captainsolo

Should work. The copyright status is unknown, as firstly it was thought lost until discovered in the 80's on the kinescope copy. The rights to CR were kicked around until they finally fell into Sony/Columbia's hands who stuck a deal with EON/MGM which gave them rights to the first novel for the first time. but that's all in regard to the novel and the '67 film.

The only official releases of the '54 version are the uncut Spyguise VHS, and the copy on the initial DVD release of the '67 film which does miss the ending bit. this is what I have and what I have seen save for watching the ending on youtube.

Those caps don't look too bad, how in the heck did they obtain a copy to scan in the first place?

Beasts of the Southern Wild-2.5 balls out of 4.

Silver Linings Playbook-2.5 balls out of 4.

The Petrified Forest-4 balls out of 4.

The Amazing Dr. Clitterhouse (I am not making this up.)-3.5 balls out of 4.

It "should" be a mono reduction of the matrix stereo. I once accidentally recorded some of it and it sounded like this. Almost all LD analog mono tracks on ac3 releases are straight reductions of the digital tracks.

That said, the ProLogic version is quite good too.

That is weird. It looks like maybe a combination of some great tight editing of different pieces in order to create the desired effect regardless of any errors it might cause.

You_Too said:

Small update: With the 97 SE we're gonna include the trailer for the 97 SE trilogy and a making of-documentary, both ripped from DJ's own Laserdiscs.

Both has been upscaled and slightly denoised. The documentary has some horribly oversaturated yellows though, and there was nothing we could do to completely fix it so we just toned it down a bit. It'll still be very enjoyable though.

Also, since the documentary is mostly shot on video it is in full 60i motion so when upscaling it we've deinterlaced it to 60p to keep all the smooth motion intact.

Badass. The doc is what it is, though I have noticed that it is slightly different to the three part slightly shorter VHS edition.

I still remember the theatrical SE looking different to any other version I have ever seen of the film. This may be why.

These Fortune Star releases seem to be 1080i upscales of HK DVD sources from what some user reviews are saying across the net.

From the Aristocats photos, I'd say the Golden Collection and Special DVDs look most accurate to how I remember and believe the film should appear. The HDTV caps look all kinds of awful and lose detail. The BD restores this but has a paler tone overall and seems to have also smoothed out some detail.

Most of all these Disney classics with multiple aspects should have been preserved in each format. Most of us grew up seeing them in Academy via VHS to boot.

Lady and the Tramp has separate Cinemascope and Academy versions, that were done independently and thus have different animation entirely. In many ways I think the lesser seen Academy is equal to or better than the Scope version. This is only found on the late 90's VHS and LD, but the pressings seem to be hard to identify.

As TAF pointed out, it seems the 1987 CAV of Pinocchio is closest to some grabs of an IB print. The 1993 restored version is likely more how the film was intended to look. I don't think you can really go wrong with either. The BD is an abomination.

I appreciate this listing idea, as I had felt myself wanting to track down some of these. Gosh, I just realized haven't really seen these since I was about 5.

I nearly bought it once, but the lddb lists it as a Prologic encoded matrixed stereo track.  I've waited to see the film in it's entirety because I wanted to find the mono track. Nothing other than early LD, VHS or Beta seems to have mono.

I thought along similar lines. After checking, The US widescreen LD is not mono. Only the Pan and Scan LD has analog mono.

Seems another to add to the list of missing mono tracks.

Cushing vs. Karloff

FIGHT!

Safest choice likely from multiple perspectives.

But not likely innovative or daring.

Now it all depends on how the script turns out.

SilverWook said:

zombie84 said:

I didn't know there even were prints made. Now that I think about it, it's kind of surprising Cameron didn't actually film Titanic in 65mm. That would have been pretty sweet.

He's been in love with Super 35 far too long for that. ;)

That would have been my response. I still don't understand some people's love for the format.

zombie84 said:

Was Titanic Super 35? I forgot he was into that. In a weird way, it helped keep his movies very visceral because of the grain. I think it was Xhonzi that said in the Last Movie thread he was glad that Cameron kept T2 rough around the edges to match the first film. I disagree with that, I think T2 is way too slick to even compare to T1, but it's that grainy, fuzzy quality that I think Xhonzi was catching onto, had T2 been filmed anamorphic it would have looked amazing but also would have highlighted the differences even more. That's one reason I regret the Aliens blu-ray, 1986 was a bad year for film stocks, especially on 35mm, but that grainy super35 quality is what I really loved about Terminator and Aliens, it gave them a certain documentary-like, grindhouse feel that matched the quick cutting and handheld camerawork.

I never felt that way about Titanic, but I guess by 1996 technology was just cleaner in general.

Yeah, that visceral quality is immediate to a film nut like me, but what struck me was the overall quality of both story and production maintained a similar rough and human edge that reflected the first film.

I've seen all kinds of 2K and 4K presentations, but I have never seen a digital image that actually surpasses the 35mm version. I usually prefer a DI back to 35 even with some clarity loss, there is typically a better balance of color and depth at least to my eyes. (Sounds like my CRT loving self talking ;) If you can find a second run theater, most are still 35, and some like the one nearest to me have kick-ass 90's era THX equipment. The 70mm IMAX TDKR was great in the full resolution, save for the forced perspective and screen curvature. The 35mm scenes looked quite degraded.

One of my biggest regrets is never having seen 70mm with correct sound placement in a grand theater as of yet. But besides that, the biggest things I've been bowled over in a theater are Techniscope (visceral to the max), VistaVision (depth even a BD would find hard to manage).

It could be from a faulty projector part on something the print was run on that caused damage in that particular spot throughout.

I had that happen one one account a month or so ago. I had gotten a huge amount of spam in the form of returned messages using every address in my sent mail folder. So I was simply sent that message and changed the password and haven't had problems since.

Request: FF or Anybody else who has the Criterion CAV or CLV issues, if there are cue marks present anywhere in the transfer, what do they look like?

If they are regular white circles or something similar than these are probably Eastmancolor show prints. However, if they have any type of "sunburst" design to them, they are Technicolor IB.

Like this: http://www.dvdtalk.com/dvdsavant/s22changecue.html

I would suggest the Japanese artwork also found on the Spanish and Australian posters. For me this always felt more representative of the overall tone of the film than the US versions did. Plus it feels a bit grittier. ;)

http://www.theforce.net/collecting/posters/esb/spain.asp

Anybody know how the 5.1 original mix compares to the Dolby Surround versions found on LD? I just watched the SE version which had some slight touching up done at THX for the new scenes, and gosh darn it if it wasn't the most dynamic matrixed surround I've ever heard if not one of the most dynamic sound mixes ever.

The fullscreen THX TSWLM has a very tiny bit of extra on top and bottom, but the pan and scan job loses a great deal of picture. Reminds me of my childhood VHS days. (I still have these to be honest.)

Did you guys notice any loud pops on the OHMSS audio? I had a few towards the end of the film that sounded more like pops on the track itself and not the source audio. But the sound is stellar and surprisingly so. Very dynamic.

The truth is that the original audio is only provided to purists because it is a common thought that original audio is antiquated and inferior. Home video is done for the biggest consumer group: Mr. Joe Video who wants a great bright and shiny picture to fill his TV screen and 5.1 surround to play on his home theater in a box or multichannel crummy soundbar.

Thus everything will have a 5.1 mix done, when to be perfectly honest it never sounds as good as the original. These mixes were done with the original materials at the time of production, with everyone's intent being to make the material sound as good as possible. They weren't intending for discrete modern setups because THEY DID NOT EXIST. On top of this, modern remixers have no connection to the film and usually are given a tight work schedule and no background material.

And DD 192 kbp/s is equivalent to a low bitrate mp3, I don't care how many tell me I'm wrong on this but it's important the original audio be given necessary space on a disc to at least have breathing room.

A spin off with an amnesiac one armed Mace Windu who is now a mercenary would be pretty good, especially since there would actually be a story there. But then they would likely do something stupid like have him change his name to Calrissian and have a child.

Screw the DS, fund research into repulsorlift engines for mass transit and both solve the alternative energy problem and protect the environment.

That would mean one could actually cruise around in one's very own badass landspeeder.

Bingowings said:

I can't get over why they hired Tom Hardy, got him to put white streaks in the sides of his hair, stuck a bit of leather on him and call it Mad Max.

Fixed. :)

Krycek87 said:

Received the Criterion Goldfinger yesterday.  Is it just me or did this have the mono theme song? Anyway, I'll begin experimenting in a few days on ripping that commentary track. 

Yes, it's the only release that still does. Everything since has the theme song in stereo. The new mono tracks may have a mono theme but I can't be sure.

I've only rented some of the BDs but the audio are still the same mixes. The added effects don't work, the surround is odd, but all in all it is unnecessary to upmix mono stems for a 1960's film designed and mixed for mono to full 5.1. IT JUST DOESN'T WORK.

The mono tracks are at least maintained despite the standard pitifully low bitrate, and despite this compression all the distractions are immediately gone. Norman Wanstall, winner of the Oscar for Goldfinger for sound design, was shocked at how bad and inconsistent the 5.1 remixes were.

Two I haven't seen in ages:

The Terminator

Nice LD with the original punchy mono mix. An extremely taut storyline is the biggest positive combined with an increasing and unrelenting sense of tension. An extremely good film that overcomes it's low budget and remains Cameron's single best effort to date.

3.5 balls out of 4.

Terminator 2

Finally seeing the SE Director's cut helps considerably as all the footage added is bridging material and adds more character depth. But I still have major reservations with the storyline as overall I am left unsatisfied by the film in the end. The effects are outstanding, with the CGI adhering to the necessary rule of enhancing sequences instead of dominating them. The sound is stunning with probably the best quality I've ever heard in Dolby Stereo Surround. It is an interesting hook to see Arnold as the good Temrinator the second time around, but because the script only occasionally touches this it is to me nowhere near as effective as the relentless terror caused by the original. Even the liquid metal T-1000 doesn't have that much menace. I also enjoy how despite a huge budget that they managed to keep this looking rough to match the look of the original film.

3 balls out of 4. A must-own LD.

With both what really surprised me was the standout performances of the lesser characters, namely Reese in the first film and the young John Connor in T2. That and the sheer amount of scripted and shot alternative material. At least the unused ironic twist ending from the first film answers my biggest question with T2: "how in the heck did they get the arm and processor in the first place?"

Warbler said:

I might able to really like TDKR, if not for the ending.  

I just can't get myself over

Spoiler:

 

 

Bruce retiring from being Batman and going away with Catwoman.    Stupid and asinine.  She set him up for Bane to beat the s__t out of him.    She helped Bane with his plan.    She is an accessory to all of the crimes Bane committed, at least the ones he committed after she set up Batman.    She is a criminal and she should be in jail.    

 

 

I just can't get over it.    Perhaps someone can do a fan edit and have Batman actually die in the end.   Although it would be a sad ending,  it would be an ending I could tolerate.  

 

I can understand that but my problem with the ending was something entirely different.

Spoiler:

The idea that Batman not only gets Catwoman, but the idea that he can effectively win his struggle. This goes against the entire troubled and tortured nature of the character because it is an endless un-winnable struggle that can only result in death or madness. And to top that off the way this was done was in a cop-out manner.

The Aluminum Falcon said:

SilverWook said:

I guess we would need a good print of Dr. No to compare.

IIRC, Terence Young mentioned something about the day-for-night sequences in Crab Key during his infamous Criterion commentary and how prints would rarely get it right. Presuming, he actually approved the Criterion master or even was watching the master while recording the commentary, the Criterion LD might be your best bet of what's right.

I'm of the opinion, though I honestly don't have much to back it up, that the Criterions are the most faithful in terms of how the movies looked theatrically. Judging by the high contrast and grain, they seem to be from prints rather than IPs, so may have an additional generation of grain/color variation.

Do you think there's any way to tweak the Lowry transfers?

One would need extreme time and patience.

You could probably color correct it relatively accurately with time and patience, doing it scene by scene at least if not shot by shot. But, you're still left with the issue of the DVNR. I suppose, with care, you could use artificial grain sparingly.

Harmy's Despecialized turned out really nice video-wise and those were similarly-treated transfers by Lowry.

Just checked-The SE DVD looks the same. Perhaps the Criterion LD might have different coloring in this particular instance. I'm almost 100% sure they used prints rather than IPs.

The issue with using any of the Lowry transfers is that they already removed detail and then added in layers of fake grain to cover it up. We can re-time them as best as we can, but still it isn't ever going to be exactly like what was originally there.