Hammer on DVD/BD Thread

[Rob4]

Originally Posted by Demdike@Cult Labs

Perhaps i should have said it's nearer to the intended release than the 1:66:1 version.

1.37:1



1.66:1

if you like lots of headroom

seriously, everything was widescreen by this point, and even though it was shot open matte, it was composed for cinema projection.

"By February 10, 1955, in an effort to "stabilize shooting methods in British studios," the Camera Technical Committee of the British Film Producers Association was now recommending 1.75:1 as the optimum ratio for British productions. Cinematographers will be instructed to compose shots loosely in order to work from 1.66:1 up to 1.85:1, with 1.75:1 being considered ideal."

now if you are saying you prefer watching it open matte that is something different and i'm not saying it doesn't work in 1.37 for some people.

[Demdike@Cult Labs]

Originally Posted by Rob4

if you like lots of headroom

seriously, everything was widescreen by this point, and even though it was shot open matte, it was composed for cinema projection.

"By February 10, 1955, in an effort to "stabilize shooting methods in British studios," the Camera Technical Committee of the British Film Producers Association was now recommending 1.75:1 as the optimum ratio for British productions. Cinematographers will be instructed to compose shots loosely in order to work from 1.66:1 up to 1.85:1, with 1.75:1 being considered ideal."

now if you are saying you prefer watching it open matte that is something different and i'm not saying it doesn't work in 1.37 for some people.

I watch to have the best complete picture. Not a zoomed in affair. Even you must see there's a hell of a lot more missing from the zoomed in one both top and bottom than there is missing from the sides on the 1:37:1

As it is i have it on dvd in the correct aspect ratio in the Hammer Originals box set. I don't rate the film that much and don't watch it anywhere near as much as Dracula or The Mummy so won't be getting the dual format release anytime soon.

[Rob4]

Originally Posted by Demdike@Cult Labs

I watch to have the best complete picture. Not a zoomed in affair. Even you must see there's a hell of a lot more missing from the zoomed in one both top and bottom than there is missing from the sides on the 1:37:1

As it is i have it on dvd in the correct aspect ratio in the Hammer Originals box set. I don't rate the film that much and don't watch it anywhere near as much as Dracula or The Mummy so won't be getting the dual format release anytime soon.

what you are describing is not zooming. its matting. the director and cinematographer never meant the top and the bottom (of the 1.37 image) to be seen when projected in a cinema - its just dead space. but if its your preference its all cool

[Susan Foreman]

From the BBC quiz show 'Pointless'

I doubt if anyone here is stumped by this, but if you are:
Frankenstein Must be Destroyed was the best answer with 15 points
Curse Of The Werewolf was next with 17 points
The Woman in Black scored 60
The Man Who Could Cheat Death had 65
Doctor Jekyll And Sister Hyde was unsurprisingly the highest score with 66

[Inspector Abberline]

Looking to pick up the Blu Ray of Scars Of Dracula,but cannot really remember that much about it,since the last time I saw it was on VHS and never had it on dvd,so whas the verdict...So How many fangs out of 5..??? Is it a Chris Lee pot of lovely blood or more of a Chris Biggins...only thing I remember is a pre Sweeney Dennis the menace Waterman....discuss..

[Demdike@Cult Labs]

Does this help?

My review in The Gothic Thread from way back in 2011.

Scars of Dracula

1970

Directed by Roy Ward Baker

A sex crazed young man visits Castle Dracula and beds Dracula's vampire bride, this leads to him being impaled on a meathook. the mans brother Simon and his girlfriend go in search of him and after several skirmishes with the dark lord see Dracula struck by lightning falling from the castle in a ball of flame.

When it was released to cinemas in 1970, Scars of Dracula received a critical mauling, so much so that Warners flatly refused to release the film stateside. It was later released by the small indie company Continental films.

The New York Times told the world to "Avoid the film like the plague. Its garish, gory junk". That was one of the better reviews.

Is it really so bad? In my opinion no, but it is the worst of all Hammer's Dracula films.

It is entertaining and belts on at a fair pace. Dennis Waterman is pretty good as the hero Simon and Jenny Hanley is drop dead gorgeous in the role of Sarah. Other instances of greatness include Dracula scaling the castle outer walls as he does in Stoker's original novel and portraying the character as a gracious and accomodating host to travellers which had been lacking since Dracula Prince of Darkness. I also like the very gory effects as the corpses in the church are caressed by the camera, the attack on the Priest is actually pretty grueling.

There are minus points to Scars no doubt about it. An almost Carry On smattering of silly nudity, the bat prop looks very unconvincing. Perhaps the main problem in my view is the way Dracula is portrayed as a sadist. He whips and tortures his servant Klove (Patrick Troughton) with gleeful abandon and also uses weapons. Sorry, Dracula doesn't need weapons to kill.

If i had a choice on watching Scars or the latest Hollywood remake hack job i certainly know that i would be once again be seeing Dracula gracing my screen.

It's the blu i've saved to buy with The Old Dark House which will hopefully join it in HMV's 2 for £25 offer. If not then i'll buy it anyway. I already bought Blood From the Mummy's Tomb, To the Devil a Daughter and Doctor Jekyll and Sister Hyde from that series and Scars was the odd one out as Suspicious Death of a Minor made up the four if you were wondering.

In short, yes get it definitely!

[Inspector Abberline]

Originally Posted by Demdike@Cult Labs

Does this help?

My review in The Gothic Thread from way back in 2011.



It's the blu i've saved to buy with The Old Dark House which will hopefully join it in HMV's 2 for £25 offer. If not then i'll buy it anyway. I already bought Blood From the Mummy's Tomb, To the Devil a Daughter and Doctor Jekyll and Sister Hyde from that series and Scars was the odd one out as Suspicious Death of a Minor made up the four if you were wondering.

In short, yes get it definitely!

Ah hah...very good...I was going to buy it anyway.but its nice to get another point of view...im all for smutty nudity and fakes bats,I mean they can't be any worse than the one in Suspiria (why argento why) and House By the Cemetary (why Fulci why,oh wait its a fulci film,say no more wink wink nudge nudge),any way thanks,yes will get in the HMV two for a monkey..(or whatever the nearest animal equivlalant is)...of to practise my Micheal Ripper impression of country bumpkin/landlord/poacher.delete where applicable.

[Demdike@Cult Labs]

Originally Posted by Inspector Abberline

Ah hah...very good...I was going to buy it anyway.but its nice to get another point of view...im all for smutty nudity and fakes bats,I mean they can't be any worse than te one in Suspiria (why argento why) and House By the Cemetary (why Fulci why,oh wait its a fulci film,say no more wink wink nudge nudge),any way thanks,yes will get in the HMV two for a monkey..(or whatever the nearest animal equivlalant is)...of to practise my Micheal Ripper impression of country bumpkin/lanlord/poacher.deletw where a[pplicable.

Yeah, i can't believe i typed this line either

There are minus points to Scars no doubt about it. An almost Carry On smattering of silly nudity, the bat prop looks very unconvincing.

It's what i live for now. F*cking pretentious twat!

[Inspector Abberline]

Originally Posted by Demdike@Cult Labs

Yeah, i can't believe i typed this line either



It's what i live for now. F*cking pretentious twat!

Don't be to hard on your self,I mean I bet you never see furry fake bats and wobbly breasts in Fellini or Goddard films ...(never seen either so I could be wrong)..

[Demoncrat]

Rubbish!! You've obviously never seen either Fellini's masterpieces 8 and a half Bats, Rocco & His Bats and of course Batyricon

Godard is batshit crazy. Will this suffice??