Hitchcock on Universal DVD and Blu-ray

[peerpee]

(7 down, 7 to go) FAMILY PLOT is the most uneven and problematic Blu-ray transfer so far. I don't know where to start...

----

This info is what I've gleaned from the actual discs. 5 x VC-1s, and 2 x AVCs so far. All ARs correct so far:

SHADOW OF A DOUBT - BD50 - R0 - Checkdisc date 7th August 2012
Length 01:47:49 / VC-1 / DTS-HD MA 2 Ch. 48kHz / Confirmed AR 1.37:1

ROPE - BD50 - R0 - Checkdisc date 30th July 2012
Length 01:20:41 / AVC / DTS-HD MA 2 Ch. 48kHz / Confirmed AR 1.37:1

REAR WINDOW - BD50 - R0 - Checkdisc date 27th July 2012
Length 01:52:25 / VC-1 / DTS-HD MA 2 Ch. 48kHz / Confirmed AR 1.66:1

VERTIGO - BD50 - R0 - Checkdisc date 13th August 2012
Length 02:08:27 / VC-1 / DTS-HD MA 5.1 Ch. 48kHz / Confirmed AR 1.85:1

THE BIRDS - BD50 - R0 - Checkdisc date 29th June 2012
Length 01:59:29 / AVC / DTS-HD MA 2 Ch. 48kHz / Confirmed AR 1.85:1

FRENZY - BD50 - R0 - Checkdisc date 30th July 2012
Length 01:55:52 / VC-1 / DTS-HD MA 2 Ch. 48kHz / Confirmed AR 1.85:1

FAMILY PLOT - BD50 - R0 - Checkdisc date 27th July 2012
Length 02:00:04 / VC-1 / DTS-HD MA 2 Ch. 48kHz / Confirmed AR 1.85:1

[peerpee]

I'll let them know on Monday, but I doubt they'll put a stop on anything. It's rank incompetence, but I imagine they'll think it's a "shrugger". Shrug and change it next time.

[hearthesilence]

Jesus, my enthusiasm for this set has pretty much died.

[domino harvey]

Hate to say I told you so, but

I hope none of you are foolhardy enough to sell off your DVDs/pre-order until we get some word on whether Universal shellac'd the picture like they have on most of these horrible 100th Anniversary Blus

Thanks for confirming the grim truth, Nick

[criterion10]

I hope none of you are foolhardy enough to sell off your DVDs/pre-order until we get some word on whether Universal shellac'd the picture like they have on most of these horrible 100th Anniversary Blus

And I indeed was one of those people ](*,) I mean, these Blu-Rays, even if Universal does butcher them, still have to be better than the DVDs, right? Still annoying though that studios can't do their catalog titles justice.

[peerpee]

First impressions of SHADOW OF A DOUBT BD were "wow". Reminded me very much of the quality of MoC TOUCH OF EVIL BD. Ropey transitions that then pop, and everything looks super nice.

First impressions of REAR WINDOW BD very good. Light speckle like VERTIGO that could have very easily been removed (for two such major league titles). Still looked great though.

First impressions of ROPE - colours look off, faded, browny.

Will be watching all three in full over the weekend.

[rspaight]

I dunno, if there's no mono on Vertigo and many of the films are overscrubbed, I might hang onto my "velvet box" DVDs. (More money for the 4,000 other things I want this fall.) I'd need to see some comparisons, though, to see if the DVNR is offset by other things.

And those credit errors are just embarrassing.

[ShellOilJunior]

Dear lord, how can they shit the bed on their biggest release of the year?

I'm sure they'd still get 4.5/5 from a certain reviewer I won't name...

[cdnchris]

Ugh. I'm keeping the UK one pre-ordered since the price is still good and I still want it. I doubt the US one will be much different but if I hear it's significantly better I may just take the hit and spend the extra hundred on the US set.

I'm curious as to which cut of Psycho is on the UK version, though. I haven't sold mine yet just in case...

[ShellOilJunior]

I'm really interested in seeing how they treated Marnie and The Trouble With Harry.

[manicsounds]

"Psycho" has got to be the same disc as the standalone.

You see, this is where Universal should have just given this set to Masters Of Cinema for release...

[MichaelB]

You see, this is where Universal should have just given this set to Masters Of Cinema for release...

This is precisely why Nick was asked to guest-review the set for Sight & Sound! Out of all the possible candidates (including me), he was the only one with actual hands-on experience of producing Blu-rays of Hitchcock films.

[Finch]

Even if the US set has the mono tracks, I'm going to hold out (at least for six months) for individual releases since I'm not prepared to spend money on the likes of TOPAZ, FAMILY PLOT etc. SHADOW OF A DOUBT, VERTIGO & REAR WINDOW are the only ones I want (not double-dipping on PSYCHO).

PS.: Nick, can you confirm if the 5.1 mix on VERTIGO is the same old shit, or whether Universal have made a new 5.1 track properly as per the PSYCHO disc?

[peerpee]

I've got the old 5.1 track on a DVD, but I've never listened to it. I also don't own any 5.1 equipment (shock horror).

I don't like 5.1 as a concept and 98% of the films I love and watch never had 5.1 tracks. I don't intend to ever have a 5.1 set-up.

So to work out whether the new 5.1 is the same as the old 5.1 would rely on me listening to stereo mixdowns of each and trying to ascertain whether various sounds were the same level (or indeed the same sounds).

Happy to spend some time on that next week, particularly if someone can provide me with some solid pointers to listen for? But at the moment there's tons of other things I'd like to get stuck into with this set!

[manicsounds]

To think that you don't have a 5.1 setup to watch Masters Of Cinema's "Soul Power"... yikes!

For Vertigo sounds, the opening scene with the rooftop chase, gunshots are re-foleyed making them sound quite modern.
Also, the scene where Stewart and Novak kiss with the waves crashing behind them, extra wave sounds are added which also sound modern.

Those 2 examples are very discernible.

[triodelover]

I've got the old 5.1 track on a DVD, but I've never listened to it. I also don't own any 5.1 equipment (shock horror).

I don't like 5.1 as a concept and 98% of the films I love and watch never had 5.1 tracks. I don't intend to ever have a 5.1 set-up.

\:D/ (Huge standing ovation) \:D/ May I applaud your fine sense of discrimination?

[peerpee]

My rough, rambling viewing notes on the technical aspects of the *UK* BD of SHADOW OF A DOUBT: http://enthusiasm.org/post/31153014639" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[peerpee]

Posted by "duggie walker" at blu-ray.com forums (where I haven't opened an account):

I notice that Nick quite proudly states that he doesn't have a 5.1 set-up and never will.

I mention this not to imply that he isn't accurate in what he's seeing but simply to point out that he's clearly a purist and his standards may exceed normal levels of expectation.

I think we'll end up with a varying bunch of discs all of which look way better than what we've got but not as good as they could. This is pretty much par for the course - there's only a handful of reference quality discs in any year; and even then, you won't have to go far to find someone who decries them.

I am a purist in the sense that I want to see a film presented on Blu-ray as faithfully as possible to its original 35mm presentation at the time of release. As 98% of the films I watch are 2D and mono/stereo, I don't think it's strange to have no desire whatsoever for a 3D TV or a 5.1 speaker set-up.

With regards to my standards perhaps exceeding normal levels of expectation, I would agree, but only because normal levels of expectation are low. The quality we all should be demanding is Criterion/BFI/MoC (the standard bearers of all I hold dear) and if you're happy with less, then nothing will ever get better and major studios will get away with the least effort possible, just because they can. The work of the best non-studio labels over the last 14 years has often shamed and raised the quality of work from the studios who pretty much all have unreliable and uneven track records. They are unreliable and uneven because of pisspoor leadership from the top and disc producers who don't learn and aren't prepared to put in maximum effort.

I'm not asking for the moon on a stick, I'm asking for a basic level of competence and best practice - which I regard as Criterion/BFI/MoC standards. It's the least we should all be expecting.

[hearthesilence]

Posted by "duggie walker" at blu-ray.com forums (where I haven't opened an account):

I notice that Nick quite proudly states that he doesn't have a 5.1 set-up and never will.

I mention this not to imply that he isn't accurate in what he's seeing but simply to point out that he's clearly a purist and his standards may exceed normal levels of expectation.

I think we'll end up with a varying bunch of discs all of which look way better than what we've got but not as good as they could. This is pretty much par for the course - there's only a handful of reference quality discs in any year; and even then, you won't have to go far to find someone who decries them.

Oh please, that's barely an indicator for anything. I've only known one single person to ever have a 5.1 setup, back in college, and he hasn't bothered to set up another one ever since he moved into his house.

[Jeff]

All due respect to Bruce Kimmel, but it's kinda funny that he doesn't know if we ought to trust the opinion of this Nick Wrigley fellow (even after it's been pointed out to him that Nick was the best producer in the business by a fair margin).

[peerpee]

I doff my cap, kind sir!

Here's my rough notes on the technical aspects of the new *UK* Blu-ray of REAR WINDOW: http://enthusiasm.org/post/31183475187" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[matrixschmatrix]

So, overall, it sounds as though Shadow of a Doubt, Rear Window, and Vertigo are all fairly solid, while Frenzy and possibly Rope are badly flawed?

[peerpee]

Haven't really had a good look at ROPE yet, I just said the colours looked drained. Will get to it later today.

FAMILY PLOT is shagged though. Don't quote me on that.

[manicsounds]

IF Eureka MoC handled this release:

1. Universal makes the HD masters
2. Universal hands them the masters
3. MoC say, "We won't fuck with the film transfer. Although we'll do some slight cleaning up"
4. Release!

Universal handling this release:

1. Universal makes the HD masters
2. Universal say, "Scrub it smooth and clean"
3. Universal say, "The credits look like shit, let's redo them. Don't worry about spellcheck. Waste of time."
4. Universal say, "We spent a shitload for that 1998 DTS track! Fuck the mono track. No one's gonna listen to it anyway"
5. Universal UK say, "We don't want non-English speakers paying cheap to get this set. Make sure one of the titles doesn't have all the subs and dubs."
6. Universal say, "Hmm, maybe those Internet message boards will be clouded up with complaints from the 20 or so 'purists' What shall we do?"
7. Universal does a maniacal laugh....
8. Release!

[MichaelB]

Oh please, that's barely an indicator for anything. I've only known one single person to ever have a 5.1 setup, back in college, and he hasn't bothered to set up another one ever since he moved into his house.

I didn't have a functioning 5.1 setup for most of the past few years - I only dug the speakers and amp out about a year ago when I took on a freelance QC job on a title that had a 5.1 soundtrack.

It's been set up ever since, but I can't claim that it makes a huge difference - like Nick's, the vast majority of my collection simply isn't in 5.1 to begin with. Either that or the 5.1 option is demonstrably worse than the original theatrical one (recent example: King of New York, whose 5.1 remix is shockingly muffled compared with the punchy Dolby Surround original).