Horror of Dracula – Blu-ray Review (1 Viewer)

[t1g3r5fan]

Although established in the 1930’s, Hammer Film Productions didn’t really begin to attract major notice until the mid-1950’s, when they began to release a series of science fiction and Gothic horror films – starting with The Quatermass Xperiment (1955) – that would soon become synonymous with the company and become known as “Hammer Horror”. Released just a year after the success of The Curse of Frankenstein, the company’s take on Dracula (known as Horror of Dracula here in America on initial release) helped cement Hammer Films as a major player in the horror movie world. A longtime favorite in the genre, Warner Archive has finally released the movie on Blu-ray for the first time here in the states.



Horror of Dracula (1958)



Released: 16 Jun 1958
Rated: NOT RATED
Runtime: 82 min




Director: Terence...

Continue reading...

 

[Noel Aguirre]

The video rating should be at least a 4 considering Hammer was never a top tiered studio and it looks pretty close to how it looked back in the day. IMHO

 

[Alan Tully]

I didn't bother in the end. I hate black crush almost as much as I hate excessive dirt on the picture. I can't say that I remember what it looked like back in 1958 as I was only eight years old at the time, but I did see it in an old cinema in 1965 (I think), & of course I can't remember exactly what it looked like, but I do remember thinking, wow, those colours! Anyway, as far as I'm concerned both the BFI & Warner have dropped the ball on this one. Oh well, first world problems, plenty of other great releases to buy.

 

[Colin Jacobson]

The video rating should be at least a 4 considering Hammer was never a top tiered studio and it looks pretty close to how it looked back in the day. IMHO

As someone who's written more than 7000 reviews over 20 years, I'm no closer now to deciding how to fairly rate unattractive images that accurately replicate the source than I was in 1999.

On one hand, is it fair to ding an "ugly" picture that represents the way the movie's supposed to look?

Probably not, but on the other hand, I feel really uncomfortable giving an "A" picture grade for a film that looks mediocre at best.

I think it's more important to read the comments about how the picture looks than to worry about the letter grade or number rating. We use those as a simple hint but the text itself is more valuable..

 

[Will Krupp]

On one hand, is it fair to ding an "ugly" picture that represents the way the movie's supposed to look?

I, for one, am not willing to concede that it's SUPPOSED to look this way.

 

[Colin Jacobson]

I, for one, am not willing to concede that it's SUPPOSED to look this way.

I'm not discussing this film in particular - I'm discussing the subject in a global sense...

 

[dpippel]

The royal we, you know, the editorial...

 

[Will Krupp]

I'm not discussing this film in particular - I'm discussing the subject in a global sense...

Got it!

 

[Robert Harris]

I'm not discussing this film in particular - I'm discussing the subject in a global sense...

In a global sense, viewers are not permitted an opinion. Either something is correct (or as humanly close to correct, as possible, based upon extant elements) or it is not.

There is no gray area.

 

[haineshisway]

And of course it helps if the review actually has knowledge about what something looked like originally

 

[Colin Jacobson]

In a global sense, viewers are not permitted an opinion. Either something is correct (or as humanly close to correct, as possible, based upon extant elements) or it is not.

There is no gray area.

You're obviously comfortable giving perfect "picture quality" grades based on what you interpret as correct - I'm not.

I just can't assign an "A+" to something that objectively looks mediocre at best.

I prefer to have some compromise in the grading and explain the choice in the text...

 

[Alan Tully]

When a transfer is done right, like: She Wore A Yellow Ribbon, Bad Day At Black Rock, Lust For Life, How The West Was Won, Ben-Hur, The Boy Friend, & many, many more (I've just chosen Warner titles for arguments sake), you don't get this - that's how we think it looked at the time, that's how the director wants it, that's what an assistant cameraman said it should look like (TGTBTU), we have a print & it looks just like that, you don't get complainers being told to get their TVs professionally calibrated. You just pop in the disc & enjoy the film with a big grin on your face.