msycamore said:
A ferry that was seen in the background in the scene when Brody is trying to tie the knot on the Orca have apparently been digitally removed on the new Jaws restoration.
Unfortunate yet minor. Any chance that the restoration company thought it was a blemish or just simply did it without Spielberg's knowledge or consent?
muddyknees2000 said:
my fuzzy memory is nagging at me that it HAD been in a trailer or preview clip, but that ultimately Ady decided not to use it since it made little sense that the Executor would have stood by doing nothing while the DS was being attacked.
I think you're right. IIRC, it was in the very first teaser. It's on the Revisited DVD for sure, just not part of the actual final Revisited edit.
Blade Runner
Star Wars (the original, of course!)
Vertigo (though this is already 70mm and I'm watching it in 70mm this month)
Singin' in the Rain
Watched a film print on the big screen with a lively crowd. First time, I've seen the movie start to finish.
"What a glorious feeling."
I only regret that the print was Eastman rather than a dye-transfer Technicolor. Still lovely color. I need to pick up the Blu-Ray now.
10 out of 10 umbrellas
Excellent work, EyeShotFirst! I never really felt Eric Serra's score worked particularly well (not a particular fan of his work in general). This is a great musical substitute. I always felt Goldeneye was really a traditional Bond film, that mysteriously lacked the traditional Bond-esque score. Keep up the good work.
taxidiver said:
I'm also looking for a high quality US version of the Big Blue. (Actually I've been looking for years). Grew up watching it. It was the single source that motivated me to start scuba diving. Any help would be much appreciated.
PM sent. Enjoy.
bkev said:
^I might have this on my external HD. I'll take a look for it.
bkev, Thank You for looking.
A fan of OHMSS here. I'd love to see this. Is this reconstruction still available anywhere online these days? The RS links are unfortunately down. If this isn't available, a vintage recording of the original broadcast would be nice. Thanks!
captainsolo said:
Other verdicts: (those with * look better on old editions)
*Doctor No, *FRWL, *Goldfinger: had some amazing cleanup work done, but the color seems to be off and downright muted in most places.
*Thunderball: Clean but with wrong color all over the place. Needs a re-do.
*YOLT: Lacking color that showed off the sunny countryside of Japan. Missing all the deep yellow/brown/orange tint of the 1967 presentation. Re-do.
*OHMSS: Framing a bit shifted to the right, a very tiny shot was accidentally inserted in error, opening blue tinted, some audio errors, no 60's Technicolor look. Re-do.
Comprehensive list, captainsolo. Your pickiness is much appreciated. Out of curiosity, what specific old editions would you recommend for the Connery films, aside from DAF, and Lazenby's film? Some of the modern transfers do strike me as dull, especially Thunderball. I'm a big fan of the 60s-era Bond, so would be curious to hear your opinion on them, more specifically:
For the first three, to experience the Technicolor, would you recommend the LD editions over the SE DVDs? And, if so, which LD editions: Criterion (which seems to have a marked color difference over later transfers and is approved by the directors) or the ones in the Connery Collection?
Then the re-dos: For Thunderball, which edition is best color-wise and also version wise? I'm not clear which LD is the International version. For YOLT, SE DVD or LD? And for OHMSS, SE DVD or LD, once more?
Your input's appreciated.
<blockquote>
<p><strong>zombie84</strong> said:</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Now that you guys bring this up, I'm hoping to have this finally up by the end of next week!</p>
<p> </p>
</blockquote>
<p>Hooray! That sounds great. I'd love to see it. I do enjoy the rough cut as an alternative experience. Out of curiosity, did you fix that flash frame I mentioned a few posts ago?</p>
Hey Chainsaw, any updates on this project? :-)
Since Series 7 is coming out this month, I've got into the mood for some Who and remembered that you were doing this project along with a fan edit based off of it. In any case, would still love to see Paul McGann in all his non-PAL pitch changed glory.
Notorious
I watched a 1950s 35mm reissue print this weekend at a local theater. It was a fantastic experience. The movie, as always was wonderful. It's perhaps my 2nd favorite Hitchcock behind Vertigo, but it's definitely the most watchable Hitchcock for me. The plot is interestingly merely functional but the characters and their dynamics propel the story nicely. I didn't spot any incompetent actors in the movie at all. This is one movie that I can proudly say has no bad acting that dates it: no useless comic relief here.
The crowd was incredibly receptive, and the theater was surprisingly full. The ending got lots of wry laughter, as I recall. It was a very old theater, so that definitely made the viewing more "authentic" to the times. Ingrid Bergman and Cary Grant were stunning on the big screen. The 35mm print was dusted and scratched in some areas, though, all in all, it was surprisingly good for its age. Film always has this wonderful warmth and texture to it. The grain never got intrusive, to me; gate weave prevented the picture from seeming sterile. Of course, the cue marks popped up every now and then. I doubt I'd have enjoyed a digital presentation as much.
On one note, I noticed that the exposure seemed to change in certain shots; while it initially seemed to be a flaw in the film print, I noticed that the film became darker (*a change in exposure*) on shots of Claude Rains where he's being menacing/forboding. I do wonder if it's intentional. In any case, intentional or not, it's absent from the DVDs or BDs. The dangers of restoration I suppose...
10 out of 10 stolen keys
The Killer
I watched an Anamorphic DVD-Rebuilder authoring of the Criterion edition at home. The video and audio were unimpressive, though the subtitles seemed to be an accurate translation. I have a feeling this was an LD transfer of a 35mm print, definitely unrestored but not DVNR'ed. They never seemed odd or machine-translated. This was my first time watching the movie, and this was my second time watching a Hong-Kong John Woo film, after Hard Boiled a few years ago.
It was good. I liked it. Chow Yun-Fat was at the top of his game, and, so were the supporting actors. The story was good. It was far more dramatic than I expected. In fact, I would probably classify it as a drama with action scenes, as opposed to an action movie that happens to be dramatic at times. The story is basic, yet well done and compelling here: a man seeks to help a woman he injured. Despite the drama, the tone never seemed to get too dark with one exception (which I will get to in a second). Check out the banter between characters. There's a certain humor to the titular Killer at times; he's not a bad man, and he isn't a solemn one either. The most obvious humor is, of course, the whole Butt-Head and Numb-Nuts schtick; it's present without overstating its blatancy. Needless to say, the action scenes were fantastic here. Good gun play, just a bit below Hard Boiled.
If I had one problem with this movie, it was the ending. Prior to the very ending, I liked the movie a lot. It was amiable and a very exciting ride; I felt the drama/emotion, but not to the point of despairing over it. In other words, it was a proper drama, without resorting to being overly sappy. Now, to preface this, I have no prior problems with bleak endings. None whatsoever. If a character, even the protagonist, deserves to die or needs to die to emphasize a point of the movie, it's fine by me, such as in Get Carter, Donnie Darko, Alien 3, Sin City, Shallow Grave, Evil Dead, Return of the Living Dead, and Night of the Living Dead. If anything, it's unjustified happy endings, especially studio-imposed ones, that get under my skin and bug me, such as Frankenstein, Bride of Frankenstein, Dawn of the Dead, Army of Darkness, and Blade Runner.
But, having said that, this ending just killed me. It was an awful downer of an ending. Frankly, it ruined the movie for me; I'm not sure I even want to watch this film again, knowing it ends like this. I had foreseen/expected a sad ending, but not to this extent. I'd expected the titular Killer to die, but then donate his corneas to her. That would be sad, but it'd be somewhat just. He was a killer; he deserves to die. He "broke" her eyes in life, now he can "fix" them in death. That would be an ending I could live with. I can just picture the scene of the police officer taking her to the operation and fulfilling his promise.
Instead, though no one emerges happily. The Killer dies, but he's brutally blinded by bullets first; he no longer has anything to give to the girl in death since his eyes are damaged. He can't even reach out and comfort her before he dies. The police officer illegally shoots the surrendering Triad leader multiple times in front of cops. No doubt, he'll be arrested and sent to prison, especially with so many witnesses and his bad status with his boss as it is. Since he'll be locked up, he can't fulfill his promise to John of having them transplant his eyes to the girl; he also can't give the money to the girl and escort her overseas. Speaking of the money, that'll probably get confiscated by the police! Yeah, the money that Sidney died to get is just going to the police. The blind girl isn't going to see any of it. No pun intended. She'll just fade to permanent blindness. Sadly enough.
I know it's just a movie, but the ending really let me down, and was too dark in lieu of the lighter tone of the rest of the movie. Because of the ending, I'd rate this movie:
7 out of 10 guns.
It would have made a 9 with a more satisfying close.
digitalfreaknyc said:
It kills me that Jaws and the Star Wars films have had numerous documentaries and The Godfather has really only had one. :(
T'is a pity, isn't it? Then again, The Godfather film itself does have, to its credit, a beautiful restoration by Robert Harris, while Star Wars has well... do I need to say it?
Cool. Sounds good, dfnyc.
AntcuFaalb said:
I don't want to get anyone's hopes up, but my coworker just told me that he might have a TESB bootleg.
That'd be fantastic if he does. It'd be unbelievably spectacular if it was from a 70mm print, though that's a tad more unlikely.
captainsolo said:
You're welcome Falcon! I remember when I first started studying Hitchcock all the big textbooks played up the original version's importance and all but thumbed their noses looking down over the "tawdry" 50's American version.
Pity, captainsolo. That this is true. I wonder if it has anything to do with Hitchcock preferring the original for its rawness and lack of finesse.
The only decent releases are PAL and a bit on the expensive side. I've always held out for someone (Criterion, clears throat, this should have been no. 1 in your Eclipse line) to finally do NTSC transfers worth a damn.
It's too bad no good NTSC releases exist, but I do really recommend investing in the PAL discs. Even with speed up, they're still watchable. The video quality on those is immaculate by the way: restored with good DVD compression to boot; actually arguably worth the price, in my opinion. The difference versus the public domain NTSC DVDs is beyond night and day. Special features are nice too. If you can just afford to get a few, get Blackmail and The Lodger.
I haven't seen Blackmail in ages because of this, which I hold as likely the first fully functioning talkie and light years ahead of its time.
Blackmail is fantastic. You should watch it. If there's anything I have to criticize about it, it's the lackluster climax (by the standards of Hitchcock's other works). Special effects wise, the climax is effective though. Anyway, I definitely recommend you pick up a decent copy of this even if it's PAL. It is, as you say, a functioning talkie. Though a bit hokey at times, Hitchcock actually understood that sound could be used beyond the sheer gimmick of having it and using music. You can definitely see influences on his later work, especially with the antagonist.
I have a PAL disc with both the sound and silent versions. Both are worth checking out, and presented in impressively beautiful quality. The sound version is obviously a landmark, with the transition from silent to sound film actually taking place onscreen (!). But, the real-time off-screen overdubbing of the lead actress does get a bit tedious. The rare, oft-ignored and not seen silent film version doesn't suffer from this and has some fascinating alternate footage. It's very expressionistic at times, and is worth at least two watches. Hitchcock's best silent film and arguably a classic.
Sound version: 4 out of 5 conveniently placed knives
Silent version: 5 out of 5 conveniently placed knives
Yes I do hold The Lodger as a silent masterwork, but even in the silent period, I've always felt that Hitch was still learning; still gaining all of the necessary aspects that came to define his career.
Perhaps, I judge The Lodger too kindly. It is definitely the work of a young director, yet to learn the ropes fully. Something about Jack the Ripper stories always intrigued me. I also like that they never actually show Jack the Ripper, nice touch.
captainsolo said:
The first film has gained a large following who suggest that it is better than Hitch's own remake. (It isn't.)
Thank you for saying that! The original really isn't better than the remake in this case. It's a pity the original gets more attention. Exempting Peter Lorre, the original doesn't have that astounding or memorable a cast, an issue Hitchcock seemed to have in a lot of his early sound films. The story's handling is only mildly exhilarating, with a slow pace. As you said, a lot less memorable a climax than the remake.
It shows his developing strengths and sets the stage for the first masterpiece, The 39 Steps.
Interesting. While I do not dispute the greatness of The 39 Steps, you don't consider any of his silent work, masterpieces? I honestly find them profoundly ignored facets of his career; many of them hold up a lot better than his early sound work. The Lodger and certainly Blackmail constitute as masterpieces for me. What's your opinion of them?
The release of both versions are rather poor.
Well, the BD of the remake is coming soon. Hopefully, that will remedy things. Hang in there.
This is great. Can't wait until the release. I'm sure it will look fantastic.
djchaseb said:
Either way you go is fine with me, I am kind of partial to the technicolor timing, mistakes or not.
This. I'd love to be accurate as possible to the IB print, flaws and all. So, I suppose my vote is for the bottom one.
ray_afraid said:
No, no. What I mean is that I don't think the sound error was there originally, and so I wouldn't consider it a change, but a restoration of how it was originally presented.
Oh I see. Considering the generation of print they're using, it is a possibility. If it wasn't like that when originally presented, I'd have no problem. It's probably next to impossible to find out whether it was in originally or not.
captainsolo said:
http://monsterkidclassichorrorforum.yuku.com/topic/40203/DRACULA-Restored#.TuOZp1bdKPQ
This might interest you.
Interestingly enough, a fan editor named movieking67 recreated this fan edit in HD using the CG 1080i version. It's on CG. Has anyone checked it out perchance? I'm curious if it's a technically sound fan edit, or if I can put it on an AVCHD. Also, I'd be interested if it's 23.976 fps. Unfortunately, the last edit by movieking67 I watched was quite a bit of a mess: junk frames, heavy compression, etc.
EDIT: I'm going to bite the bullet and download the edit. Anyone interested in my findings?
bkev said:
Opinions?
Quite probably. Judging from all the hype about "secrets" in the theater, a subplot was probably deleted. I don't think it was too much of an overall detriment though. The story seemed relatively straightforward albeit good in its theatrical format. It'd be interested to see an alternative extended version on BD.
In my mind, there are two possibilities for cuts:
Anyway, that's just my two cents. On the topic of Spider-Man, I hope the sequel adapts this from the original comic. They did set it up that villain during the end credits:
See that's what happens when you go on breaking promises. :-P Thoughts?
Bingowings said:
The Thing prequel deserves a directors cut with all the studio interference undone.
Yes! It's such a pity that the studio covered up all the practical effects with CGI and changed the ending. They should be blamed for it's lack of box office success.
ray_afraid said:
...but either way it's a "fix" I don't mind as I'm sure it wasn't supposed to be that way ever. Of course, if it was that way in it's original form, one could say that they are making changes. But I'd call it restoration.
I think our definition of restoration definitely differs then. To me, it's like when special effects wires or crew accidentally show up in movies. They weren't supposed to be there, but they ended up there anyway. It'd be revisionist to clean up, as it doesn't represent the original version of the films. In essence, my stance is if it's due to the wear of time, fix it, but if it was always there, leave it be.
captainsolo said:
Saw that video and pretty much flipped...there's a huge thread over at the classic horror film board that goes into detail but I noticed the "fixed" title cue is actually a different recording, as was on the Spanish edition. All they needed to do was to pull the music on the opening titles of The Mummy,which utilizes the exact same Swan Lake recording as Dracula!!!
That's an unfortunate oversight if they committed to replacing the opening music. I was concerned the Spanish version might have a different albeit contemporary recording. Still, I'd prefer to leave it untouched if it was like that back in 1931.
Out of curiosity, what horror film board? I'd be interested in opinions about the BD preview there.
captainsolo said:
It was exactly this, and delivered by Edward Van Sloan's Dr. Van Helsing, much like his intro to Frankenstein a few months later. This is why the film ends so abruptly and awkwardly cut/fades to the End card Universal globe.
They really ought to restore that ending, or make a recreation. As it is, the ending is awkward, and the film ends on an odd notes. They have at least some of the video, as shown by the documentary on the old disc. They ought to just use a sound-alike for a recreation. With all the digital audio tools available today, it should be easy to make it sound relatively fitting. It'd be like what they did for the old versions of Metropolis but better with some video.
SilverWook said:
If Universal screws it up, someone around here will probably try to fix it.
That's what I love about this site. :-)
toho-scope said:
blade runner dvd and bluray 2006 briefcase and earlier dvds (colour timing)
predater 2010 blu (absurd dvnr)
yellow submarine all releases since 1999 (no us cut)
Right. I added these. Thanks. Predator was actually on there already.
most classic doctor who dvds (dvnr and missing episodes)
all arabian knight dvds (pan and scan or wobilly badly cropped widescreen transfer)
the princess and the cobbler (pan and scan only)
droids and ewoks (incomplete)
pokemon the movie (no original japenese theactrical version available)
digimon sesions 2 and 3 (english dub unavailable in any form on dvd or vhs)
yugimon 1999 tv movie (only on LD, rest of the first season commercially unavailable)
Point taken but aren't most of these strictly DVDs? The thread was supposed to highlight inferior BD releases, not DVD releases. Also, I didn't think the Doctor Who DVDs were bad by any means, even the old ones. The DVNR doesn't seem excessive to me, but to each his own, I suppose.
Bobocop said:
Perhaps some films just aren't meant to be seen in HD.
This is an argument I've never been sure about. Personally, I always think a film always can deserve higher resolution, but things do end up showing that normally wouldn't in theaters. Then again, back in theaters, you couldn't pause movies and analyze frame by frame. But, hmm... the alternative of digitally removing wires always seems a bit revisionist to me. I'd be interested to see the consensus if there's some films that need to be revised or not shown in HD at all. Anyway, I added Highlander for it's lack of Special Features.
captainsolo said:
I'd also add all discs with lossy audio or simply audio ported from the DVDs. Why not give the higher resolution audio we pay for?
That would make quite a comprehensive list indeed though. Sorry, but, even with lossy/ported audio, it still pretty much equals the DVDs. However, now that you mention it, I would be interested in adding BDs with inferior audio tracks to the DVDs (i.e. lower bitrate or a lack of a DTS track). I'm pretty sure there are some cases like that.