A Few Words About A few words about...™ Peter Pan -- in Blu-ray (1 Viewer)

[Kevin Martinez]

The difference is that Disney acknowledges that changes are being made, and that the original work is being modified. RAH

I'm curious. Where has Disney acknowledged that the look and feel of these films is being altered wholesale? The press releases and most reviews only go on and on about "restored", "remastered", "better than ever" but never a direct acknowledgement of alteration. Even if they did, does that make it okay? If Fox was upfront with the DNR of Predator and Patton, would they get glowing reviews? What about all the accusations of wrong color for Warner releases like Looney Tunes or The Wizard of Oz? Because Warner has made no mention of personal agenda, those changes are fair game? What about the brouhaha over the original Blu-ray for The French Connection (which was done by the director, a la George Lucas)? Where do we draw the line, exactly?

 

[Robert Harris]

Originally Posted by Kevin Martinez
I'm curious. Where has Disney acknowledged that the look and feel of these films is being altered wholesale? The press releases and most reviews only go on and on about "restored", "remastered", "better than ever" but never a direct acknowledgement of alteration.
Even if they did, does that make it okay? If Fox was upfront with the DNR of Predator and Patton, would they get glowing reviews? What about all the accusations of wrong color for Warner releases like Looney Tunes or The Wizard of Oz? Because Warner has made no mention of personal agenda, those changes are fair game? What about the brouhaha over the original Blu-ray for The French Connection (which was done by the director, a la George Lucas)?
Where do we draw the line, exactly?

Where one may lose the battle, but win the war.
As stated, these films have now been protected in every way possible, both analogue and digital, and that is way ahead of some other studios.
Also, there are many original dye transfer prints on these titles, which hopefully should be accessible for the right reasons, ie. study, etc.
RAH

 

[Kevin Martinez]

Where one may lose the battle, but win the war. As stated, these films have now been protected in every way possible, both analogue and digital, and that is way ahead of some other studios. Also, there are many original dye transfer prints on these titles, which hopefully should be accessible for the right reasons, ie. study, etc.

But that does jack-all if regular people aren't able to access them. Furthermore if these kinds of changes are so commonplace and acceptable, what is the point of Blu-Ray? We might as well just stick to our DVD's.

 

[Edwin-S]

Which Disney films are you talking about? Crawdaddy

Bambi, Lady and The Tramp and Pinocchio to name three. The colours are all too hot and primary, especially on Bambi and P. The original colours were cooler, more toned down. The films looked like they had more dimension from foreground to background, even without multiplane camera shots. Now everything just pops characters, backgrounds. It all looks the same......flat like most of Disney's later films. I don't know how else to describe it. All I know is that these reimaginings are not the films I remember seeing as a kid. They have ruined the visual character of these classics by trying to make them look like their latest films. Films that are well animated but come nowhere near the quality of their early output, especially in backgrounds.

 

[Robert Crawford]

Originally Posted by Edwin-S
Bambi, Lady and The Tramp and Pinocchio to name three. The colours are all too hot and primary, especially on Bambi and P. The original colours were cooler, more toned down. The films looked like they had more dimension from foreground to background, even without multiplane camera shots. Now everything just pops characters, backgrounds. It all looks the same......flat like most of Disney's later films. I don't know how else to describe it. All I know is that these reimaginings are not the films I remember seeing as a kid. They have ruined the visual character of these classics by trying to make them look like their latest films. Films that are well animated but come nowhere near the quality of their early output, especially in backgrounds.

Man, you're good. I can't remember what the exact color of any of those films looked like 50 years ago when I was a kid watching them in a movie theater. Also, I'm not sure how they ruined the visual character, but I guess it's true in your case. After watching Disney's presentation on the work they've done on Peter Pan, I look forward to revisiting this title again in the near future. I thought the "after restoration" scenes Disney showed our HTF group looked great in comparison to the "before restoration" scenes. I'm sure there will be others that disagree about the colors.
Crawdaddy

 

[bigshot]

Disney is the single most intrusive studio when it comes to bluray restorations. They spend the most to scrub their films to aniseptic perfection. If any studio did the same with a classic live action film, bluray fans would be screaming their heads off. But for some reason, no one sems to remember what cartoons used to look like. But Warner Bros does. Their shorts put Disney's features to shame. Disney knows how to do it properly too. The UK Donald Duck Christmas bluray looked staggeringly good. But they want better for that for the crown jewel features. They want to restore them to the way they never were originally. Honestly, as a film fan, I couldn't care less if Disney has preserved its elements if they're going to muck around with them and make them something else. What's the point of preserving films if you're not going to release them as they were preserved? There is one way to get Disney to stop doing this stuff. Buy the bluray. Watch it. And return it telling the retailer exactly what is wrong with it. Enough returns and Disney will take notice. I've got mine on preorder and that's just what I'm going to do if it's like Sleeping Beauty or Alice.

 

[Edwin-S]

That certainly comes off as sarcastic. Look up Mickey through the mirror on Youtube. Admittedly, the quality isn't great, but the look of that short is how I remember how Pinocchio and Snow White used to look to me. There is varying degrees of texture that come through in the backgrounds. AFAIAC, a lot of that has been lost with Disney's fiddling. You don't agree...fine, but there is no need for sarcasm.

 

[Edwin-S]

My comment was directed Robert Crawford. I'm posting using a tablet and it does not seem to allow me to quote.

 

[bigshot]

Check out On Ice and Alpine Climbers on the Xmas bluray. Beautiful! Anyone who has seen cartoons on the big screen knows they aren't all purple and lime green and dayglo pink. Call a spade a spade.

 

[bigshot]

Bambi can be jerry rigged into looking acceptable by turning the saturation WAY down, but Alice and Sleeping Beauty are unsalvageable. Dance of the Hours in Fantasia was great. The rest of the film was various degrees below that. Dumbo is the best bluray I've seen of the features, but its 5:1 soundtrack was atrocious. I really don't know why people put up with paying $30 for a bad transfer. Maybe people just don't care about cartoons.

 

[bigshot]

If you want a good sequence in Peter Pan to check for color accuracy, check the part they never seem to get right... When Captain Hook sneaks up on Peter in Skull Rock, every cut as he gets closer and closer is a different color palette. It starts out the standard red and gets cooler and cooler with each scene cut. When the star rotates in his eye, his jacket is full on purple. In previous versions they even the scenes out and they have to push it so far, the background changes color.

 

[Robert Crawford]

Originally Posted by Edwin-S
That certainly comes off as sarcastic. Look up Mickey through the mirror on Youtube. Admittedly, the quality isn't great, but the look of that short is how I remember how Pinocchio and Snow White used to look to me. There is varying degrees of texture that come through in the backgrounds. AFAIAC, a lot of that has been lost with Disney's fiddling. You don't agree...fine, but there is no need for sarcasm.

Sarcasm has nothing to do with it. I can't remember what the colors are suppose to look like on a feature I viewed in a movie theater as a child, 50 years ago. I'm glad your memory is good enough to recall such from your childhood. Also, I'm not disagreeing with you at all because my recollection is compromised.
Crawdaddy

 

[Robert Crawford]

Originally Posted by bigshot
If you want a good sequence in Peter Pan to check for color accuracy, check the part they never seem to get right... When Captain Hook sneaks up on Peter in Skull Rock, every cut as he gets closer and closer is a different color palette. It starts out the standard red and gets cooler and cooler with each scene cut. When the star rotates in his eye, his jacket is full on purple. In previous versions they even the scenes out and they have to push it so far, the background changes color.

So should it stay standard red thoughout until the star rotates in his eye?
Crawdaddy

 

[Robert Harris]

Originally Posted by Robert Crawford
So should it stay standard red thoughout until the star rotates in his eye?
Crawdaddy

What I believe Mr. Worth is saying is that the palette changes with each passing change in Capt. H's proximity. Very interesting concept, sound a bit like the artists creating more of a depth for haze and distance.
One would have to check an original dye transfer print to see this properly.
Reminds me of something that costume designer Phyllis Dalton did on Lawrence of Arabia.
As Lawrence's psychological base begins to make its downward spiral, his white robes change at times, almost imperceptibly, as Ms Dalton constructed them of thinner and thinner materials to make them look less regal as time goes on.
RAH

 

[JoeDoakes]

And second, Peter Pan should be in theaters.  What a thrill kids would have to be able to see this film on the big screen.

If there is something that annoys me about Disney's treatment of its annimated classics (other than SOTS), is that Disney has not put any of the Walt era films in theaters in years. Over Christmas, I really wanted to take my children to the movies, but they thought that the closest thing I could find (Monsters, Inc.) to something appropriate for them (ages 3 and 5) looked too scary to them. I first saw the Disney films in theaters on rerelease in the 1970s and I would love for them to have that experience. With digital projection, I cannot understand what the probleme is as Disney would not even need to produce new prints. Provided that Disney ensured that the theaters showing limited runs of the classics had proper 4K projectors, limited releases of the Disney classics would be a terrific way for Disney to promote the films and their home versions. Mr. Harris, do you know why none of these films are being given any kind of theatrical release?

 

[J Whip]

I have reviewed this title and have found this thread to be interesting. In short, I found the picture to be superb and the audio almost as good. It is amazing how good 1953 sound elements can be mixed to multichannel. As far as the color, I was not even born in 1953 so needless to say, I have never seen the film in a theater. I have never understood claims made by those who claim to be able to remember what a film looked like as far as colors go, years after they have seen them in a theater. I for one have trouble remembering them weeks later, unless it is really odd looking. Subtle differences, forget it. If in fact, the film as remastered has the same color as the cells used to make the film, one could say that the remastered version is more true to the source than the actual film made from those cells, if in fact the colors are different The same is true of the lack of grain as the cells would have none. Either way, this release looks and sounds better than I could have imagined it to be and I for one, enjoyed it immensely. Rather than nitpick over details, I would prefer to enjoy the show. Just my 2 cents.

 

[bigshot]

So should it stay standard red thoughout until the star rotates in his eye?

No, each scene should be a degree different. In previous releases the telecine colorist saw the shifting color in the scene and attempted to correct for it, turning the first few steps in the transition into the standard red color. He must not have realized that the darkening color palette is there to emphasize Hook's menacing. There was a Japanese laserdisc where they held Hook's red consistent throughout the whole sequence. By the end, they were pushing it so far, the background started changing colors. The DVD turns him red through the first few steps in the transition, then it suddenly changes to a cooler color, but not the full on purple from the original film. I held the color model cels for this sequence in my hands, and I made note of the sequence when I saw the film projected in a 35mm Tech print. I've had a lot of experience with the colors on the film. It's one of the finest examples of color styling I've ever seen, largely due to the influence of Mary Blair. I've never seen it properly served on home video. The Mermaid Lagoon is another sequence where the colors are almost always incorrect. In fact, I've seen screen grabs from different releases that show that the painting of the establishing shot was swapped for a completely different painting. I think someone at Disney decided that they liked Mary Blair's concept painting better than the production background, so they edited it in over the one that was originally there. It's a pretty concept painting, but I don't think people at Disney today should be double thinking the creative decisions made almost sixty years ago.

 

[bigshot]

As far as the color, I was not even born in 1953 so needless to say, I have never seen the film in a theater. I have never understood claims made by those who claim to be able to remember what a film looked like as far as colors go, years after they have seen them in a theater. I for one have trouble remembering them weeks later, unless it is really odd looking. Subtle differences, forget it.

I've done animation art restoration for major collectors and auction houses, I've interviewed the ink and paint ladies who colored this film, I've seen the film projected from Tech prints, and I have swatches and sample cels from Peter Pan in my reference library. I've studied the colors in this particular film, as well as other animated films. The color differences I'm talking about are definitely not subtle. It's a problem with saturation, hue and shade. The color manipulation is so extreme, you can't fix it by adjusting the color controls on your TV. I haven't seen the bluray yet, so I don't know what they've done with it yet. I'll post again when I get my copy from Amazon.

 

[Don Crouch]

Another very helpful review, Sir! You've yet to steer me wrong....and to help keep that string going, do you have/keep a list of blu-ray conversions to avoid? Thanks!

 

[Worth]

If in fact, the film as remastered has the same color as the cells used to make the film, one could say that the remastered version is more true to the source than the actual film made from those cells, if in fact the colors are different The same is true of the lack of grain as the cells would have none.

But the cels were animated with the intention of being filmed, and no doubt the colours were tweaked and adjusted based on how they photographed, rather than how they looked to the naked eye.