RAY DVD

[JSngry]

LTB (hallelujah I love her so) surprised me by bringing this home Tuesday night, and since then, I've watched both the theatrical version with and without the director's commentary, as well as the extended version with all the deleted scenes restored, and all the little trivial stuff, like the trilers and stuff.

Big news for me is how much better an already fine movie is made by the restoration of the deleted scenes. Opinions may vary on this, but I found that it made the move a lot less "Hollywood-y" and really provided more quality dramatic depth. The director's commentary, although at times (not too many,, though) a tad geeky/fanboy in quality was good for at least one listen, as he freely cops to what scenes/elements are apocryphal (and why they were used anyway), as well as providing interesting (to me, anyway) commentary on, not just the film, but the cast and crew as well. Apparently, this was a low(er)-budget independent film, so imagination had to be used across the board. It was used quite well, imo.

Priced to sell at under $20 (if your son works at Fry's, it's under $17...). Do yourself a favor and check it out.

[Shawn]

Thanks for the review Jim, I haven't had a chance to see this film yet...so I'm especially looking forward to it now.

[sal]

Wal Mart has it for $14.99, but today is the last day!

[ejp626]

Are the deleted scenes actually inserted into the movie (like expanded Lord of the Rings or Apocalypse Now), or are they off on their own (like 90% of movies)? While I like watching deleted scenes, you just can't get much flow or feel for them, when they are separate.

[sal]

Are the deleted scenes actually inserted into the movie (like expanded Lord of the Rings or Apocalypse Now), or are they off on their own (like 90% of movies)? While I like watching deleted scenes, you just can't get much flow or feel for them, when they are separate.

They are integrated into the movie like Lord of the Rings. Haven't seen it yet, but that's what I read somewhere.

[JSngry]

Are the deleted scenes actually inserted into the movie (like expanded Lord of the Rings or Apocalypse Now), or are they off on their own (like 90% of movies)? While I like watching deleted scenes, you just can't get much flow or feel for them, when they are separate.

You can have it either way - there's an "extended version" of the movie on the main DVD (although there's a slight - 1-2 seconds - pause while the deleted scenes load on my admittedly not state-of-the-art DVD player), or you can view them seperately on the "bonus" DVD.

BTW - the bonus DVD also has two uncut music perfmance scenes. In either version of the movie, they're not presented in this fashion.

[sal]

You can have it either way - there's an "extended version" of the movie on the main DVD (although there's a slight - 1-2 seconds - pause while the deleted scenes load on my admittedly not state-of-the-art DVD player

I finally got around to watching my copy of the Ray DVD. Although I agree with Jim in the fact that the deleted scenes are effective and add to the depth of the film, I am VERY unhappy with the "technical" aspect of this DVD.

Before you buy this, be aware that it is not a seamless "extended" edition like Lord of the Rings. As you are watching the film, right before it goes into an extended scene, these white music note icons come blinking on the screen (very annoying), and then you get a pause (while a new title loads) and then it goes straight into the extended scene, which is grainy, has bad sound, and just poor overall presentation quality. When the deleted scene ends, again the 2-3 second pause, as it has to re-load back into the main film. What's happened here is that the technological shortcomings of this DVD have destroyed the continuity of what could have been an effective extended edition of the film. Why couldn't the filmmakers have spent a bit of extra time and money, restored the deleted scenes to the same quality of the regular film, and created an option to watch a true extended edition of the film that actually would make for a good experience? I have never before seen a DVD release that has taken this cheap route before. Instead, we're stuck with this thrown together crap heap of a DVD that takes some really effective scenes and just cheaply and unartisticly throws them into the mix. It didn't work for me, and I'm very disappointed. I will stick to watching the theatrical version in the future.

[Jim Alfredson]

Why couldn't the filmmakers have spent a bit of extra time and money, restored the deleted scenes to the same quality of the regular film, and created an option to watch a true extended edition of the film that actually would make for a good experience? 

$$$$

[Dan Gould]

Why couldn't the filmmakers have spent a bit of extra time and money, restored the deleted scenes to the same quality of the regular film, and created an option to watch a true extended edition of the film that actually would make for a good experience? 

$$$$

You just have all the answers, today, don't ya?

[JSngry]

You can have it either way - there's an "extended version" of the movie on the main DVD (although there's a slight - 1-2 seconds - pause while the deleted scenes load on my admittedly not state-of-the-art DVD player

I finally got around to watching my copy of the Ray DVD. Although I agree with Jim in the fact that the deleted scenes are effective and add to the depth of the film, I am VERY unhappy with the "technical" aspect of this DVD.

Before you buy this, be aware that it is not a seamless "extended" edition like Lord of the Rings. As you are watching the film, right before it goes into an extended scene, these white music note icons come blinking on the screen (very annoying), and then you get a pause (while a new title loads) and then it goes straight into the extended scene, which is grainy, has bad sound, and just poor overall presentation quality. When the deleted scene ends, again the 2-3 second pause, as it has to re-load back into the main film. What's happened here is that the technological shortcomings of this DVD have destroyed the continuity of what could have been an effective extended edition of the film. Why couldn't the filmmakers have spent a bit of extra time and money, restored the deleted scenes to the same quality of the regular film, and created an option to watch a true extended edition of the film that actually would make for a good experience? I have never before seen a DVD release that has taken this cheap route before. Instead, we're stuck with this thrown together crap heap of a DVD that takes some really effective scenes and just cheaply and unartisticly throws them into the mix. It didn't work for me, and I'm very disappointed. I will stick to watching the theatrical version in the future.

I didn't notice the poor quality you mention, but do get the pauses. I don't like them, but I'll take'em until something better comes along. The added scenes really do make it a better movie, I think, pauses or not. I just process it all after it's over, and process the pauses out. But mileages on that technique obviously vary.

I wonder how much of this is due to genuine budget constraints. The director's commentary repeatedly mentions how the film was made w/o any major studio backing, and that the big-money guy (forget his name) was a "moral conservative" who insisted on a PG-13 film. Sounds like maybe the DVD budget was already in place before anybody knew how well the film would do, and funds were not unlimited. Maybe.

How well DID this film do at the box office anyway? I know it was a hit, but it came and went from the major theatres here before I could get a chance to see it, not more than 2 months or so. And it's not yet made the dollar-house circuit either.

Don't know all that much about how the film industry "plans" the life-cycle of a film, but I definitely pick up the vibe that nobody was sure that this thing was going to be any kind of a big success and proceeded accordingly. More's the pity.

[sal]

I didn't notice the poor quality you mention

I don't have the best audio/video equipment, but its fairly decent. With the deleted scenes, I noticed that the the picture quality looked like it was transfered directly from the film stock, and not digitally remastered or anything. The colors were weak and the picture was grainy. Imagine watching a movie in 70mm and then a scene cutting to 16mm. This is what it felt like. And the sound was very compressed...almost sounding metalic. It was a huge change from the beautiful 5.1 mix that the rest of the movie had.

Sorry to keep bitching about this. I'm sure it had to do with the budget and pre-production forcasts and all that good stuff..... I'm just upset because I think these extra scenes could have really served the film had more care gone into the presentation. And now, it feels like we're stuck with a half-assed product. I wish that I could process it all at the end and be done with it, but unfortunately these things really bother me.

Edited February 8, 2005 by sal

[Chuck Nessa]

I noticed that the the picture quality looked like it was transfered directly from the film stock, and not digitally remastered or anything

Sorry, but I have a huge problem with the term "digitally remastered". If it came from tape or film to digital, that happened.

I have the same problem with people talking about Dolby, Cedar and NoNoise. Most folks using the terms don't know the processes or the real results.

End of bitch.

[medjuck]

I didn't notice the poor quality you mention

I don't have the best audio/video equipment, but its fairly decent. With the deleted scenes, I noticed that the the picture quality looked like it was transfered directly from the film stock, and not digitally remastered or anything. The colors were weak and the picture was grainy. Imagine watching a movie in 70mm and then a scene cutting to 16mm. This is what it felt like. And the sound was very compressed...almost sounding metalic. It was a huge change from the beautiful 5.1 mix that the rest of the movie had.

Sorry to keep bitching about this. I'm sure it had to do with the budget and pre-production forcasts and all that good stuff..... I'm just upset because I think these extra scenes could have really served the film had more care gone into the presentation. And now, it feels like we're stuck with a half-assed product. I wish that I could process it all at the end and be done with it, but unfortunately these things really bother me.

It's possible that the opposite is ture: i.e. that the outakes were taken ff of their avid editing machine and were never colour corrected on film. (Though colour correction is now often done using a digital intermediate, since that's quite expensive they probably didn't do it when finishing this film.) And you're probably right that the outakes didn't go through a sound mix.

In fairness to correct this after the fact would be quit expensive and they do allow you to see the original film and watch the out-takes seporately.

[sal]

Sorry, but I have a huge problem with the term "digitally remastered".

I have the same problem with people talking about Dolby, Cedar and NoNoise.

Try not to lose any sleep tonight.