Some screenshot comparison between the UK and US blu-ray. Already stirring up some controversy... most people seem to dislike the contrasty look of the new restoration done by Fremantle. Am I the only one to feel the UK one is more filmlike than MGM?

No way, the Fremantle UK disc boosted the image, blowing out a LOT of detail that's clearly seen in the MGM disc.

To be fair, I've never seen this movie, so maybe this was how it's supposed to look, but I seriously doubt it.

I can't help but wonder whether andyli is comparing the US blu with the UK DVD--there's simply no way that the UK blu can be considered anything other than an abomination. Not an 'IMHO' matter either; it was mis-handled--this is a quality control issue. Completely blown out. Looks like a public domain handling of an Italian horror film. The UK DVD is pretty true.

Beaver on the Freemantle Blu..... Uhh,

Perhaps the best part of the review (leave it to either a Gary Tooze-ism or creepiness on Freemantle's part for highlighting it)... but apparently film restoration has the added effect of augmentation.

So glad I didn't order that.

Although there is a surprisingly large amount of extra information at the top and left side of the frame (EDIT: and the right - in the capture of Susan George at the church social you can see both eyes of the woman in the background to the right of the frame) of the Freemantle Blu captures, just as there had been on the Freemantle DVD.

I dislike it too, but I saw the film theatrically from a restored 35mm print in Brighton in 1995 and that's pretty much how it looked.

So not only did they do the transfer from a theatrical print (as opposed to a low-contrast print specifically designed for the purpose), but that theatrical print was too contrasty to begin with?

No wonder it's such a disaster - this should have been seen coming a mile off.

Incidentally, can anyone confirm whether the MGM release really is region-free? I've had my fingers burned too often trusting the Beaver on this issue.

blu-ray.com is good about this type of thing, it says "Region Free".

Yeah, Blu-ray.com is usually always on top of it when it comes to region coding. I recall it having the ABC logo on the back when I saw it at Best Buy, but haven't picked it up yet so can't confirm.

I can certainly understand about Beaver - Planet Axel confirms Straw Dogs as region free, but there is an "A" logo on the back cover displayed there.

It's definitely region free as I played it in my Sony SDP370 here in London.

Reading over this thread after having seen the film again (what better to watch after Puss in Boots?) I feel like bringing up something that's always bothered me over the initial reaction to the feel (as demonstrated by Ebert's comment quoted on the previous page), but how could anyone feel that Pechinpah is sympathizing with David when from frame one he is comparing Hoffman's acting to George's (easily the most complex character of the film)? George gives a typical performance (of absurd quality) of naturalism and what would seem like a normal performance while Hoffman is almost bad. He's robotic in even his most emotional scenes and moves like he's a robot or just following stage direction. David's this passionless thing. Even more than the climax or rape I find one of the shots in their sex scene to be the most disturbing. George is there like a blanket loose and comfortable and than in the background Hoffman comes up angular and robotic like a rusted stick figure.