The Troubled Troubles We've Seen, Marcus Ophuls' Overlooked Doc

Marcus Ophuls (son of filmmaker Max Ophuls) made one of the greatest one of the greatest holocaust documentaries (specifically about the less commonly addressed French occupation) of all time... indeed one of the great documentaries of all time period: 1969's The Sorrow and the Pity.  It's very well known as well as being highly regarded, having been released, restored and reissued around the world. But it's not the man's only film, or even his only great film. It's not even his only Academy Award winning film (Sorrow was nominated, but his 1988 documentary, Hotel Terminus, actually won). Unfortunately however, when it comes to releasing his films on home video, he's treated like a one hit wonder. Most of his films remain competently unavailable anywhere in the world. But at least one more of his powerful documentaries has actually been released in America, albeit very obscurely.
The Troubles We've Seen is one of his more modern works, from 1994, and focuses on wartime journalism. The bulk of the film was shot in Sarajevo in 1993 while the city was under siege, interviewing reporters from all over the world - including the BBC, CNN, ABC news, French television, etc -  who've converged in a Holiday Inn near "sniper alley" where news reporters are frequent and intentional sniper targets. At one point, he's interviewing a reporter while standing over the body of another reporter who's just died from a sniper's bullet; it can be pretty harrowing stuff.
But the film also takes a broader view, looking back at past wars and how the news reports are disseminated around the world. It's 224 minutes, so it has time to really sink its teeth into tangents, like a famous Spanish war photographer who was accused of faking some of his most famous shots, or the animosity between "on the ground" photojournalists and on-screen anchors. Other times he drifts more into covering the actual war the reporters are covering and the effect it has on its people.
And, perhaps to lighten the mood, we see Ophuls adopt a technique similar to what Errol Morris would start doing years later (inspired by this film?), of cutting in footage from old movies to act as a sort of commentary or counterpoint to what's going on in-film. For example, we'll have a politician talking about war and then cut to a scene from Duck Soup with Groucho Marx telling Harpo as he goes off to fight gallantly on the front lines for his home and country that he'll be back home, thinking what a sucker he is. Other times, it's more serious, a la a clip from some English adaptation of Henry V of the soldier's speech about how the victims of battle will rise up on the conscience of the king who led them to war while we look at victims of a recent bombing. He goes a little overboard with it in the beginning of the film, where it starts to feel like we get two sentences of clip for every one sentence of actual interview; but it soon tapers off and feels very natural and effective.
There's one example I've read Ophuls get criticized for a couple of times online, that I thought I'd take the liberty of defending. Ophuls is talking to a former actor who's now living in a cramped apartment with his wife and children, and his two legs blown off by a Serbian grenade. The actor says he expects to get prosthetic legs soon and plans to return to the stage once the war ends, and Ophuls is asking if he believes the Serbs and the Croats can ever actually live in peace after the war. The actor is completely convinced they can, and it cuts to a clip of James Cagney tap dancing on stage from Yankee Doodle Dandy, to which critics have said, isn't that juvenile and cruel to mock this man with no legs by cross cutting to a tap dancer, but I believe they've missed the point. During that interview, Ophuls keeps pushing the issue of whether they can ever truly live peacefully afterwards, forgiving and forgetting the atrocities of the war they just fought to live amongst each other again. He calls the actor "very optimistic" as he seems to act like it will be no problem. But when Ophuls asks" what will happen when he's on stage and one of the men responsible for blowing off his legs is in the audience, and the actor says, "I will kill him." So we see peace really won't be so simple or easy to achieve as the people are being lead to believe, and Cagney is representing the cheerfully naive fantasy of how happy everyone will soon be. He's happily tap dancing on stage, all smiles and flag waving, when the real actor already has the intent to kill again in his mind, just lightly covered by this dream of happier times.
Not that every thing about this film is perfect. I already mentioned the beginning feels a bit self-indulgent with all the excess cutaways, like when we see the opening of Annie Hall before Ophuls similarly addresses the camera to explain what his film is going to be about. It also drags a bit in the middle as it gets a little too mired up in the details of French television of the day, which non-viewers of early 90s French news programs won't get as much out of. And there's a weird bit where Ophuls talks about his "Fellini hat" (it's the same kind of hat Marcello Mastroianni wore in 8 1/2) and we see lots of footage of a naked, younger woman in his bed. I don't get what that was supposed to be about. I suspect it was to show that the reporters were all sleeping with hookers in this hotel - and so was our host; but the whole segment had the feel of a self indulgent in-joke. But so for all the virtues this film shows in its longer running time, allowing it to cover what most films wouldn't be able to get into, it does feel also like shedding a good 10-20 minutes could have made Troubles leaner and more powerful.
So this film is only available from Milestone Film and Video, a small NY company that sells this as a 3-disc DV-R set directly from its site and sometimes through Amazon when their storefront is stocked. To be clear, though, this is a legit, licensed release, not one of those bootleg sites that torrents obscure movies and sells them to you on homemade DV-Rs for $20 a pop. Milestone's releases used to be available in stores nationwide back when DVDs were the most mainstream, popular form of movie viewing, and in fact they're the company that put out the original DVD of The Sorrow and the Pity back in 2001. However, this release doesn't feel so official when you actually put it in your player...
First of all, for a 2011 release, it's surprising (and disappointing) that these discs are not anamorphic. I think thiat's because this disc was released previously as a proper pressed DVD, which has long since gone out of print, and this 2011 DV-R is just a quiet reissue. The back of the box says this film is 1.31:1, but look at the screenshots; that's obviously wrong. This film is more like 1.61:1; but that's good, because it looks like the correct aspect ratio. this film was shot on 35mm, at least according to the imdb, and was made to play in theaters, so we're probably getting the proper AR, at least. But since it's non-anamorphic, that means the film is windowboxed, sitting tiny in the center of your screen surrounded by black on all four sides. Subtitles are burned in. There are no extras of any kind, and only the first disc has a proper menu screen. The second disc ends abruptly but continues playing a black, silent screen for a couple minutes... I sure hope there wasn't footage from the movie that was supposed to be playing during that time that we're missing. Then it cuts to a gray screen for a little while, which is 1.37:1 - hey, that's where they got that ratio from!
Did I mention the discs are single layer? Of course they are! And they didn't even use all of that space - more like half. This film is divided into two distinct parts (with credits and everything), but it's broken up into three discs rather than keeping both halves together on two dual-layered discs, which would've played a lot better. Hell, they probably could've fit it on two single-layered discs without any additional compression. Speaking of compression, the video quality is passable, I guess, for a standard def DV-R, assuming you go in with low expectations. It's certainly soft and murky enough to make you wonder if this was sourced from video tape. Remarkably, it's not interlaced, though there are frames of ghosting, which probably come from sloppy PAL/ NTSC conversion, or just an old pull-down issue. This could obviously look heaps and heaps better. The labels on the disc are plain white with text, there's no insert, and yet they ask the painfully high price of $39.95. And you guys thought Zipporah films was bad!
Maybe he's just wearing two pairs of glasses?
Still, it's the only release of this remarkable film, and it does get the job done. And I get that they're a low budget company sitting on some important films, but there are so many improvements they could make to this release without spending a penny. We can all make anamorphic DVDs on our home computers. But again, I believe this is actually a really old disc that just wasn't updated at all, and it only gets into the realm of frustrating when you see the price tag. Oh well, in lieu of other options, this film is still worth it. I sure wish some blu-ray company (Kino? Criterion? Studio Canal?) would come along, though, and do the whole Ophuls catalog right. I mean, the films besides The Sorrow and the Pity.

Blue Underground's Hell of the Living Dead (Sound Issues and DVD/ Blu-ray Comparison)

Anchor Bay originally released Bruno Mattei's Hell Of the Living Dead and Rats as two separate releases in 2002, and then reissued them as a double feature in 2003. Blue Underground than acquired them and put both titles out individually again, under their own banner, in 2007. Always with the same transfers and extras. But finally in 2014, Blue Underground has released them, again together as a double-bill, on blu-ray with all new transfers and features.
I was always been amused by both, but Hell of the Living Dead was the film I'd been a fan of since owning the old VHS release under the title Night Of the Living Dead Zombies [whoops! See the comments] in the 80s. It's an Italian zombie film that fully delivers on everything you wanted from those films, an at the same time is totally bonkers. And unlike most knock-offs and retreads, it's quite ambitious in its scope. This isn't four teenagers in a cabin beset by zombies; our cast travels practically half the globe, having adventures in the jungle, high rises, power plants, suburban homes and abandoned missionaries. It's got a huge cast, bolstered out even further by a generous helping of stock footage, which is creatively integrated into the film, even if its effectiveness is uneven. And it was pretty damn impressive to see Dario Argento's infamous scorers Goblin had done the soundtrack to this film... until I grew to realize it was just their previous work carried over from previous films, mainly (entirely?) Dawn Of the Dead.
I did see Rats back in the day, too; but remembered it mostly as a pretty average horror film that was basically 90 minutes of generic build up for an admittedly pretty great ending. But that was never enough to compel me to pick up any of the DVD releases, especially since Hell and Rats shared the same Bruno Mattei interview on both discs anyway. So I picked up the very first Hell disc and then just sat it all out from the outside, until I found out Blue Underground was creating an all new documentary on the making of Hell Of the Living Dead, compelling me to upgrade to the blu-ray. But I have to say, having gotten it now as part of the package with the Hell upgrade, the film has grown in my estimation, and I've grown to appreciate the silly, colorful comic book tone Mattei applied to both films.

Now, I just called this blu-ray an upgrade, but is it really? There's been a little bit of controversy about that.(and there'd probably be even more if word had gotten out more), so let's take a look.
Blue Underground's 2014 blu-ray on top; Anchor Bay's 2002 DVD on the bottom.
Well, okay, the framing is almost identical (in the top shot, you'll notice the AB disc has a little more info on the bottom and the BU has the same amount on top), both slightly letterboxed to the proper 1.85:1 aspect ratio. But the blu-ray certainly benefits from the HD treatment. The colors are pretty different, though, looking a lot colder and more muted on the blu. Margit Newton looks a completely different color on the blu-ray than she did on the DVD.

But that's not even what this disc's controversy is about. What you don't see in those screenshots is the sound, or the film's running time. So is this new blu-ray cut? No, not really... but technically yes. No scenes have been removed or graphic imagery censored, but their have been micro trims to a LOT of scenes. Basically frames have been removed regularly, throughout the film (only Hell; it's not on Rats), between shots. Essentially, it's the exact same problem that plagued Shriek Show's infamous Burial Ground blu-ray. And as with Burial Ground, the problem is not on the older DVDs, just the newer blus. To be fair, you don't generally notice it in most cases... In fact, I don't think I could even find all the instances without ripping both discs and syncing them up in a program like Final Cut to find the moments where the they go out of sync. But when the cuts happen during music, you do hear it. You don't hear pops or drop outs, because the shots have been buttressed up against each other, but the score skips notes. And it always happens as the video shot switches, which makes it seem like Mattei was some kind of amateur who couldn't edit the audio and video on separate tracks... it's the kind of error you find in student films. Except in this case, it's not a problem with the original film, only this new blu-ray.

So I contacted BU back when a forum member on first pointed this out and another member followed up by uploading comparison footage, and here's what they said:

"We became aware of the issue with HELL OF THE LIVING DEAD after the Blu-ray was released. We brought it to the attention of the Italian licensor who supplied the new HD master to us. They informed us that there was damage at several of the cement splices in the original negative, necessitating that they remove one frame on each side of the cut so that there wouldn’t be noticeable frame damage or picture jumps during those cuts. Please keep in mind that this is a 30+ year old, extremely low budget film. We're confident they did the transfer as best they could with what they had to work with. Hopefully this does not impede in your enjoyment of the film. We believe that the positives of this new HD transfer far outweigh any negatives. As there is no way to fix the damage to the negative, we are not able to issue replacement discs."

Personally, I can think of ways to fix the problems digitally, if not perfectly, at least enough to salve the irritation almost entirely. But it would take a lot of work and expense (if they were going to replace all the discs) for BU to attempt any of that for what, now that I've sat and watched the blu-ray properly (as opposed to earlier, where I was specifically going through the film, searching for the flaws that had been reported), a not too noticeable problem. First of all, unless you're really searching for the problem, you won't notice it when the score isn't playing, which is most of the time. And even when it is, sometimes the cuts happen as the music is on a horn blare or beat that disguises the cut. I'd say there's only a handful of times where you'll be just watching the film and go, "hey, what just happened?" And of course it always passes super quickly. So... it's annoying, I wish it wasn't there, but it's not time to grab the pitchforks and torches and march on BU. This disc just doesn't rate 5 stars in the audio department is all.

And I think BU is right about the positives of the HD outweighing the negatives. Let's look at another comparison shot.
Blue Underground's 2014 blu-ray on top; Anchor Bay's 2002 DVD on the bottom.
Blue Underground's 2014 blu-ray on the left; Anchor Bay's 2002 DVD on the right.
I'll be honest, I'm on the fence about the colors; but there's no question this picture is a lot clearer on the blu. Look at how soft and smeary those faces are on the DVD. Heck, look at the leaves over his shoulder for an even bigger distinction. Maybe on a smaller TV, you might for the unbroken audio if you preferred the warmer colors, roo. But on a big screen, you've gotta go with the blu.
And Rats looks pretty great, too. I don't have the DVD to compare it to, but the image here looks great. Once again, it's been slightly letterboxed to 1.85, and it's a very attractive watch that's probably part of what helped me come appreciate the film more this time around.

But like I said, the biggest selling point for me to upgrade from my DVD was actually the special features. First of all, the original Bruno Mattei interview, which has been on every release of both Rats and Hell on both Anchor Bay and Blue Underground has been carried over here, too. And that's great, because it was an upbeat yet very forthcoming chat. There's also trailers and galleries for both films, that have been with us since the earliest release. Some of the trailers are worth checking out, though, since you get to see the films marketed with different titles like Virus and Blood Kill. The DVD did have a unique insert, which included an interview between Fangoria's Michael Gingold and filmmaker Scooter McCrae; but I'm really not at all sorry to see their "Shatter Dead is a much better film than Hell of the Living Dead" trash talking fest go.

But then there's a new, 50+ minute documentary film called Bonded By Blood, which really focuses on Claudio Fragasso and his involvement. He's as forthcoming and engaging as Mattei was, but with an extra sense of humor, talking us through Hell Of the Living Dead, his marriage (his wife is also his collaborator who cowrote most of his films) and touching on the rest of his and Mattei's careers. Margot Newton and Franco Garofalo are also interviewed to share their side of things. And at first it seems like it's going to be all about Hell, but then we travel to the studio where they shot Rats and Fragasso talks to us on the old sets, along with stars Ottaviano Dell'Acqua and Massimo Vanni.
To be honest, I would've bought this blu-ray if Bonded By Blood was the only thing on it. The HD upgrade and the double-bill with Rats could just be like fantastic bonuses. And visually, this is a really top tier blu-ray release from BU, who after all had a few little problems with some of their earlier Italian blus. I suppose they've had a little problem with this Italian blu, too; but it's of a totally different nature. And while it is a flaw, it's not nearly enough for me to turn people away from this sweet little package.

The Devil's Advocate Uncensored, Recalled DVD (and Blu-ray Comparison)

As the result of a lawsuit, Warner Bros is not allowed to release their 1997 film, The Devil's Advocate, uncensored anymore... and haven't been for a long time. Specifically, one of the biggest set pieces in the film, a massive bas-relief sculpture in Al Pacino's apartment that ultimately comes to life was said to be too similar to a bas-relief called Ex Nihilo which resides above the western entrance to the National Cathedral in Washington. It's not a reproduction, it was just judged to be too similar that it violated copyright, and since the sculptor found its use offensive (it's meant to be a very divine piece, and in the film, it's literally Satanic), he refused the studio permission to include it in the film, even though they'd already shot and released the film theatrically with it featured in multiple scenes. So a settlement was reached where Warner Bros. could release 475,000 copies through rental stores, and thereafter they created a new version of the film, with some very early CGI (this was the 90s, remember) replacing every shot of the sculpture with a new, generic image. Yuck.
Original DVD on top; CGI'd blu below.
This is the first shot of the sculpture after the big reveal. An elevator door slowly slides off-screen to reveal this crazily large, impressive sculpture than Al just happens to have in his office. As you can see, it's full of human figures swirling around each other (just like in Ex Nihilo). Not only is this sculpture prominently displayed in multiple scenes, where it's used to make a big statement about Pacino's opulence and the kind of place Reeves is entering into, but SPOILER: the sculpture ultimately comes to life and those people in it writhe and try to seduce Reeves. Now, to be fair to the new version, the image doesn't look too fake in the background. Even as characters walk and talk in front of it, it fits into its environment fairly convincingly. But it sure is a far less impressive art piece, just a mass of generic white swirls (I'm sure it's kept so simple because complicating the image would have made it look faker). It's just not nearly as impressive or effective.
Original DVD on top; CGI'd blu below.
And it's not just in the background. There are times when the camera is looking squarely and solely at the sculpture, nothing else. Early in the original, the camera adopts Reeves' point of view, panning slowly over the people in the sculpture. In the new version, the camera pans the same way over... a swirly jumble of nothing. You're not going to tell me in the shots above that one is just as good as the other.
Original DVD on top; CGI'd blu below.
And we come back to the sculpture repeatedly, in multiple scenes throughout the second two-thirds of the picture. Here, they loom over the people in the room ominously, as if they're reaching out to them. Or... it's just a white lump hanging back safely against the wall in the new version. They couldn't have at least made the swirls lean outward?
Original DVD on top; CGI'd blu below (no, this is not a mistake)
Look, the shots have been totally changed (it's not just zoomed in tighter; Pacino's gone), but now it's the same sculpture in both versions? Yes, bizarrely, that's what happens in the CGI version. The sculpture transforms into the version with people in it at the 1.57 mark, ten minutes before it comes alive in the story. First of all, that means we watch the statue totally moving around and changing, with one of those old school morphing effects, long before its meant to be anything but a "normal" sculpture, and Reeves has absolutely zero reaction to it (because in the original version, it hasn't done anything weird yet, so why would he?). And secondly, if we're allowed to see the sculpture as the version with humans in it for the final scene of the film, in many shots and angles over the course of ten minutes - this is in the censored version, mind you! - what was the point of censoring it all throughout earlier? Why not have it look like it does at the end earlier on? It makes no sense! Now, it's even more frustrating!

But in March of 1998, the film was commercially released uncensored on DVD. Despite having a large red message printed on the back of the case reading, "[t]he large white sculpture of the human forms on the wall of John Milton's Penthouse in 'Devil's Advocate' is not connected in any way and was not endorsed by the Sculptor Federick Hart or the Washington National Cathedral, joint copyright owners of the Cathedral sculpture 'Ex Nihilo' in Washington, D.C." was actually still the original bas-relief on the DVD. That disc was recalled and re-issued the same year, and since then the film has always been issued with the censored print with the CGI'd sculpture, including multiple pressings, boxed sets, and even recent blu-ray releases.

Now if you're anything like me, there's only one version of this film to own: that rare, recalled DVD from 1998.
And it's a film worth owning for sure; it's a blast. Keanu Reaves, gives one of his better performances as a young, Kentucky lawyer who gets hired by a big time New York law firm. So he and his girlfriend (Charlize Theron) move to the big apple, only to find out that his boss, Al Pacino, seems to literally be the devil. Now, I know a lot of people believe Pacino is one of those actors who's moved on from giving legitimate acting performances to just pushing out an over-the-top caricature in every film he does now, and I tend to agree; but this is the one role where his over-playing it actually suits the character and the mood perfectly, and so his instincts are spot on. Plus, it's got an absolutely perfect supporting cast, including Jeffrey Jones, Craig T. Nelson, Heather Matarazzo and even Don King as himself.
You'd never know it from the poster, the credits, or even the film's imdb page, but this is a Larry Cohen film. He wrote the original script; but due to union rules, only the guys who did some later rewrites are given official credit. Cohen fans will still be able to sniff his writing out, though, as its full of his usual wit and "what if" approach to scenarios. To be fair, though; having listened to the audio commentary, it sounds like some of the changes the new guys made were for the better; so I definitely don't mean to suggest they don't deserve credit here.
Original DVD on top; CGI'd blu below.
So, this original recalled DVD features the same transfer - except of course for the CGI-altered shots - as the later releases, showing the film in its original 2.35:1 aspect ratio. Fortunately, as old as this DVD is, it isn't so old that it's non-anamorphic. I think we dodged a bullet there. The blu-ray, naturally, looks a good deal better - except, again, for the the fact that it has the CGI-altered image instead of the director's original vision - but this looks just as good as any other standard def DVD version. Plus, interestingly, it has a little more picture information on the sides... because the blu ray is slightly stretched horizontally. However, if we're not dismissing the blu-ray, it has to be said that it's a noticeable improvement, with better detail, where the DVD has wonkier edges, no doubt because the SD is an older transfer. Improved, but censored. Ultimately, which is more important? To see the movie in nice HD, or to see it unaltered? It's a decision you're going to have to make for yourself, because unfortunately, we can't have both.
deleted scene
This DVD also has some nice extras... pretty much the same extras which have been present on every release of this film. It has the aforementioned audio commentary, by director Taylor Hackford, which is fun and very informative. Then there's the trailer, a couple TV spots and a LOT - about 30 minutes worth - of deleted scenes, also with commentary by Hackford. And here's one more advantage the blu-ray has that must be noted. On the DVD, the commentary is forced on the deleted scenes. That is to say, you cannot watch the deleted scenes without the director's commentary playing over them. But on the blu-ray, the commentary is optional, so you can also hear the scenes play out on their own. That is absolutely preferable, so score a few more points for the blu-ray release. I'd almost recommend getting both, and maybe for really big fans of this film that's what you should do. But at the end of the day, when you're going to sit down and rewatch this movie, you're going to pick one version or the other anyway. So you're still forced to decide: uncensored or HD?

So let's assume you chose uncensored, or you do feel compelled to pick up both. How can you tell the original recalled version apart from the reissue? Well, first of all, obviously, stay away from any sets... the double feature with Insomnia, the Al Pacino Collection? No. But that's obvious. The ones that are hard to tell apart are the 1998 solo DVDs. Fortunately, Amazon has still maintained separate listing pages for them (here's the link to the original). They often don't do that, and remove or merge listings for older DVDs, which can be quite frustrating. Luckily, they remain distinct as of this writing. But still, trusting people listing and selling their DVD copies on Amazon to know which listing is for which, or even that there are two different versions, and listing their DVD correctly is a leap of faith that extends right out into the domain of the foolhardy. And why limit ourselves to buying from Amazon, anyway? We need a real way to tell these DVDs apart, and fortunately, such a way exists.
First of all, the recalled version is (unfortunately) packaged in one of those half cardboard "snapper crapper" cases. Warner Bros later reissued this in the preferable keep-case packaging, and that of course is the CGI'd version. However, it's not that easy! While that reissue also came out in 1998, that is the 3rd version. Both the recalled version and the first censored version came before it, and both are in snappers. So you can certainly rule out any version in a standard clamshell keep-case, but you can't embrace any version in a snapper. We need to look closer.
There is a catalog number on the spine of the DVD case, which is unique to this version. The recalled version is number 15090. I'm not sure of all the other catalog numbers, because I never went nuts and collected every single subsequent pressing. But if it's any number other than 15090, you don't want it. There are other distinguishing factors, too... for example, different editions have different UPC numbers. The recalled version is: 0 85391 50902 8; however I'm not 100% certain that none of the other editions have that same UPC. I don't think they do, and I know for sure that at least some of them have different UPCs. But I can't swear to it that they all do. I AM certain about the catalog number, so go by that. If you see it used in a shop you can just check the spine. Or if you want to order it from EBay, Amazon or anyplace else, just ask the seller what that catalog number is on the copy he's selling. Fortunately, Devil's Advocate was a major film from one of the biggest studios, so a lot of these were released into the wild before the recall. They're still quite findable with a little knowledge and effort.

Good luck!

Stuart Gordon's Dolls from Scream Factory (DVD/ Blu-ray Comparison)

For my money, Dolls is the best of Stuart Gordon's non-Lovecraftian adaptations, and maybe even better than one or two of those. It already received a pretty nice DVD from MGM, with an excellent OAR transfer and two strong audio commentaries. But still, a special edition with no video extras (i.e. any documentaries, deleted scenes, interviews) feels a little incomplete. So I was happy to see Scream Factory filling that gap when it came time for their blu-ray upgrade.

Update 7/47/17: I just picked up an interesting 2011 DVD set from MGM, called 6 Horror MoviesDolls is one of those six, so I'm adding it to the comparison.
This film has more of an almost family-friendly, children's' story feel to it, even though it's still a pretty gruesome story. It's a dark and stormy night when a little girl, her father and wicked stepmother (played to the hilt by Carolyn Purdy-Gordon) wind up having to spend the night with a creepy old couple who live in an old, isolated mansion with no telephone. The house is full of Victorian-style porcelain dolls because the old man is a toy maker living in seclusion. A cheerful salesman (Stephen Lee, who you probably remember from Gordon's Pit & the Pendulum) soon also arrives with two colorful punk rock hitchhikers, and they wind up stirring the dolls, who are actually little killer monsters who have a really negative reaction to rude behavior.
Dolls has an interesting production history I didn't realize until watching the extras. Apparently, as they were about to begin filming From Beyond, Charles Band gave him the script to Dolls and asked him to shoot it on the same sets first. So that's why it's not written by Gordon's usual guy, Dennis Paoli (though Brian Yuzna is still on board as a producer). And even though he shot it first, it didn't come out until after From Beyond, because the film took so long in post-production, adding insert shots and especially David Allen's awesome stop-motion imagery of living dolls. Everything here is just about having fun with the horror genre, often with a very classic, early Hollywood feel. The fantasy sequence at the beginning with the killer teddy bear is worth the price of admission alone, one of my favorite horror moments as a kid that still plays just as well watching it again today.

Scream Factory's 2014 blu looks great, but they really didn't have to do much beyond taking MGM's already top notch transfer from their original 2005 DVD and putting it on blu. Amusingly, MGM's original DVD was also a two-sided flipper disc, with a fullscreen version on the other side, so we can look at that, too.  And it was a flipper again in MGM's 2011 6 Horror Movies collection, but loses its widescreen side in favor of being backed with another of the six films (they do six films on three discs).
Scream Factory blu on top; MGM 2005 DVD mid; MGM's 2011 DVD on bottom.
Scream Factory's 16x9 blu is slightly letterboxed to 1.85:1, just like MGM's DVD was. It's clearly the same transfer, with identical framing, colors, etc. And unsurprisingly, the 2011 DVD matches the 2005 DVD.  Scream's blu obviously benefits from the upgrade to high definition, of course, making everything clearer, smoother and more attractive, which helps especially in a film like this, with a heightened, stylized look. There is some weird ghosting going on during the stop motion scenes, but it's ONLY during the stop motion scenes, so it's probably just how the effects were originally put together, because they felt the stop motion would look more fluid that way. Anyway, it does the same thing on both releases, so we're stuck with it either way.
Scream Factory 2014 blu first; MGM 2005 DVD (widescreen side) second;
MGM 2005 DVD (fullscreen side) third; MGM 2011 DVD fourth.
The full screen version is one of those semi-open matte deals, like we just saw with Star 80. It gives us a little more information vertically, along the bottom. But it cuts off chunks of the sides, too. I suppose they're trying their best to make it look good for 4.3 TVs by splitting the difference; but it winds up being less interesting than a standard open matte, as it doesn't even give us so much more picture for curiosity's sake. It's just a bland compromise, so I really don't mind seeing it go for the blu, or even the 6-pack.
Scream Factory ported over both commentaries from MGM's DVDs (yes, the 6-pack retains all the extras from the solo releases, which is pretty sweet). The first is a really informative one by Stuart Gordon and screenwriter Ed Naha. And the second one is a more upbeat cast commentary by Carolyn Purdy-Gordon, Stephen Lee, Ian Patrick Williams and Carrie Lorraine, who played the little girl. The latter might've benefited from a moderator, as it often gets stuck when the actors can't think of anything to say; but they do have a lot of interesting anecdotes and insights when they start gathering momentum. Scream Factory also retained the other bits and bobs, too, including the trailer, a photo gallery and storyboard comparison.

But the highlight is that they've also created a new 30 minute retrospective documentary called Toys of Terror: The Making of Dolls, featuring interviews with Stuart Gordon, Charles Band, Brian Yuzna, Carolyn Purdy-Gordon, Ian Patrick Williams, effects artists Gabe Bartalos, Gino Crognale, and John Vulich. It really does add a lot of depth to the release, and while it IS sometimes a little redundant, repeating facts and stories that we already heard in the commentaries, it's kind of fun to hear how Gordon's story of inspiration has changed over the years. In the commentary, he and his wife talk about how he was looking at a collection of very old dolls late at night in a museum and thought to himself, wouldn't it be scary if he'd gotten locked inside? In the documentary, he flat out says he was locked inside and had to spend the night in the museum with the dolls. Maybe someday when 400k media comes out, we'll get to hear him talk in a new interview about how the dolls in the museum really came to life and he had to fight his way out!  😉
Scream Factory's blu also features a bonus trailer for Phantom of the Paradise. And MGM's DVD also had a bonus commercial for their horror line of DVDs and opened with one of those annoying "YOU WOULDN'T STEAL A HANDBAG" [silly, how else do they think I pay for all their DVDs?] anti-piracy commercials, so it's nice to be rid of that. But on the other hand, the DVD had optional subtitles in English, French and Spanish, while Scream just has the English. But the blu has both 5.1 and 2.0 DTS audio, while the DVD just has standard Dolby stereo. Scream's blu also has reversible artwork and a slipcover with their typical comic book-style cover, which I don't think suit these movies.

All told, it's just a solid, all-around upgrade. It's not some fancy restoration, since we didn't need one here. It's simply the basic boost from SD to HD, plus a nice, new documentary to sweeten the deal. It's a very good release for a very good movie. If you're not too rigid about upgrading all your blus to DVD, this one might be close enough, since it's the same transfer. But for techies, it's an essential upgrade; and for serious Dolls fans, that doc may be difficult to resist.