criterionforum.org

Jesus, blue tint or did someone just spill blue ink over the entire goddam thing?

I don't have the NOTLD BD, but I think there's one, very clear, lesson to be learned here. If Twilight Time wants to do these limited runs of modern horror Blu-rays, then they need to start contacting the filmmakers and sending them checkdiscs, to ensure that the film presentation is what it should be. It's bad enough that we have to deal with the omission of previously available extras, but considering the company's comments at this point, it's obvious that no one who was aware of how the film should be presented had seen the final Blu-ray (not the image transfer, not the HD master from Sony, the Blu-ray), and when your label is all about the presentation of the film--and has the price tag to prove it--then there's little excuse for that.

McCrutchy wrote:I don't have the NOTLD BD, but I think there's one, very clear, lesson to be learned here. If Twilight Time wants to do these limited runs of modern horror Blu-rays, then they need to start contacting the filmmakers and sending them checkdiscs, to ensure that the film presentation is what it should be.

The transfer is the responsibility of the studio licensing the title, not Twilight Time. Sony should have been the one checking with Savini. If Twilight had done as you suggest and Savini had complained about the master, there's little Twilight Time could do about it. They couldn't force Sony to remaster.

Twilight Time: we're helpless, expensive middlemen!

That music and effects track doesn't appear by itself, you know. ^^

Jameson281 wrote:

McCrutchy wrote:I don't have the NOTLD BD, but I think there's one, very clear, lesson to be learned here. If Twilight Time wants to do these limited runs of modern horror Blu-rays, then they need to start contacting the filmmakers and sending them checkdiscs, to ensure that the film presentation is what it should be.

The transfer is the responsibility of the studio licensing the title, not Twilight Time. Sony should have been the one checking with Savini. If Twilight had done as you suggest and Savini had complained about the master, there's little Twilight Time could do about it. They couldn't force Sony to remaster.

Surely Twilight Time could have rejected the master and sought either rectification of it or a refund of their licence fee? I mean, I presume their relationship with Sony is a contractual one, so there would be contractual remedies for this sort of thing. (Unless TT and / or their lawyers are complete idiots.) If the master were missing the last five minutes of the film, had major sound drop-outs, or accidentally consisted of off-air VHS recordings of old episodes of Happy Days, do you think the label would be dumbly obliged to issue it on BluRay while parroting the same "the master is the master and we are all its slaves" mantra?

zedz wrote:

Jameson281 wrote:

McCrutchy wrote:I don't have the NOTLD BD, but I think there's one, very clear, lesson to be learned here. If Twilight Time wants to do these limited runs of modern horror Blu-rays, then they need to start contacting the filmmakers and sending them checkdiscs, to ensure that the film presentation is what it should be.

The transfer is the responsibility of the studio licensing the title, not Twilight Time. Sony should have been the one checking with Savini. If Twilight had done as you suggest and Savini had complained about the master, there's little Twilight Time could do about it. They couldn't force Sony to remaster.

Surely Twilight Time could have rejected the master and sought either rectification of it or a refund of their licence fee? I mean, I presume their relationship with Sony is a contractual one, so there would be contractual remedies for this sort of thing. (Unless TT and / or their lawyers are complete idiots.) If the master were missing the last five minutes of the film, had major sound drop-outs, or accidentally consisted of off-air VHS recordings of old episodes of Happy Days, do you think the label would be dumbly obliged to issue it on BluRay while parroting the same "the master is the master and we are all its slaves" mantra?

That's assuming that Twilight Time recognizes the issue as a problem. If Sony hands them an HD master of NOTLD and says "Hey, we made this two years ago (or whatever), we've Q.C.'d it, it's good to go for Blu-ray" then Twilight Time is going to think that they've been given a good master. If there is a technical problem--digital hits, drop-outs, etc.--they would have every right to contact Sony and request a replacement or a fix reel.

In the case of NOTLD, the issue is an aesthetic one, not technical. Twilight Time may have looked at the transfer and thought it was fine, and that was the way the film was supposed to look. Again--not their job to check with Savini. If they thought "Hey, this looks a little odd to us" they could certainly ask Sony about it. But if Sony says "This is how our colorist chose to time the film for the HD master", Twilight Time can't very well insist that they remaster just because they don't like Sony's colorist. They'd have to prove it's an error and a problem, not just say "We don't like how this look" or "Gee, we think maybe this is wrong" or "Golly, the fans seem unhappy about this." (If the studios remastered every time a fan complained, they'd all go bankrupt.)

It seems the HD master of NOTLD 90 that was used for streaming/downloading/running on cable/satellite channels is correctly color timed. This master given to TT is the first appearance of the blue tinting.

Jameson281 wrote:That's assuming that Twilight Time recognizes the issue as a problem. If Sony hands them an HD master of NOTLD and says "Hey, we made this two years ago (or whatever), we've Q.C.'d it, it's good to go for Blu-ray" then Twilight Time is going to think that they've been given a good master. If there is a technical problem--digital hits, drop-outs, etc.--they would have every right to contact Sony and request a replacement or a fix reel.

In the case of NOTLD, the issue is an aesthetic one, not technical. Twilight Time may have looked at the transfer and thought it was fine, and that was the way the film was supposed to look. Again--not their job to check with Savini. If they thought "Hey, this looks a little odd to us" they could certainly ask Sony about it. But if Sony says "This is how our colorist chose to time the film for the HD master", Twilight Time can't very well insist that they remaster just because they don't like Sony's colorist. They'd have to prove it's an error and a problem, not just say "We don't like how this look" or "Gee, we think maybe this is wrong" or "Golly, the fans seem unhappy about this." (If the studios remastered every time a fan complained, they'd all go bankrupt.)

The issue at hand though is one of representation. Whether Twilight Time recognizes it or not, the business model that they participate in projects a Criterion-like level of oversight over their films. Now, that doesn't mean Criterion-like quality, but what it does mean is that they could easily be expected to have licensed these films not just because they will sell out, but because Twilight Time thinks they are special in some way. I mean, these guys are basically doing the exact same thing that Image, Mill Creek, Olive, Echo Bridge et al. are doing, with the only difference being some liner notes with each release, and possibly also some work with an isolated score. Then they charge five or six times as much as those other Blu-rays can be had for, with a limited number of copies that you can only buy through tightly-controlled channels--you even have to pay shipping, for goodness sake. Now, I had assumed, as I'm sure had many others, that the extra money that everyone pays to get a Twilight Time Blu-ray would go into QC on the materials they receive, which would mean researching the way the film is supposed to look, and if necessary and possible, bringing in production personnel in some capacity to advise them if the materials they receive do not meet those standards. In the case of NOTLD '90, it would have been easy. The film is only twenty-two years old and has been available on multiple home video formats and HDTV broadcasts, and much of the production staff is still around. All they had to do was run a check disc off and mail it to Savini, who surely would have been more than happy to oblige at some point, and then the error could have been identified early on. The worst-case scenario would have been that Sony made a grievous error and cannot be bothered to fix it, so Twilight Time makes an announcement, posts some screenshots, and lets their buyers decide.

If Twilight Time had done this, then maybe I would be able to condone their business model, but as it stands, they have proven themselves to be little more than a glorified Olive Films or Mill Creek. I certainly won't be ordering any disc from them again until it has been properly reviewed.

Jameson281 wrote:In the case of NOTLD, the issue is an aesthetic one, not technical. Twilight Time may have looked at the transfer and thought it was fine, and that was the way the film was supposed to look. Again--not their job to check with Savini.

On the contrary, I'd say it's the job of any responsible DVD publisher to confirm that the disc they're charging people for is actually a reasonable representation of the film and hasn't been, say, dyed indigo. If those comparison caps are accurate, we're really talking about basic quality control here. It's not like the slight red or green bias people argue about in different transfers of Ozu films.

You assume that the people in QC have seen the film before. Trust me, that's rarely the case, especially in a case where Sony has done all the prep work.

TT doesn't have a large number of employees. I assume if Redman was interested enough to lease it he'd have seen the film at least once before. Also that sort of blue doesn't look natural for a film made in the '90s. It's far too digital.

Tom Savini chimes in--here's a message Pat Tallman posted on her Facebook page:

Hey Sweetie, I just watched the Blue Ray of our NOTLD90 cause there was a complaint it looked blue. My copies are excellent and look fantastic...BUT i just want to say while watching it again, and somewhat objectively.....you were fabulous.

So, looks to be director approved.

So was The French Connection.

Another Savini quote:

"You know what...I watched it last night and it's beautiful. I can't see anything wrong with it and I watched it on my 70 inch high def Sharp"


On Twilight Time's Facebook page someone posted comparisons of how the disc looked on their TV when it was in "Theater Mode" and when it wasn't. In "Theater Mode" the excessive blue tinting disappeared. So this is really looking like much ado about nothing--fans who don't have their TV's properly adjusted freaking out, spreading rumors and jumping to conclusions.

Slightly off topic now, do people here have their screens on theater mode? I always thought it made the colors look weird on my Samsung.

Also, quite frankly, Sony's track record the last 5-6 years is pretty damn great. They did the HD mastering more than likely with some specific instruction, whether from Savini himself or from the Answer Print, or so forth. Sony home video releases from the 90s/00s do have a history of being overly brightened to make up for older TV weaknesses.

Are you supposed to have your tv set to theater mode? I thought one was supposed more or less always to turn that shit off.

"UPDATE: As promised, we have discussed NOTLD at the studio and are able to verify via SPE's Mastering Department, that our Blu-ray is indeed the approved transfer from 2010, generated for the film's 20th anniversary, and done in consultation with the film's director of photography. As you will have also seen on this page and elsewhere on the internet, director Tom Savini has now had a chance to view the end product and declared it "fantastic." As we are aware that some fans of the film will remain disappointed, our offer of a full refund still stands if you wish to return your copy. However, we would caution you with this thought: this is a limited edition run of 3,000 copies, and the title is sold out. Right or wrong, it is a collector's item, and there are no guarantees this title will ever be repressed. Going forward, if TT encounters another situation where the new transfer differs greatly from the old, we will bring that to collectors' attention prior to the disc being offered so that you may know of the changes beforehand. Thanks for all your support.

Best,

Nick Redman and Brian Jamieson."

LINK

matrixschmatrix wrote:Are you supposed to have your tv set to theater mode? I thought one was supposed more or less always to turn that shit off.

I've always viewed those "enhanced" settings like tone controls on a preamp. Better off without.

On many televisions theater or movie mode is the most accurate out of the box setting, as its color temperature is set to measure the closest to 6500K. Normal and dynamic modes often run cool, thus giving the image an overall blue cast. Motion smoothing, dynamic contrast and other "enhancers" are usually found under a separate menu.

Here's another comparison between the Blu-ray and DVD of NOTLD.

I really don't understand why Savini and Sony did this...

How are people seeing how many copies remain unsold?

Apparently if you add 3,000 copies to your cart and try to check out it will display the number of copies left