The Curse of Frankenstein

[Robert W]

Judging from the screenshots here,

THE CURSE OF ASPECT RATIOS! | Hammer restoration blog

the 1.37:1 versions certainly contains more information than the other two versions.

[Stephen@Cult Labs]

Now I know they are only screengrabs, but I think the 1.66:1 version looks terrible, the 1.77:1 version looks a lot better composed. I would've liked them to include all 3 versions on the disc. Maybe dispensed with the dvd and put another BD in there with that version.

[oaxaca]

Well there's 2 versions that come with the new Icon/Lionsgate BD: 1.37:1 (academy ratio) and 1.66:1...

Judging by that Hammer article on aspect ratios, which was really informative, the 1.37:1 ratio is most probably the one intended by the makers of the film as the 1.66:1 cuts info from the top and bottom... Why would people want to watch this version? I'm not sure why it even included! ... Going to watch the BD in about an hour, can't wait!

[Stephen@Cult Labs]

Originally Posted by oaxaca

Well there's 2 versions that come with the new Icon/Lionsgate BD: 1.37:1 (academy ratio) and 1.66:1...

Judging by that Hammer article on aspect ratios, which was really informative, the 1.37:1 ratio is most probably the one intended by the makers of the film as the 1.66:1 cuts info from the top and bottom... Why would people want to watch this version? I'm not sure why it even included! ... Going to watch the BD in about an hour, can't wait!

Yes, but I mean the 1.77 seems better composed than the 1.66 version. Imo, i'd rather have the 1.77 version and the 1.37 .

[oaxaca]

Originally Posted by Stephen@Cult Labs

Yes, but I mean the 1.77 seems better composed than the 1.66 version. Imo, i'd rather have the 1.77 version and the 1.37 .

Ah ok, well that makes sense. The 1.77 does definitely look better than the 1.66...

[the blob]

First of all, the new transfers come from a 1.37:1 source supplied by Warner. The only 1.77:1 version is the old Warner DVD.

I think everyone can agree that the 1.37:1 version looks the best. That doesn't actually mean that it should look the best. The big issue is the headroom on the 1.66:1 version and the fact that it's too tight. It'll look even worse for anyone watching it on DVD with a CRT display because overscan will likely crop it more to the point where tops of heads are being lost.

The point is, the 1.66:1 version SHOULDN'T look that bad. Hammer have chosen to just crop a central 1.66:1 image from the full frame. There is another well-used method to frame it using a common top, which would have ensured plenty of headroom, thereby losing more of the bottom where there is extra space to accommodate. To compare the screengrabs on the Hammer blog, you're just comparing virtually an open matte against a badly cropped and misframed version.

Hammer still maintain their stance of 1.37:1 being the intended aspect ratio, despite the efforts of specialists and experts in the history of widescreen and projection claiming otherwise and providing evidence to show that COF in particular was meant to be projected and seen in widescreen, which is perhaps the most infuriating part. Had it not been half-arsed, we would have had the 1.37:1 version and a properly matted 1.66:1 version which shouldn't be too much to ask and would have been very simple to do. All they had to do was consult someone, one of which was regularly posting on their blog so they didn't have far to look.

So, here we are with a similar situation to The Devil Rides Out, where it would have been easy to completely satisfy everyone and provide both versions but what Hammer say is right (because of course, this is the real Hammer from way back when????) and they simply chose not to bother doing it properly.

[Handyman Joe]

Watched this last night - want to say it has one of the best commentaries I've heard, 2 guys - Rigby and Hearn - who really know their stuff. It's like a 90 minute trivia tennis match with both men constantly surprising each other with the obscurity of their knowledge, At one point Marcus Hearn even informs us who adopted the dog in the fromaldyhide jar after the film was completed. Great stuff, fingers crossed they get the Dracula gig too. Re picture quality - I feared for the transfer in the opening scenes but it gets better as the movie goes on and overall is pretty solid. All in all, a great release.

[Rik]

Originally Posted by Handyman Joe

Watched this last night - want to say it has one of the best commentaries I've heard, 2 guys - Rigby and Hearn - who really know their stuff. It's like a 90 minute trivia tennis match with both men constantly surprising each other with the obscurity of their knowledge, At one point Marcus Hearn even informs us who adopted the dog in the fromaldyhide jar after the film was completed. Great stuff, fingers crossed they get the Dracula gig too. Re picture quality - I feared for the transfer in the opening scenes but it gets better as the movie goes on and overall is pretty solid. All in all, a great release.

I haven't listened to the commentary yet, but I intend on doing so next week.

[Robert W]

Including two differently framed version of he film at least gives you the option to choose which version you want to watch, unlike the now botched bd of The Devil Rides Out.

Too bad the Dracula: Prince of Darkness bd was botched as well. I was looking forward to that one most of all.

[Rik]

Originally Posted by Robert W

Too bad the Dracula: Prince of Darkness bd was botched as well. I was looking forward to that one most of all.

What's wrong with the BD of Dracula:POD?