Posts: 583
Threads: 12
Joined: 2016 Jan
Thanks: 76
Given 68 thank(s) in 49 post(s)
I may have asked this before but I'll ask again. Is it me or does the Edward Van Sloan prologue as well as the opening title music sound somewhat crisper on the BD when compared to the rest of the movie?? I know we already discussed how in some instances multiple sources were used in the English track but we were referring to the LD track before.
Posts: 2,290
Threads: 39
Joined: 2015 Jan
Thanks: 177
Given 187 thank(s) in 133 post(s)
Actually, I was referring to all tracks, in all languages, regardless of source.
Yes, the Van Sloan prologue, the intro and outro music are all of better quality than most of the film, with exception of some of Frankenstein's monologues during the film.
Posts: 583
Threads: 12
Joined: 2016 Jan
Thanks: 76
Given 68 thank(s) in 49 post(s)
This might be of some interest to you. Doesn't affect the project or anything but something interesting in regards to the sound. A CHFB user messaged a French film scholar regarding the print of Frankenstein he had first seen. He'd first seen it in 1958 and noted that it was for the most part the censored print. Anyways I'm just gonna paste the transcript of when he recalls the scene where the 'God' line was supposed to occur.
Can you describe what you saw and heard pf the famous scene where Clive's line was censored? ( Same answer- it was cut partially
and covered by the storm. HOWEVER, many years later, but BEFORE the US restoration of the film , the Cinematheque Francaise
once showed a composite print with the line fully uncut , in English and sub-titled in French. I only saw this print once and never again. When the shot of the lines written by Dr. Waldman before dissecting the monster, these lines were in Italian !!!)
Posts: 583
Threads: 12
Joined: 2016 Jan
Thanks: 76
Given 68 thank(s) in 49 post(s)
2016-05-28, 01:59 PM
(This post was last modified: 2016-05-28, 02:04 PM by crissrudd4554.)
I'm just happy there's at least a small group of people who appreciate this. I know if I hadn't pitched anything no one would because I feel the older a film is the least likely people are gonna be concerned with preserving it correctly. They'll most likely look at it and go 'Well its an 80+ year old movie. What do you expect?' However I think when the argument can be made, and I think we have (for the minority of people who care for the matter anyways), that a 20+ year old VHS tape has an audio mix that is in many ways superior to a DTS track on a BD, its gotta raise some attention.
One of my pet peeves with BD is, and don't take offense to this folks, not so much the format but how many people who have clung to it have sorta created a biased view on how films are presented. Its as if they immediately assume that because BD is HD they are getting the BEST presentation of the film possible in every aspect. Not entirely true in a lot of cases. The same could be said for these films but as I said people will most likely take the 'flaws' for granted due to the films age which is unfortunate. I mentioned this situation on blu-ray.com and someone who agreed with me also confessed he wouldn't have noticed this had someone pointed it out. Am I expecting this film to get the same treatment as something that was released in the last 40 years? No. Do I think it deserves that kinda treatment? Absolutely.
This is not only one of my favorite films but it's an important film in general IMO. It's been cited as the film that solidified horror as a movie genre, made a middle aged unknown actor a household name and an icon in fright films, spawned numerous sequels and parodies. Not to mention although Dracula was successful the studio were still facing potential bankruptcy which I'm sure the depression didn't help. So the studio truly owes a lot to this film regardless how old it is.
Don't get me wrong. I'm not trying to be impactful or anything. For the casual fan is the BD good enough? More than probably. Then again as I said they'll likely just take the whole thing for granted and just be convinced this is the best a film of its age can be presented. I found it amusing when you said this project has ruined the official audio for you. Not so much because you don't like it anymore, but because I'm the same way. The fact I can subject myself to VHS quality because I find the BD audio so distracting I think says a lot. I know, I know. I can hear what some are you are saying. 'What?? Are you crazy?? The audios not THAT bad!!' And for the most part it probably isn't but I'm picky like that. I believe every aspect of presentation needs to be taken accounted for. Especially in today's times don't we want the BEST in home viewing presentation??
Posts: 1,008
Threads: 33
Joined: 2015 Jan
Thanks: 736
Given 414 thank(s) in 260 post(s)
Agreed on all counts. They still make mistakes, they still work behind closed doors, there is little to no QC, audio is disregarded and can be EQ'd and noise reduced to death, colors are often wrong etc.
Damn Fool Idealistic Crusader
Posts: 583
Threads: 12
Joined: 2016 Jan
Thanks: 76
Given 68 thank(s) in 49 post(s)
Yep and I'm sorry but I don't buy the 'it was a creative artistic decision' excuse either.