Tweet Dracula 1931 BD. Looks it got a good restoration work.

Take a look:

http://www.dvdbeaver.com/film/dvdreview ... a_1931.htm


Universal aparently did a very good job digitally restoring the movie from the best film elements .

Indeed it looks almost like restored from original camera negative, considering it's a early talk shot in 1931 film emulsion.
I bet they have a very good film master, maybe a good interpositive fine grain.

Lugosi skin texture is visible now.

Yes, that looks really good. I am curious to see what
the other films in the set look like, hopefully they will
be posted on that site soon.

I see a shot from Edward Van Sloan's "There ARE such things!" footage- I wonder if they managed to restore the whole clip, or is it just the few seconds they've used before.

Things have made things clearer- unfortunately Lugosi's hairpiece now looks obviously fake. That's the curse of restorations- there are Things Man Was Not Meant To See.

according to Universal they used as nitrate positive print. I believe it was a silent aperature ratio.

I see a shot from Edward Van Sloan's "There ARE such things!" footage- I wonder if they managed to restore the whole clip, or is it just the few seconds they've used before.

That shot of Van Sloan in front of the curtain is from the FRANKENSTEIN prologue. His epilogue for DRACULA took place in front of a blank movie screen.

I wonder how Spanish version looks

There was Spanish version of Dracula Universal did the same time they working on Bela Lugsoi version

This is good news. i know that there is some disatisfaction with the way Universal often "airbrushes" opticals (smooths them out digitally), but on the whole their Blu-ray versions of classic titles have been excellent.

It look too good to be a print, even a original print.
Many people confuse terms, and call print for anything with positive image, even a fine grain positive master. A fine grain it's not a projection print.


Probably the information of this page is fully reliable.
http://articles.latimes.com/2012/apr/30 ... d-20120430

"Schindler's List." ?? Restored????? Háaa háaaa... I think the right term is tranfered....

According this they have the original negative, but in bad shape, and missing footage, so they prefer to use a very good master.

The Spanishversion appears to still have problems in the worst damaged scenes.
http://www.dvdbeaver.com/film4/blu-ray_ ... h%20ex.jpg" target="_blank
But very decent in the scenes that had quality: http://www.dvdbeaver.com/film4/blu-ray_ ... panish.jpg" target="_blank

Frankenstein 1931 also got a excellent restoration work:

http://www.dvdbeaver.com/film4/blu-ray_ ... lu-ray.htm

And they use a positive fine grain, I supose according the article, but it look great like restored from original negative. It indicates that was very well made fine grain, maybe a emulsion a çittle bit more modern than master of Dracula (also great).

Let's hope Bride of Frankenstein BD look as good as this, cause the DVD of Bride wasn't so good as the first film.

I hope that after the holiday season Universal will release them as singles. I really do not care about The Creature From the Black Lagoon. ymmv, of course!

The screen caps look fabulous, I MUST say!

Take a look:

http://www.dvdbeaver.com/film/dvdreview ... a_1931.htm" target="_blank" target="_blank

Universal aparently did a very good job digitally restoring the movie from the best film elements .

Indeed it looks almost like restored from original camera negative, considering it's a early talk shot in 1931 film emulsion.
I bet they have a very good film master, maybe a good interpositive fine grain.

If that image of the main title card is from the new restoration it appears they decided to retain the misspelling in the title card. I thought I'd read somewhere that they planned to correct it.
I hope they do keep it as it is. It should not be fixed after all these years.

David Skal has reported on another board that the print he had seen at the Film Forum in July was "fixed".

I am more interested to hear the SWAN LAKE Overture and how it was repaired.

Take a look in this restoration demo, when they grade the image contrast:

http://epdaily.tv/all/type-of/news/univ ... announced/


The beofre gradding image show a wide dynamic range, flat contrast, like it was copied from original camera negative. This leads me to presume the film elements used was a fine grain low cntrast shot from camera negative and not a projection print.

Was justhe staircase brightness (contrast) changed ?? ?(look at 0:23) That would be a alteration and not a restoration.
I supose the contrast was changed for the entire frame, well I hope...

The Invisible Man 1932 and The Mummy 1932 also looks good, but a tad more grain reduced. Dracula keeps some nice small sharper grain. The review said Mummy And Invisible Man have interesting grain, but I bet it is noticeable for motion, while in screen captures we see somewhat a fuzzy grain texture.

http://www.dvdbeaver.com/film4/blu-ray_ ... lu-ray.htm
http://www.dvdbeaver.com/film4/blu-ray_ ... lu-ray.htm


They look more like a 40's film than a 30's film, given the fine transfer.
Mummy And Invisible Man perhaps it's a bit video look, like Kane first DVD... given the smoot of some grain and low contrast. But still impressive and invitting.

David Skal has reported on another board that the print he had seen at the Film Forum in July was "fixed".

I am more interested to hear the SWAN LAKE Overture and how it was repaired.

Yeah, I read that they were going to "fix" that too. And once again, I wish they'd leave it as it always has been - the way we know and love it!

Bride of Frankenstein:

http://www.dvdbeaver.com/film4/blu-ray_ ... lu-ray.htm


Some captures are a little bit fuzzy, but it's just soft focus technic, sometimes used by the photographer director, like the Mary Shelley (Elsa Lanchaster) close up.

Another great trasnfer.

Don't forget that in 3 weeks Carla Laemmele who was an extra in this film 81 years ago turns 103. Her first film was in 1925 and she currently has 2 films she has appeared in in post production here in 2012 87 years later

ARE THEY KIDDING!? Listen to what they did to the main title. In "fixing" the audio tug in "Swan Lake" they altered the beat structure. They said they took matching music from the Spanish version. That was a completely DIFFERENT arrangement of "Swan Lake". What they should have done was used matching bars from the same arrangement as used in THE MUMMY or THE MURDERS IN THE RUE MORGUE.

Un....believable.

I caught that too, Ray. Outside of the added introduction used on DRACULA (English), MUMMY, RUE MORGUE and BLUE ROOM, the recordings sounds identical. In a blindfold test I wouldn't be able to tell the difference. When it comes to home video, DRACULA seems cursed.

I'm a little confused, watching the demo, how they can boast one moment about changing the contrast on just part of a frame, and then claim the next moment that their aim was not to leave any footprints.

I'm sorry... if you're changing part of the image, not because it's damaged but because you think it was lit poorly, that is changing the original.

According to the Film Daily, the correct running time was 85 minutes:

http://archive.org/stream/filmdailyvolu ... 0/mode/2up

The print used on the disk was from the 1936 re-release and has about 10 to 11 minutes missing.
The epilogues was at most one or two minutes long. Makes you wonder what the prudes at the Breen office
found so offensive. It's a shame that so many Pre-Codes that happened to be re-released in the late 30's, 40's
and 50's now only survive in a Sarah Palin approved form.

Oh, bullshit. Since when has Sarah Palin wanted to censor movies?

Now, maybe Tipper Gore...

[Christopher Jacobs]

My copy of the Universal Monsters Blu-ray set just arrived in the mail about 13 hours ago, and I've already watched DRACULA, some brief scenes from the Spanish version of DRACULA, and the new restoration featurette, as well as THE MUMMY. The restoration (other than the missing footage still being missing) looks absolutely superb in what may well be the best HD transfers I've ever seen from Universal Home Video (who used to be notorious for intrusive digital "noise reduction" softening of the image in a misguided attempt to reduce or eliminate film grain). DRACULA and THE MUMMY now look better than any film print I've ever seen of them, mostly as if they were shot yesterday on modern B&W film, and certainly far better than any previous video versions (and the "Legacy" series DVD sets looked pretty darn good!). Those two films, at least, deserve an A+ for video quality, or 5 out of 5, 10 out of 10, as the natural fine film grain, details and textures now visible, plus the rich, pearly-looking contrast and grayscales, are nothing short of astonishing after all the decades of video, 16mm dupes, battered original TV and film society prints and sometimes iffy revival theatre prints. If all old movies looked like this on video, most people would be less likely to think of them as "old movies" with their preconceived concept that they'd obviously be fuzzy and grainy like the poor copies of worn dupes of old movies they've seen before. The bonus features, with a few exceptions dealing with Universal's centennial, are all standard-definition, ported over from the old DVDs. I'm really looking forward to going through the rest of the set.

My UK edition of the Universal Monsters Blu-ray set arrived and I watch parts of DRACULA, THE MUMMY, and some bonus features. It looks great and appears to have everything the US edition has including the Spanish DRACULA and the 3-D CREATURE FROM THE BLACK LAGOON. The booklet and postcard-sized lobby cards are included. I like the way the discs are housed too - no cardboard sleeves. My total cost including shipping from the UK is $55.

[Christopher Jacobs]

Watched THE WOLF MAN tonight (well, last night at this point), and as a movie it holds up better than I remembered (I watched the DVD once about a decade ago when it came out, but previously had not seen it since it was on TV in the 70s and 80s, and probably a 16mm college screening). Again it looks better than I've ever seen it, with amazing clarity, although the first 20 minutes or so do seem to have some very slight digital grain reduction and edge ehancement that give it an almost "overclean" slightly video look, but by 20-30 minutes into the movie the grain remains very natural and the picture throughout the film has great contrast and detail. I'd probably rate the video on THE WOLF MAN an "A" or 4.5 out of 5, almost but not quite as good as DRACULA and THE MUMMY. I'll try to watch FRANKENSTEIN and/or THE INVISIBLE MAN sometime over this weekend (relatives visiting, so we may well be watching something completely different).

I've got the U.S. box set, which does not include the postcard posters in the U.K. set, but does print them on the cardboard pages facing the Blu-ray disc slots in the book packaging they all come in. I believe that the U.S. set apparently includes one or two extra commentary tracks missing from the U.K. set discs.

Christopher,

I have most of these titles already on DVD but your enthusiasm is seriously tempting me.

[Christopher Jacobs]

Christopher,

I have most of these titles already on DVD but your enthusiasm is seriously tempting me.

I've got them all, too, in the various Universal horror "legacy" series, but although most of the bonus features are simply the same standard-definition extras ported over to the Blu-ray, the new HD transfers of the features themselves are so much sharper projected in full 1080p by 1920 onto a big screen four feet tall by about five to seven feet wide that they're almost breathtaking. I really hope they sell well and quickly enough to encourage Universal to put out the rest of their horror classics (and other titles) in new HD scans onto Blu-ray (as well as more classics in 3-D).

Today my Panasonic active infra-red 3-D glasses finally arrived in the mail, and since earlier tonight my sister and mother decided to go out shopping rather than watch something in my basement theatre, I used the opportunity to watch THE CREATURE FROM THE BLACK LAGOON in 3-D, which I'd previously seen only in 2-D. The picture quality ranges from good to excellent, a few softish shots due to duping at transitions or optical enlargements in the original print. The 3-D is quite spectacular overall, again varying in intensity from shot to shot, but mostly being vivid and involving, often reminiscent of Viewmaster pictures. Underwater 3-D shots are very impressive, as are the jungle shots on the water and the cave shots. Julie/Julia Adams looks especially entrancing in 3-D! I watched it again immediately following in the 2-D version on the same disc, but this time with the audio commentary (which is very entertaining and informative, and which I can't recall having gotten around to listening to on the old DVD release from 2004). The 2-D version of CREATURE FROM THE BLACK LAGOON also has good to excellent picture quality, which I'd rate a B+ or A- at some points (including the opening Universal logo and a few early scenes that appear to have some grain reduction) to a solid A through much of the film, to a dazzling A+ in quite a few shots (with a very film-like grain pattern), sometimes for long stretches at a time (basically whenever there are no opticals or process shots).

Although there are a few recent movies that have had effective 3-D versions theatrically (HUGO, especially, comes to mind, as well as the computer-created 3-D version of TITANIC), it is this one Blu-ray release with the 3-D edition included more or less as a free bonus afterthought that really makes me glad I decided to upgrade to 3-D when I replaced my old projector. I really hope they put out REVENGE OF THE CREATURE and IT CAME FROM OUTER SPACE in 3-D Blu-rays, the latter of which still has its original stereo soundtrack surviving. (Of course I'll now also be looking forward anxiously to the promised 3-D Blu-rays of classic 1950s films from Warner Brothers over the next year.)

[Christopher Jacobs]

Finally got through the other four films in the set over the past couple of nights.

FRANKENSTEIN is another incredibly sharp transfer, another A+ or 5 out of 5. Same for THE INVISIBLE MAN, in which even all the ground-breaking traveling matte optical effects look outstanding. Beautiful contrast and visible but fine, natural-looking film grain on both films.

THE BRIDE OF FRANKENSTEIN, arguably the best movie of the entire set for entertainment value, looks very good indeed, but just a bit softer/grainier than DRACULA, FRANKENSTEIN, THE MUMMY, and THE INVISIBLE MAN, appearing like a really nice 16mm original or good 35mm release print, but the black levels and contrast range is better than most of the prints I can remember seeing. Perhaps it was scanned from a finegrain or dupe negative rather than a camera negative. Of course there are a lot more optical effects in BRIDE and their required dupe work will naturally be revealed as a bit lower quality than the rest of the film in such a sharp transfer. It still deserves an A for picture quality, or a good 4.5 out of 5.

THE PHANTOM OF THE OPERA is the only movie in the set that I did not previously own on the DVD. While the film itself isn't up to the Chaney classic, the HD image transfer is mostly A+ quality, with lush, gorgeously rich Technicolor and an extremely sharp picture that shows the film grain structure clearly. Several shots do exhibit some very minor color fringing due to color matrix alignment/shrinkage problems, but these instances are not severe (no worse than A- quality) and do not last very long. I'd give the overall film a solid A, or 4.5 out of 5 instead of a full A+ or 5, but only because those few minor problems come and go a few times rather than being a single instance.

Sound is very nice on all the films, mostly better than any previous available versions. The commentaries from the old DVDs are excellent, as are the making-of documentaries, even if all the ported-over bonuses are still just standard-def. The few new featurettes are in HD, covering the history of Universal Studios and their film restoration process.

You might want to wait for a sale on the U.S. box set or get the much cheaper U.K. set, but the Universal Classic Monsters Essential Collection is definitely essential for Blu-ray collectors, whether or not you've got the original DVD releases from a decade or more ago.

Although there are a few recent movies that have had effective 3-D versions theatrically (HUGO, especially, comes to mind, as well as the computer-created 3-D version of TITANIC), it is this one Blu-ray release with the 3-D edition included more or less as a free bonus afterthought that really makes me glad I decided to upgrade to 3-D when I replaced my old projector. I really hope they put out REVENGE OF THE CREATURE and IT CAME FROM OUTER SPACE in 3-D Blu-rays, the latter of which still has its original stereo soundtrack surviving. (Of course I'll now also be looking forward anxiously to the promised 3-D Blu-rays of classic 1950s films from Warner Brothers over the next year.)

I must second that and quite enthusiastically. I've had mixed experiences with the home iteration of 3D (thusfar the best contemporary experiences technically have been the Hugo and Tintin blu rays), but only the ps3 download of 'The Mad Magician' had really knocked my socks off until this 'Creature' release. The illusion of inward depth is well achieved on all of the contemporary 3D releases I've seen, but only the older polarized films seem to pull off the 'jump off the screen' gags successfully. Dial M for Murder is also working quite well in this regard, but the B&W films seem just a bit more effective for some reason.

This set is a must own for any serious buff and I equally hope that Universal puts out a second volume... and more 50's 3D titles.

Since the extras on the U.K. set are standard def, will they work on U.S. players? (in other words, are they PAL or NTSC), or perhaps they're up-converted?

I'll answer my own question.

They play just fine.

I got the Universal Monsters set today as a Christmas present from the other half.

The packaging is excellent. Looking forward to digging in.