Bedazzled (1967), starring Raquel Welch, Dudley Moore - Feb 19, 2019

[chas speed]

Originally Posted by Zen_Amako

I watched the Twilight Time disc tonight. The isolated score is 2ch stereo. The movie itself is also 2ch stereo, although it looks like there's also a 1ch monaural track available.

The picture quality is very good, although many scenes seemed to have a deliberate soft-focus/"vaseline over the lens" look. The picture at times appeared to be a little vertically squeezed, but I couldn't tell if that was the intended look. The film is presented in a wide aspect ratio - maybe 2.40:1?

I enjoyed the film. I had only seen it once before on DVD many years ago. I laughed out loud at a few sight gags. Peter Cook is pretty great.

I know what you mean about the film having a lot of soft focus shots. Like the Raquel Welch scene is shot through a mosquito net and many shots are filmed through other things.

[chas speed]

Originally Posted by Baron Blood

It really is a shame the BBC didn't preserve their televised programs.
Not Only... But Also was hilarious with only one DVD full of surviving skits in varying quality.

Here's a couple of my favorites.

The Best of What's Left of Not Only But Also Episode 5 The Making of A Movie - YouTube


Not Only ... But Also - Superthunderstingcar - YouTube


Regarding Bedazzled, If any new screen caps show up online I hope someone will post them here or give us a link.

They actually did save most of the B/W 60's shows, but were hell bent on destroying all of the 70's color episodes that weren't filmed outside the studio.

[ghidorah]

Originally Posted by Zen_Amako

I watched the Twilight Time disc tonight. The isolated score is 2ch stereo. The movie itself is also 2ch stereo, although it looks like there's also a 1ch monaural track available.

Thanks for this.

[WaverBoy]

According to reviews, the TT Blu picture is still vertically stretched like the old DVD, so everyone still looks Besqueezled. Not cool.

[chas speed]

Originally Posted by WaverBoy

According to reviews, the TT Blu picture is still vertically stretched like the old DVD, so everyone still looks Besqueezled. Not cool.

A lot of people don't think the DVD was vertically stretched.

[WaverBoy]

Originally Posted by chas speed

A lot of people don't think the DVD was vertically stretched.

Those people would be incorrect.

[MagellanvsHimself]

I can confirm that the BD is vertically stretched - it's a shame to me because the transfer is absolutely beautiful, and the 1.0 HD track sounds extremely clear (avoid the 2.0 - I found it to be extremely tinny sounding).

[WaverBoy]

Looks like it'll be a long time before we get a proper release of this classic.

[chas speed]

[QUOTE=WaverBoy;16170266]Those people would be incorrect.[/QUOTE

The DVD looked fine. Maybe you had to be anal-retentive to notice.

[WaverBoy]

Originally Posted by chas speed

The DVD looked fine. Maybe you had to be anal-retentive to notice.

No, the DVD is provably vertically stretched, as is the Blu-ray; maybe you had to be blind to not notice.

[chas speed]

[quote=WaverBoy;16171381]

Originally Posted by chas speed

No, the DVD is provably vertically stretched, as is the Blu-ray; maybe you had to be blind to not notice.

Are you one of the people with good vision that thought that the Twilight Blu-ray should have been letterboxed at a 2:66.1 aspect ratio like the German Blu-ray. I'm sorry, but I am not that blind.

[DMRI2006]

Originally Posted by chas speed

Are you one of the people with good vision that thought that the Twilight Blu-ray should have been letterboxed at a 2:66.1 aspect ratio like the German Blu-ray. I'm sorry, but I am not that blind.

Reading through this thread you seem hellbent on defending the U.S. transfer -- not sure why really, but you're pretty much alone in that corner.

The German Blu-Ray, which I picked up cheap, actually looks accurate, and if nothing else, nobody is stretched out like the Fox DVD transfer. Whether or not it's overmatted and shouldn't be 2.55 I don't know, but it's about 100 times more watchable than the stretch-o-vision U.S. transfers. Nobody looks like a stick figure in it at least!

Anyway you seem to be on an island of your own if you can't even acknowledge the U.S. transfers being vertically stretched -- they are, and they are absolutely "wrong", but you can have at it trying to defend it.

[Aclea]

Not having seen the TT disc yet, I'm wondering if part of the problem might not be that Peter Cook and Eleanor Bron were both rather tall and thin at the time and often tended to look like they were shot in Scope but shown without an anamorphic lens even on TV shows in the Sixties (indeed, the contrast in height and shape between Cook and Moore was often a pointed feature of their TV work). I have seen the German disc in that botched or overmatted 2.63:1 ratio (there's no question that the film was shot in the 2.35:1 that was standard for 35mm Panavision at the time), and while Stanley Donen's trademark circle in a square looks appropriately circular in that, it has to be said there are a few shots where Dudley Moore looks a tad wider and more inappropriately circular than he should. It's particularly noticeable in the cuckolded multi-millionaire wish.

Possibly complicating matters further is that the film comes from a period when Stanley Donen was really going wild with the cinematography and while there's nothing as out there as Arabesque (which in one sequence does squeeze the Scope image vertically and horizontally when Gregory Peck is tripping out on the motorway, and on which Bedazzled's cinematographer Austin Dempster worked as a camera operator), there are a lot of photographic flourishes, especially with filters and gauzes or the distorted handheld fly on the wall's POV shots.

[WaverBoy]

Originally Posted by chas speed

Are you one of the people with good vision that thought that the Twilight Blu-ray should have been letterboxed at a 2:66.1 aspect ratio like the German Blu-ray. I'm sorry, but I am not that blind.

If you think the old DVD looks fine and isn't vertically stretched, you are indeed that blind.

[Rzzzz]

After reading all these posts, I am pretty convinced I won't be paying $30.00 for this and that makes me happy....

[amputd]

George Spigott worked on the film and he personally assured me it is not vertically stretched

[SMOOT]

Originally Posted by amputd

George Spigott worked on the film and he personally assured me it is not vertically stretched

I watched the film last week on Blu-ray, and I told the friend who brought the disc over for us to view that I thought it looked vertically stretched.

One could say it is the result of the lenses used in the original photography (and that may be true), but this otherwise colorful film does not display perfectly normal height-to-width human proportions

I just discovered this thread a few minutes ago (as I went looking for comments on this film). Never saw Bedazzled before but I thought it was fun.

[chas speed]

Originally Posted by DMRI2006

Reading through this thread you seem hellbent on defending the U.S. transfer -- not sure why really, but you're pretty much alone in that corner.

The German Blu-Ray, which I picked up cheap, actually looks accurate, and if nothing else, nobody is stretched out like the Fox DVD transfer. Whether or not it's overmatted and shouldn't be 2.55 I don't know, but it's about 100 times more watchable than the stretch-o-vision U.S. transfers. Nobody looks like a stick figure in it at least!

Anyway you seem to be on an island of your own if you can't even acknowledge the U.S. transfers being vertically stretched -- they are, and they are absolutely "wrong", but you can have at it trying to defend it.

You honestly think a few people on this thread represent the entire country? If you are going to debate this you might take 5 seconds to confirm that Bedazzled was filmed in a 2:35.1 ratio, since you admit that you don't even know that. I am not alone in knowing that it wasn't filmed in the 2:55.1 ratio featured in the German Blu-ray. You are wrong and alone in that belief. For what little it is worth, I don't think the Bedazzled Blu-ray is worth 30 bucks. It is a rip off for that price. This is a $14.99 Blu-ray if ever I have seen one.

[reallynotnick]

Don't use these to judge picture quality since they aren't direct BD captures, but I did my best to try to show a comparison of the two versions here. There clearly isn't any more or less picture shown on either disc, so the aspect ratio is the only thing that changes. I am going back and forth on which one looks correct to me.

http://www.framecompare.com/screensh...rison/G7GLNNNX


EDIT: Looking at this site they seem to think it lands in between the two sizes, as their edited image is about 2.48:1, the German one is about 2.63:1 and the US one is about 2.37:1, which I suppose would explain why I can't tell which one looks right.
https://www.dvdtalk.com/reviews/73690/bedazzled-1967/

[WaverBoy]

Originally Posted by chas speed

You honestly think a few people on this thread represent the entire country? If you are going to debate this you might take 5 seconds to confirm that Bedazzled was filmed in a 2:35.1 ratio, since you admit that you don't even know that. I am not alone in knowing that it wasn't filmed in the 2:55.1 ratio featured in the German Blu-ray. You are wrong and alone in that belief. For what little it is worth, I don't think the Bedazzled Blu-ray is worth 30 bucks. It is a rip off for that price. This is a $14.99 Blu-ray if ever I have seen one.

Regardless, the US transfer is vertically stretched. That's a fact. Deal with it.