A Few Words About A few words about...™ Gone with the Wind -- in Blu-ray (1 Viewer)

[moviebuff75]

Anyone?

 

[moviebuff75]

I am just wondering if they repositioned all of the text in 1954, from the textless footage. And since the last shot was reframed, if THE END title was separately repositioned over the reframed footage, or just lifted up along with it.

 

[KMR]

and second, in the penultimate "As God is my witness, I'll never be hungry again!" sequence, Vivien Leigh's face is so dark you cannot make out her expressions. Indeed, you can barely see the spectral highlights in her eyes.

"Penultimate"? Isn't that scene quite far from the end of the film?

 

[Robin9]

"Penultimate"? Isn't that scene quite far from the end of the film?

Yes, isn't that scene immediately before the Intermission? It sure as hell isn't the second from last scene in the film.

 

[Mike2001]

It sure as hell is the second from last scene.

Victim of auto-correct?

 

[Robin9]

Victim of auto-correct?

Yes, that's not what I wanted to post! I don't know how that happened but I've rewritten my post. Many thanks.

 

[Alan Tully]

If only the second half was as good as the first half, then it really would be a classic. I haven't looked at it for years, but worth keeping the Blu-ray for all the extras, that's if you have the earlier release, before Warner removed all the extras.

 

[Robin9]

If only the second half was as good as the first half, then it really would be a classic. I haven't looked at it for years, but worth keeping the Blu-ray for all the extras, that's if you have the earlier release, before Warner removed all the extras.

I agree. I watched the Blu-ray disc a few weeks ago and made a firm decision: in future I will start the disc at the ball scene where we meet Rhett Butler for the first time, and I'll switch off after Ward Bond's scene. For me, between those points it's a damn good film but either side: yawnsville!

 

[moviebuff75]

Would THE END have originally been placed on the tree, and not blocking out Scarlett?

 

[darkrock17]

Would THE END have originally been placed on the tree, and not blocking out Scarlett?

I don't think so, it would look very odd to have text not across the screen back then. Moving away from the traditional format wouldn't start happening until the 50's and 60's.

 

[moviebuff75]

But the restoration team said that shots with text were recomposited. That is one of the shots, but I didn't know if they just lifted it like the other shots or repositioned the title on the frame. If the shot originally had more of the tree at the top, then the way it is now, THE END would have been in the bottom 1/3 of the frame.

 

[darkrock17]

But the restoration team said that shots with text were recomposited. That is one of the shots, but I didn't know if they just lifted it like the other shots or repositioned the title on the frame. If the shot originally had more of the tree at the top, then the way it is now, THE END would have been in the bottom 1/3 of the frame.

At the end the silhouette of Scarlett is wearing a hat looking at down at Tara, were as all the other time she isn't, so the end shot couldn't be taken from anywhere previous unless it was an outtake they left in for the original print. Also at the end the camera zooms out so it doesn't matter if we can see the silhouette or not before the scene fades to black.

 

[moviebuff75]

In 1954, they took the original shot and moved it up one sprocket hole, cropping the top of the final shot. I was wondering if the text was originally higher up on the tree.

 

[Robert Harris]

In 1954, they took the original shot and moved it up one sprocket hole, cropping the top of the final shot. I was wondering if the text was originally higher up on the tree.

There would normally be an international background, and multiple language overlays used in the production of the matrices.

 

[moviebuff75]

So, even if they lifted that shot in 1954, they would have placed the titles exactly where they were in the frame in the 1939 U.S. release?

 

[Robert Harris]

So, even if they lifted that shot in 1954, they would have placed the titles exactly where they were in the frame in the 1939 U.S. release?

Could is the word

 

[Matt Hough]

When MGM reissued GWTW in 1961 to commemorate the Centennial of the Civil War, did they use the "widescreen" version from 1954 or the original 1.37:1 version? I think the first time I saw the movie was in the blown up 70mm version in 1967 which we all know now was an esthetic catastrophe, but for someone like me who hadn't seen it before, didn't know any better.

 

[moviebuff75]

Probably the 1954 version, but I read somewhere that Selznick made some minor dialogue changes to that version.

 

[Robert Harris]

I believe the ‘67 release a CS.

 

[john a hunter]

When MGM reissued GWTW in 1961 to commemorate the Centennial of the Civil War, did they use the "widescreen" version from 1954 or the original 1.37:1 version? I think the first time I saw the movie was in the blown up 70mm version in 1967 which we all know now was an esthetic catastrophe, but for someone like me who hadn't seen it before, didn't know any better.

Was an aesthetic mess but made oodles of money which helped MGM keep going for a few more years.
Must admit I saw it and liked it!