Page 1 of Curse Of Frankenstein

Today is the street date for Hammer/Lionsgate`s Blu-ray and DVD double-pack of the 1957 Curse of Frankenstein which effectively launched Hammer as The House of Horror.

If anybody frequents some of the other forums I do, they`ll know that Hammer is considered by the online community to have made the most almighty mess of the release, deciding against all contrary advice that the movie was shot to be shown Academy framed (1.37:1).  The correct aspect ratio for the movie has always been thought to be 1.66:1, with American theatres cropping to 1.85:1.

As a sop to us anal types who said the movie was 1.66:1, Hammer have included the movie in that format as an extra - although that version appears to be misframed to cut the tops off heads.

The movie is also very soft in focus which appears to be down to the source material - the transfer was made from an interpositive supplied by Warner Bros constructed from Technicolor separations as the Original Camera Negative is apparently faded beyond use.

Hammer, who have a blog about these things, refuse to acknowledge they have made any mistakes in spite of considerable evidence and opinion to the contrary.

J Mark Oates

This item was edited on Monday, 15th October 2012, 06:00

This is plain crazy and will serve only to irritate the very fans who this is targeted at.

Another case of putting the project into the wrong hands.

I won`t be buying - and I`m very much target market.   


Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrr.

Although I don`t think it will ever happen, what Curse of Frankenstein needs is a friend at WB to put it on the Ultra Resolution waiting list (which seems predominantly reserved for MGM musicals).

J Mark Oates

Why have all the Studio Canal Hammer releases (3 more on Monday - Rasputin The Mad Monk; The Devil Rides Out; The Mummy`s Shroud) been treated to the royal release programme - at correct aspect ratio - 1:66.1 - and this has not? There are also some splendid extras including some fascinating and well-produced documentaries, like a feature on Hammer Horror spin-off books which is a real treat. Oh well. Such are the vagaries of licencing.

Devil Rides Out has apparently been "enhanced" with the sometimes shonky effects of the era supplemented with CGI smoke and the like.  That`s a whole other can o` worms.

J Mark Oates

Have you seen this thread?







My Blu-ray Screenshot Site

This item was edited on Sunday, 21st October 2012, 00:42

Not that actual thread, but I am familiar with a couple of the usual suspects.  John Hodson is an habitue of both the HTF and Roobarbs.  He`s passionate about movies - especially presented OAR and Curse is driving him bananas because Hammer is sticking to its guns about 1.37:1 being the OAR when the movie was made in a period when British cinema`s output was largely 1.66:1.  The 1.66:1 version of the movie on the disc is centre-extracted, which although is the usual modus operandi for this sort of thing, it`s fairly obvious Curse was intended to be shown/extracted as common-top (with the 1.37:1 frame).

Steve W (aka Pecker on AVF and Yorkshire on HTF) is Hammer`s main cheerleader in the home theatre community, coming up regularly with screengrabs to show how utterly wrong 1.66:1 is and that the movie should be shown 1.37:1.

Me?  I`m firmly in the 1.66:1 camp and have been from Day One.  I ran the 1.37:1 Blu, the 1.66:1 Blu and the old Warner 1.85:1 DVD side by side and checked scene for scene framing and composition.  The old Warner DVD is very tightly framed, but they employed a tilt-and-scan approach to the movie.  I suspect Warner prints would be similarly prepared.  The Hammer 1.37:1 Blu is framed with everything happening in the top third of the frame and little or nothing in the bottom third.  The picture is framed beautifully at the top but there is way too much legroom at the bottom of the image, leading this little black duck to conclude the OAR for the movie is 1.66:1 Common Top.  Unfortunately the Hammer 1.66:1 version has been deliberately framed with centre extraction so that a lot of information is and foreheads are lost.

If Hammer would just have done a proper 1.66:1 extraction and put that on as the default version, with the 1.37:1 as a "decide yourself" option, there wouldn`t be a squeak of complaint on the net.

Well, other than the image is very soft because Warner Motion Picture Imaging supplied the 4K scan from a stock interpositive produced from separation masters that may have been suffering from shrinkage.  They couldn`t go back to the Original Camera Negative because its buggered. 

J Mark Oates

I count myself as an enthusiastic learner about the technical side of cinema.  I`ve always been interested in cinema, and DVD and Blu-ray has always been an extension to that magical realm for me.  It always adds to my appreciation of movies finding out little technical gems about how they`re made and I love it when I can have one of those light-bulb "if you do x to y then z happens" moments.

You can imagine how frustrated I feel when somebody comes up with a little gem of information I wasn`t aware of that turns what I thought was a fairly decent working theory on its head.

That`s what`s happened to me about Curse of Frankenstein.  Suddenly I`m not sure of anything.  I`m not sure who`s right in this aspect ratio debacle or who`s wrong.  Apart from me.

I know what I think is right, but I`m told in no uncertain terms it can`t be.

I don`t think my current sig could be more apposite...

J Mark Oates

This item was edited on Tuesday, 23rd October 2012, 03:53

Oh dear! It`s all so confusing.

You`re right about the enhancements on `The Devil Rides Out`. I don`t mind the `restoration` but it wasn`t until I viewed the extras (blissfully unaware till then - so you can see that they are quite `sympathtic`) that I realised, to my horror, that they had digitally `enhanced` some scenes way beyond tidying and grading - by adding effects and things like cloudscapes behind the big house. Now that is NOT ON!!

I remember watching the first releases of Gerry Anderson material on VHS where they compiled episodes into `movies` and added godawful Star Wars meets Space Invader effects into it in an attempt to modernise. `orrible. Of course they eventuallly surpassed even that with the 16:9 Blu-Ray of Thunderbirds which made the Hood look like a boiled egg with the top of his head lopped off - but I digress!

I could live with the effects if the movie was available un-Georged as well, but apparently tarted-up is the default.

J Mark Oates