my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Community   » The Afterlife   » Back to the Future on Blu-Ray (Page 1)

This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2

Author Topic: Back to the Future on Blu-Ray Mark J. Marshall Film God Posts: 3188 From: New Castle, DE, USA Registered: Aug 2002 posted 12-25-2010 02:20 PM                    So this was one of my presents this morning. I opened it and we watched the first one... and I'm a little disturbed. The "TO BE CONTINUED..." was removed. What is up with that? That really bothers me. Why would they do that? I'm not sure if "TO BE CONCLUDED..." was removed from part II or not yet. Ugh.  |  IP: Logged Tom Petrov Five Guys Lover Posts: 1121 From: El Paso, TX Registered: Jan 2003 posted 12-25-2010 04:07 PM                    quote: Mark J. Marshall The "TO BE CONTINUED..." was removed. The original print never said "To Be Continued" It was added to the VHS tapes. I am sure TO BE CONCLUDED will be there. Part II prints had the Part III preview at the end of the movie.  |  IP: Logged Joe Redifer You need a beating today Posts: 12859 From: Denver, Colorado Registered: May 99 posted 12-25-2010 08:02 PM                        I'd be more disturbed at the awful packaging of the set.  |  IP: Logged Mark J. Marshall Film God Posts: 3188 From: New Castle, DE, USA Registered: Aug 2002 posted 12-25-2010 10:31 PM                    quote: Tom Petrov The original print never said "To Be Continued" It was added to the VHS tapes. WHAT?!? Woah, my world is falling apart. Did they not anticipate parts II and III when I was out? I thought the "TO BE CONTINUED..." was a great way to end it. I thought I was sure I have seen it in more places than the VHS tape. Ah well. And yeah the packaging is kinda strange.  |  IP: Logged Jake Spell Master Film Handler Posts: 294 From: Johns Island SC Registered: May 2009 posted 12-25-2010 10:41 PM                     Nope, parts 2 and 3 were afterthoughts after universal saw how well part 1 did in theaters. Its all explained in the commentaries  |  IP: Logged Mark J. Marshall Film God Posts: 3188 From: New Castle, DE, USA Registered: Aug 2002 posted 12-25-2010 11:26 PM                    Wow. All this time. Next you're all going to tell me that the first Star Wars wasn't called "Episode IV".  |  IP: Logged John Wilson Film God Posts: 5438 From: Sydney, Australia. Registered: Dec 1999 posted 12-26-2010 03:31 PM                     quote: Joe Redifer I'd be more disturbed at the awful packaging of the set. Or by the way it now looks like it was shot on video.  |  IP: Logged Joe Redifer You need a beating today Posts: 12859 From: Denver, Colorado Registered: May 99 posted 12-26-2010 07:18 PM                        Doesn't look like that here.  |  IP: Logged Vern Dias Film Handler Posts: 28 From: AllenTX USA Registered: Apr 2009 posted 12-26-2010 09:55 PM                        Junky looking BD. Only suitable for viewing on a 40" or smaller display from a 15 feet+ viewing distance. Rather than creating a new transfer, Universal used an old one and DNR'd it to death, then applied a generous helping of sharpening to try to "restore" the detail the DNR processing destroyed. Vern  |  IP: Logged Mark J. Marshall Film God Posts: 3188 From: New Castle, DE, USA Registered: Aug 2002 posted 12-26-2010 11:15 PM                    Citation needed. We just watched all three here while being snowed in. They all looked great on my 53" TV. My wife and I noticed details in the images that we never noticed before. Were they perfect? I don't think so. But they looked pretty darn good to me.  |  IP: Logged Vern Dias Film Handler Posts: 28 From: AllenTX USA Registered: Apr 2009 posted 12-27-2010 05:59 PM                        http://forum.blu-ray.com/blu-ray-movies-north-america/145829-back-future-25th-anniversary-trilogy-oct-26th-178.html#post4058215 For a comparison between an UN-DNR'd original and the damage done by DNR applied to the BD transfer. http://www.imagebam.com/image/fbce38103448214 http://www.imagebam.com/image/72ce36103448588 Compare the halos around the highway signs on the two images... The first image is from the BD, the second from an HDTV broadcast. Make sure you click on each image to show the full 1080 resolution. I hope links are legal.... Vern  |  IP: Logged Joe Redifer You need a beating today Posts: 12859 From: Denver, Colorado Registered: May 99 posted 12-27-2010 10:39 PM                        Links are illegal, you will soon be arrested. Anyway, the BD version looks much better than the HDTV broadcast version. The Blu-ray has no vertical sharpening that I can detect whereas the HDTV broadcast version has a halo on the letterbox bar as a result of vertical sharpening. The BD seems to have horizontal sharpening whereas the HDTV broadcast version does not. BD still wins. The BD has more detail as well. Here is an example which shows off the halos in each version really well: Perfect? No. But studios will never stop doing this. Ever. Also, Claudia Wells was hotter than Elizabeth Shue.  |  IP: Logged James Westbrook Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1133 From: Lubbock, Texas, Usa Registered: Mar 2006 posted 12-27-2010 11:26 PM                     I've last seen Back To The Future 2 21 years ago when it was first run. I haven't seen it since. I recall Lea Thompson having breast implants. I recall the older Biff chastizing the young Biff ("Make like a tree and LEAF! You sound like an IDIOT when you do that!" I recall Michael J Fox entering through what he thought was his bedroom window and finding black kids in his room. However, except for the beginning of the movie where she is sleeping, I cannot recall what else Elizabeth Shue did. Did somebody pay her a million dollars to pretend she is sleeping? I'm wondering if she did more in the third one, which I still have not seen.  |  IP: Logged Chris Slycord Film God Posts: 2986 From: 퍼항시, 경상푹도, South Korea Registered: Mar 2007 posted 12-27-2010 11:47 PM                     quote: James Westbrook However, except for the beginning of the movie where she is sleeping, I cannot recall what else Elizabeth Shue did. Did somebody pay her a million dollars to pretend she is sleeping? They also paid her to pretend to wake up and pretend to be an older version of herself w/ makeup and whatnot. And regardless of Claudia Wells being hotter back in the day than Elisabeth Shue, Shue is much more attractive than Wells today. Only one of them has aged a bit gracefully.  |  IP: Logged Joe Redifer You need a beating today Posts: 12859 From: Denver, Colorado Registered: May 99 posted 12-28-2010 12:00 AM                        I haven't seen Wells lately, but I will take your word for it. No need to prove it, either... really, I'll take your word. Do not destroy my vision of Wells.  |  IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2

Printer-friendly view of this topic

Hop To: Select a Forum: Category: Operations -------------------- Digital Cinema Forum Film Handlers' Forum Large Format Forum Ground Level Feature Info, Trailer Attachments & REAL Credit Offsets Category: Community -------------------- Film-Yak Film Handlers' Movie Reviews The Afterlife Bob Maar's Joke-A-Thon Category: Classified -------------------- Equipment and Supplies Wanted/For Sale Help Wanted/Seeking Employment Category: System -------------------- Software Beta Testing Forum

The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.