't be a coincidence.

[TripleHBK]

Originally Posted by StingingVelvet

These are questions I can't answer, I'm just saying it cannot be a coincidence they're all Lakeshore titles. The studios do put limits on what the labels can do, it's in the contract, so it's just a hypothesis they couldn't fix it. The most believable thing to me would be Lakeshore remastered them all and the person they hired made the same mistake on everything, but Arrow says they did Creepshow 2 themselves, so... I dunno.

In any event, the main point here is it can't be a coincidence.

I wanted to post a Richard Karn "That 70's Show" 2 Inches to the left joke here but apparently there are no screen shots of this particular episode on the interwebs.

[HonestJohn]

Originally Posted by TripleHBK

I wanted to post a Richard Karn "That 70's Show" 2 Inches to the left joke here but apparently there are no screen shots of this particular episode on the interwebs.

Theo is right here man ...

[Show spoiler]

[captainjoe]

I shared this in the UK forum:

Originally Posted by captainjoe

To me this looks framed properly on the blu-ray. The creature is dead centre of the frame whereas the cropped DVD she's not. That's the sort of thing a camera operator and cinematographer would frame for.
http://caps-a-holic.com/c.php?go=1&a...=97696&i=7&l=0

Again with the bathroom mirror shot:

http://caps-a-holic.com/c.php?go=1&a...=97692&i=3&l=0

The chopped off V on the vick's bottle looks sloppy in terms of composition.

[Shingster]

Originally Posted by JohnCarpenterFan

Clearly the people at Arrow have serious issues understanding what composition is, something which everybody who works in a company who releases and remasters films should understand. James White also made some very questionable comments regarding Phenomena where he was judging how the colors should look based on the original negative (which isn't even color timed) and put down previous releases insinuating that they were incorrect because they were from elements which were actually color timed.

That's not what he said and you bloody well know that, I even told James on facebook about your concerns (even though a total layman asking a professional if he had the common sense to use a reference print must be the height of insulting their intelligence) and I got conformation and posted it for you. You wanna go for Arrow's jugular over a perceived House framing cock up then go for it, but spreading bullshit over upcoming releases helps nobody.

[JohnCarpenterFan]

Originally Posted by Shingster

That's not what he said and you bloody well know that, I even told James on facebook about your concerns (even though a total layman asking a professional if he had the common sense to use a reference print must be the height of insulting their intelligence) and I got conformation and posted it for you. You wanna go for Arrow's jugular over a perceived House framing cock up then go for it, but spreading bullshit over upcoming releases helps nobody.

Edited comment after reading James' reply although he still doesn't mention what was used for reference or what condition it was in.

[JohnCarpenterFan]

Crew member's arm:



Incomplete set:



Film equipment tends to show up every now and then on the left side of the image as do reflections of mics. A brick backdrop is seen behind the house in a pivotal scene making it obvious it was a set.

Nowhere near as many goofs as in Hellraiser III, although (of course) the composition really suffers due to the extra information at the side. The CAH comparisons may look better in some shots but it should be mentioned that in the ones that do, either the camera is moving or something is moving towards the camera.

[GaragePoet]

wow, pretty disappointed to read that might not have been handled properly. esp on the first and most important film of the whole set. i could shrug this off so much easier on part 2, but this seems pretty bad. hope to hear some kinda official word on it before it's released...

[kidglov3s]

Exposed left edge of the set on this shot from CAH:

[Show spoiler]

[captainjoe]

Thanks for the pics that definitely isn't right then. At the very least those specific moments should've been fixed. The head room in crew member arm shot is way too open, needs to be zoomed in more

[StingingVelvet]

My problem with Hellraiser 3 was that there were constant shots obviously meant to be centered that were instead off to the right. Creepshow 2 didn't really have that feel for me, it mostly seemed centered (though others disagree) with some quick errors on the left. Hopefully this is more the latter than the former.

[Ruined]

Damn, wish I didn't sell of my DVD set. This is far more clear but framing errors really bug me.

Any other companies have rights to this for Blu-ray in other countries?

[StingingVelvet]

Originally Posted by Ruined

Any other companies have rights to this for Blu-ray in other countries?

Since all their Lakeshore titles have this problem I would guess no label could release anything else.

[Ruined]

Originally Posted by StingingVelvet

Since all their Lakeshore titles have this problem I would guess no label could release anything else.

Japanese Blu-ray version & UK StudioCanal version of Hellraiser 3 did not have the problem the Arrow UK/US version had

US Image Blu-ray version & UK 88 Films version of Creepshow 2 did not have the problem the US Arrow version has.


Quick search shows nothing though for House. I'll just get the 4-disc UK set and call it a day, and try to find a zoom mode on my player or projector to fix the issue :/ Unlike the alternate Blu-ray versions of Hellraiser 3 and Creepshow 2, the DVD version is a massive step down from the Arrow version, so some sort of zoom or shift would be best fix.

Edit: if you do a 130% zoom cropped to 1.78:1, that appears to be the amount to get the height right. But to center, needs to be panned to the right a bit as well. I think most of that could be accomplished with a similar amount of zoom when zooming a nonanamorphic DVD to 1.78:1.