Excalibur - DVDfile.com forum for DVD, Blu-Ray, and HD-DVD

Bowman · 02-07-2001, 10:27 PM

Thinking of picking up a John Boorman double feature this week of The Emerald Forest new release and Excalibur. TEF is a no-brainer for me as I really love this film, but I would like to know people's thoughts on the Excalibur disc. Mainly with regards to picture, sound, and extras (I believe there's a commentary on this disc - if so, how is it?).

tomdkat · 02-07-2001, 10:57 PM

I own Excalibur. I don't have a progressive scan DVD player or a fancy HDTV or anything. I have a Pioneer DVL-919 and a 20" Panasonic TV.

The picture on Excalibur is good but not great or breathtaking. The audio is decent but not groundshaking. I think they did a good job on the DVD, but if technology could be used to improve it more they should re-release it.

I bought Excalibur for $7.99 at a store. If you can find it for cheap, cheap go ahead and pick it up. Otherwise rent it first to see if you like the DVD quality enough to add it to your collection.

I think the movie itself belongs in any collection, regardless of DVD quality (but that's just my opinion).

Peace.....

Chris in OC · 02-07-2001, 11:15 PM

One other thing about Excalibur -- it was shot at about 2.35:1 but the DVD is cropped to about 1.85:1. Even if you've never seen the film, it's obvious when the title comes up and spills off the sides of the screen. Why they did this, I don't know, especially since the laserdisc had the proper aspect ratio. It's priced at $10 or less everywhere I've seen it, so it's not too bad a deal, and I agree that the film is worth having in my collection, but it's not quite what we should be seeing. I'm hoping they re-master this one properly.

mahavishnu · 02-07-2001, 11:31 PM

You know, when I first saw the disc I immediately though "this has been cropped from 2.35:1" I was then told on this forum that this was not the case.

Can someone provide the definitive word on this issue?

Either way the framing is horrible.

tomdkat · 02-07-2001, 11:51 PM

I also noticed how the title was cropped, but I jut chocked it up as a mystery. I also have the LD so maybe I'll watch them more closely ad compare the two.

You would think King Arthur and the Knights of the Round Table would deserve better treatment, but oh well......

Peace.....

disclover · 02-08-2001, 01:10 AM

I didn't see this movie in a theatre, but I seem to remember reading on a web site somewhere that "Boorman shot it for 1:85:1, to keep the effects budget down." Seems bizarre to me in the light of the fact that the laserdisc was apparently 2.35:1, and that the film looks like a natural for 2:35:1 framing. Anyway, yes, the disc is incredibly cheap. Picture quality is a lot better than I expected but certainly not top-notch. Sound is good, again not stellar (apparently this was released theatrically in mono, and they tried to tweak it for a stereo mix on the DVD, but any stereo separation appears to be confined to the music score, the dialogue remaining basically mono). For the price, I'd say it's worth it, but this is a cheapie Warner title that could be done better.

Chris in OC · 02-08-2001, 01:33 AM

I'd be curious to hear more details about this. My knowledge of film formats is a little sketchy, but most 1.85 films I've seen have been matted. To get the image I've seen on the LD, Boorman would have had to use a wider format, like an anamorphic lens or Super 35. Maybe he did and decided in post production to go with 1.85, but that doesn't explain why the LD was framed for a wider screen, or why the title doesn't fit the 1.85 frame (that could have been fixed easily before release). Besides, this film just seems to beg for a widescreen image.

[This message has been edited by Chris in OC (edited 02-07-2001).]

Kevin M · 02-08-2001, 02:43 AM

Well I have the old 90/91 Excalibur LD and it is not 2:35:1 but 1:85:1.

I have an LD player & a DVD player so I did a side by side (well..with switching anyway) comparison between the two and from what I can see the DVD cuts off the top & sides of the picture but not in all scenes, the amount of cropping seems to flop around from scene to scene. Not the best to be sure but not as bad as a pan & scan job let's say.

A new transfer would be nice.

------------------
-----Kevin M.-----
"Let's build a snowman! We can make him our best friend! We can name him paul or we can name him.....Beowulf! We can make him tall or we can make him...not so tall! Snowman!" - Cannibal the Musical

Chris in OC · 02-08-2001, 05:20 PM

Hmmm...I'll have to see if I can still rent that LD. I clearly recall the black bars top and bottom being larger on the LD than they were on the DVD. Thanks for the info, Kevin.

mahavishnu · 02-08-2001, 07:01 PM

So in other words there's been some sort of unforgivable fuck-up at the mastering stage.

Wesly Moore · 02-08-2001, 08:13 PM

For whatever it's worth, the IMDB entry for Excalibur lists the aspect ratio as 1.85:1 for the theatrical release, widescreen laserdisc, and DVD.

I didn't think the disc was outstanding, but it certainly beat my old VHS tape, and the price was right.

------------------
Wesly Moore
------------------
weslymoore@aol.com
My collection...out of control

They mostly come at night. Mostly.

[This message has been edited by Wesly Moore (edited 02-08-2001).]

Taxi · 02-08-2001, 09:36 PM

Unfortunately, imdb is about as reliable as a Florida Vote Counter when it comes to OARs.

------------------
Taxi
DVDFile Forum Administrator

Chris in OC · 02-08-2001, 11:20 PM

In the immortal word of Keanu Reeves: "Whoa."

I did some searching thru the reviews listed for this DVD, and found that many list the aspect ratio as being the "theatrical 1.85:1" or words to that effect, although DVDFile's review shows 2.35:1 in the right column stats. Also, a few of them mention an audio commentary by Boorman (how did I miss that?) in which he says that that's the aspect ratio in which he shot it. The DVD is also supposed to be 16x9 enhanced.

Maybe I just imagined everything...I really do need to see that LD again. However, assuming it was shot at 1.85:1, I wonder why it was reframed as Kevin M noted above.

Wesly Moore · 02-09-2001, 12:52 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Taxi:
Unfortunately, imdb is about as reliable as a Florida Vote Counter when it comes to OARs.

I knew somebody would mention that...hence my original post's "for whatever it's worth" disclaimer.

I have not yet listened to Boorman's commentary on this disc, but I will do so soon to see what he has to say about the filmed aspect ratio.

------------------
Wesly Moore
------------------
weslymoore@aol.com
My collection...out of control

They mostly come at night. Mostly.

mahavishnu · 02-09-2001, 11:07 AM

OAR or not, it's useless if the disc has been cropped and incorrectly framed.

Kevin M · 02-09-2001, 11:42 AM

It has. Also the DD 5.1 track is actually weaker sounding (in the bass & mid's) than the LD's PCM tracks.

Saddly when I noticed all the cut off top's of heads in the DVD image I also noticed how improved the image quality is from the old LD transfer........damn it.

------------------
-----Kevin M.-----
"Let's build a snowman! We can make him our best friend! We can name him paul or we can name him.....Beowulf! We can make him tall or we can make him...not so tall! Snowman!" - Cannibal the Musical

Wesly Moore · 02-15-2001, 05:47 PM

Boorman does indeed comment on the filmed aspect ratio in his commentary. He mentions that he would have preferred to film in a "scope" format, but the planned optical visual effects would have been much more expensive in an anamorphic process. Due to these cost considerations, he chose to film in open-matte. That said, the image on the DVD often does seem badly framed, cutting off characters' heads and the like. I suspect that film was matted incorrectly during the transfer.

Boorman also mentions the audio mix. He describes how the audio was originally mixed for Dolby stereo, and he took the film out for test/preview screenings with the Dolby mix. He was appalled to find that the audio levels for the different channels varied wildly from theater to theater. He then went back to make a mono audio mix and released the film that way. Plans for the DVD (or was this commentary recorded for the LD?) may have been unfinalized when he recorded the commentary, as he says that he "hope[s] that a stereo mix can be included on this new edition." I couldn't find any information regarding the 5.1 mix included on the DVD.

------------------
Wesly Moore
------------------
weslymoore@aol.com
My collection...out of control

They mostly come at night. Mostly.

Templar · 01-19-2002, 08:15 PM

Sorry to dredge this thing up again, but has anyone done any kind of serious examination of this disk? The anamorphic enhancement cuts off a good portion of the film, what's up with that? I played the ending scene...the money shot...you know with the sword being held by the Lady of the Lake...in both anamorphic and regular widescreen...and in anamorphic you can't even see the top of the sword. I swear about 10% of the screen is cut off in anamorphic. Is it just a bad transfer or what?

02-07-2001, 10:27 PM	#1 (permalink)
Bowman Actor Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: El Paso, TX	Excalibur Thinking of picking up a John Boorman double feature this week of The Emerald Forest new release and Excalibur. TEF is a no-brainer for me as I really love this film, but I would like to know people's thoughts on the Excalibur disc. Mainly with regards to picture, sound, and extras (I believe there's a commentary on this disc - if so, how is it?).

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

02-07-2001, 10:57 PM	#2 (permalink)
tomdkat Official Forum Warmonger "Dial Tone" Join Date: Sep 2000 Location: Hayward, CA, USA	I own Excalibur. I don't have a progressive scan DVD player or a fancy HDTV or anything. I have a Pioneer DVL-919 and a 20" Panasonic TV. The picture on Excalibur is good but not great or breathtaking. The audio is decent but not groundshaking. I think they did a good job on the DVD, but if technology could be used to improve it more they should re-release it. I bought Excalibur for $7.99 at a store. If you can find it for cheap, cheap go ahead and pick it up. Otherwise rent it first to see if you like the DVD quality enough to add it to your collection. I think the movie itself belongs in any collection, regardless of DVD quality (but that's just my opinion). Peace.....

02-07-2001, 11:15 PM	#3 (permalink)
Chris in OC Actor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: So Cal	One other thing about Excalibur -- it was shot at about 2.35:1 but the DVD is cropped to about 1.85:1. Even if you've never seen the film, it's obvious when the title comes up and spills off the sides of the screen. Why they did this, I don't know, especially since the laserdisc had the proper aspect ratio. It's priced at $10 or less everywhere I've seen it, so it's not too bad a deal, and I agree that the film is worth having in my collection, but it's not quite what we should be seeing. I'm hoping they re-master this one properly.

02-07-2001, 11:31 PM	#4 (permalink)
mahavishnu Actor Join Date: Jun 2000	You know, when I first saw the disc I immediately though "this has been cropped from 2.35:1" I was then told on this forum that this was not the case. Can someone provide the definitive word on this issue? Either way the framing is horrible.

02-07-2001, 11:51 PM	#5 (permalink)
tomdkat Official Forum Warmonger "Dial Tone" Join Date: Sep 2000 Location: Hayward, CA, USA	I also noticed how the title was cropped, but I jut chocked it up as a mystery. I also have the LD so maybe I'll watch them more closely ad compare the two. You would think King Arthur and the Knights of the Round Table would deserve better treatment, but oh well...... Peace.....

02-08-2001, 01:10 AM	#6 (permalink)
disclover Actor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Long Island NY	I didn't see this movie in a theatre, but I seem to remember reading on a web site somewhere that "Boorman shot it for 1:85:1, to keep the effects budget down." Seems bizarre to me in the light of the fact that the laserdisc was apparently 2.35:1, and that the film looks like a natural for 2:35:1 framing. Anyway, yes, the disc is incredibly cheap. Picture quality is a lot better than I expected but certainly not top-notch. Sound is good, again not stellar (apparently this was released theatrically in mono, and they tried to tweak it for a stereo mix on the DVD, but any stereo separation appears to be confined to the music score, the dialogue remaining basically mono). For the price, I'd say it's worth it, but this is a cheapie Warner title that could be done better.

02-08-2001, 01:33 AM	#7 (permalink)
Chris in OC Actor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: So Cal	I'd be curious to hear more details about this. My knowledge of film formats is a little sketchy, but most 1.85 films I've seen have been matted. To get the image I've seen on the LD, Boorman would have had to use a wider format, like an anamorphic lens or Super 35. Maybe he did and decided in post production to go with 1.85, but that doesn't explain why the LD was framed for a wider screen, or why the title doesn't fit the 1.85 frame (that could have been fixed easily before release). Besides, this film just seems to beg for a widescreen image. [This message has been edited by Chris in OC (edited 02-07-2001).]

02-08-2001, 02:43 AM	#8 (permalink)
Kevin M Actor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: mid west	Well I have the old 90/91 Excalibur LD and it is not 2:35:1 but 1:85:1. I have an LD player & a DVD player so I did a side by side (well..with switching anyway) comparison between the two and from what I can see the DVD cuts off the top & sides of the picture but not in all scenes, the amount of cropping seems to flop around from scene to scene. Not the best to be sure but not as bad as a pan & scan job let's say. A new transfer would be nice. ------------------ -----Kevin M.----- "Let's build a snowman! We can make him our best friend! We can name him paul or we can name him.....Beowulf! We can make him tall or we can make him...not so tall! Snowman!" - Cannibal the Musical

02-08-2001, 05:20 PM	#9 (permalink)
Chris in OC Actor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: So Cal	Hmmm...I'll have to see if I can still rent that LD. I clearly recall the black bars top and bottom being larger on the LD than they were on the DVD. Thanks for the info, Kevin.

02-08-2001, 07:01 PM	#10 (permalink)
mahavishnu Actor Join Date: Jun 2000	So in other words there's been some sort of unforgivable fuck-up at the mastering stage.

02-08-2001, 08:13 PM	#11 (permalink)
Wesly Moore Actor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles, CA	For whatever it's worth, the IMDB entry for Excalibur lists the aspect ratio as 1.85:1 for the theatrical release, widescreen laserdisc, and DVD. I didn't think the disc was outstanding, but it certainly beat my old VHS tape, and the price was right. ------------------ Wesly Moore ------------------ weslymoore@aol.com My collection...out of control They mostly come at night. Mostly. [This message has been edited by Wesly Moore (edited 02-08-2001).]

02-08-2001, 09:36 PM	#12 (permalink)
Taxi Admin Emeritus Join Date: Aug 1999 Location: Orygun	Unfortunately, imdb is about as reliable as a Florida Vote Counter when it comes to OARs. ------------------ Taxi DVDFile Forum Administrator

02-08-2001, 11:20 PM	#13 (permalink)
Chris in OC Actor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: So Cal	In the immortal word of Keanu Reeves: "Whoa." I did some searching thru the reviews listed for this DVD, and found that many list the aspect ratio as being the "theatrical 1.85:1" or words to that effect, although DVDFile's review shows 2.35:1 in the right column stats. Also, a few of them mention an audio commentary by Boorman (how did I miss that?) in which he says that that's the aspect ratio in which he shot it. The DVD is also supposed to be 16x9 enhanced. Maybe I just imagined everything...I really do need to see that LD again. However, assuming it was shot at 1.85:1, I wonder why it was reframed as Kevin M noted above.

02-09-2001, 11:07 AM	#15 (permalink)
mahavishnu Actor Join Date: Jun 2000	OAR or not, it's useless if the disc has been cropped and incorrectly framed.

02-09-2001, 11:42 AM	#16 (permalink)
Kevin M Actor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: mid west	It has. Also the DD 5.1 track is actually weaker sounding (in the bass & mid's) than the LD's PCM tracks. Saddly when I noticed all the cut off top's of heads in the DVD image I also noticed how improved the image quality is from the old LD transfer........damn it. ------------------ -----Kevin M.----- "Let's build a snowman! We can make him our best friend! We can name him paul or we can name him.....Beowulf! We can make him tall or we can make him...not so tall! Snowman!" - Cannibal the Musical

02-15-2001, 05:47 PM	#17 (permalink)
Wesly Moore Actor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles, CA	Boorman does indeed comment on the filmed aspect ratio in his commentary. He mentions that he would have preferred to film in a "scope" format, but the planned optical visual effects would have been much more expensive in an anamorphic process. Due to these cost considerations, he chose to film in open-matte. That said, the image on the DVD often does seem badly framed, cutting off characters' heads and the like. I suspect that film was matted incorrectly during the transfer. Boorman also mentions the audio mix. He describes how the audio was originally mixed for Dolby stereo, and he took the film out for test/preview screenings with the Dolby mix. He was appalled to find that the audio levels for the different channels varied wildly from theater to theater. He then went back to make a mono audio mix and released the film that way. Plans for the DVD (or was this commentary recorded for the LD?) may have been unfinalized when he recorded the commentary, as he says that he "hope[s] that a stereo mix can be included on this new edition." I couldn't find any information regarding the 5.1 mix included on the DVD. ------------------ Wesly Moore ------------------ weslymoore@aol.com My collection...out of control They mostly come at night. Mostly.

01-19-2002, 08:15 PM	#18 (permalink)
Templar Banned Join Date: Mar 2001 Location: Bumblefark, PA	Sorry to dredge this thing up again, but has anyone done any kind of serious examination of this disk? The anamorphic enhancement cuts off a good portion of the film, what's up with that? I played the ending scene...the money shot...you know with the sword being held by the Lady of the Lake...in both anamorphic and regular widescreen...and in anamorphic you can't even see the top of the sword. I swear about 10% of the screen is cut off in anamorphic. Is it just a bad transfer or what?