Blade Runner (1982): color-timing; different versions; audio mixes

[Chewtobacca]

This thread about the 1982 film, not the 2017 one. Please start another thread to discuss that.

I'm primarily interested in the look of the film, the differences between versions, and the various audio mixes.  While the the color-cast found on the branching BD is the beginning of the revisionism seen in the FC, it is relatively light, and it's possible to remove it and leave something that approaches the look of the first DVD (but without the awful pink/red look).

top: branching BD; bottom: quick regrade






In fact, my suspicion is that once the cast is removed, the branching BD comes fairly close to the film's original look(s).  I also think that, pre-FC, the film was rather inconsistent when it comes to color: the shots of the city at night are quite nice, but all the scenes in the Bradbury building look drab, the part in which Deckard interrogates Rachel is a nasty red (far better in the FC), and the scenes in Deckard's apartment don't gel particularly well with the appearance of the rest of the film (especially the light that spills in through the windows).

Don't get me wrong: I love the production and share the common view that the FC went too far in its revisionism; it's just that I feel that it had a point too, which was that the film needed a more consistent image, one that would play into its futuristic setting.  If you focus on objects that are less affected by the teal and orange, the colors often appear quite rich and striking.  And some scenes could use a tint.

I've heard that the 5.1 on the branching BD has some changes from the '92 DC.  Does anyone have any information about this?

[PDB]

Looks nice Chew especially the noodles shop. Definitely feels better.

[captainsolo]

Nothing has ever really been confirmed or indicated so all BR material is just us guessing. I've seen the DC and FC prints but not an original TC release print.

The pre-FC mixes seem the same for the most part with only minor mixing differences when going from LD 2.0 to DVD/BD 5.1. As for color the tints they added, these are not accurate at all and otherwise obscure what is likely a good IP scan. I'm pretty sure its the same scan done for the 2006 remastered DC DVD before the box set was released the next year. It looks like it could also be another Warner MPI hack job where they start tealing things and ruining the color balance of the source materials. (Supermans etc. and anything after a certain point in time)

The earlier video releases (Embassy , Criterion) have slightly deeper color-more reds yellows etc. but it is still unknown whether this is accurate to the 1982 release prints or not. The DC dials this back a bit and is more balanced due to it being a better scan of the US source materials in '92.

Sound: The sound sounds virtually identical between the IC and DC LDs other than the narration requiring different EQ. I think the DC LD is the best sounding home release despite not being discrete, and I'm not sure if any home audio is derived from the 70mm mix. The successive DVDs are good but the lossy 5.1 never sounded quite as full as the LD. The FC mix is very good but tends to over-emphasize effects and has an overpoweringly mixed LFE channel at times-and is clearly not a 1982 audio mix. I never noticed a difference between the DC and branching disc but there could be some I guess.

[Stamper]

There's a Blade Runner (regrade to the Criterion Collection laserdisc) on a certain place. Where does it fit there? This gets confusing.
After a point, it's hard to tell any regrade apart and it's specs. I think it could be cool if first posts in regrades would recap all other versions released, so that we can tell them apart.

[PDB]

That's my regrade which you can find here on fanres. Chew looks to be going in a different direction by fixing the BD's colors (tending more back to the blues over greens). So they are two different things.

[Stamper]

Oh I get it. There are already so many official releases of Blade Runner LOL.

[Chewtobacca]

Nothing has ever really been confirmed or indicated so all BR material is just us guessing.

As for color the tints they added, these are not accurate at all and otherwise obscure what is likely a good IP scan.

Yes, everything is speculation.  And I am way past the notion that a given film had a single look theatrically, so even if someone had seen a print of the TC, it wouldn't matter to me much.  The tints are undoubtedly inaccurate (from the point of the view of theatrical presentation), but I do have some sympathy with them.

Thanks for your reflections on the audio, captain!

That's my regrade which you can find here on fanres. Chew looks to be going in a different direction by fixing the BD's colors (tending more back to the blues over greens). So they are two different things.

As PDB says, there is no conflict between this thread, which is for discussion of the film itself, and his forthcoming release (about which he and I have already put our heads together).  I have no plans whatsoever to release anything BR related on FanRes.  The screenshots are primarily to show what the colors of the branching BD are like with the tint removed and to give some grounds for my speculation about the pre-DC colors.  (The regrade might feed into my personal fanedit of the film, but that's not really a FanRes matter.)

[Chewtobacca]

Here's the first confirmation of a difference in the 5.1 on the branched BD (on the DC on Disc 3 at 24:05).

When the janitor opens the door to Leon's room, he mutters, "Kowalski". This is dialogue which only belongs in the Workprint and Final Cut versions and doesn't have subtitles either.

PDB, I'm not sure this will affect your forthcoming release, which aims to add in stuff missing from the DC anyway.  And I've always liked the line.

EDIT: Moreover, see this post on Blu-ray.com.

[PDB]

Thanks for the heads up Chew. I saw that entry on blu-ray.com also and thought of your queries. Luckily the ld pcm tracks are ok. I just have to remember to remove that from the 5.1.

[Chewtobacca]

I think that you're giving yourself unnecessary work, but it's your project.