UHD Review A Few Words About A few words about...™ - Rebel without a Cause -- in 4k UHD (1 Viewer)

[JoshZ]

I found this article you referenced today after spending a portion of yesterday searching Google for information related to their involvement with rebel, and scratching my head lol.

It would seem that posting on Instagram that you like a movie is now considered "a mission" to save the work of that artist, and tossing a couple bucks toward a crowdfund campaign to put it on Blu-ray officially makes you the chief architect of its film restoration project.

 

[JPCinema]

Scorsese speaking about the movie is right at the beginning.

When will we see the restored THE MISFITS? The Film Foundation has restored it.

 

[Kevin Antonio (Kev)]

It would seem that posting on Instagram that you like a movie is now considered "a mission" to save the work of that artist, and tossing a couple bucks toward a crowdfund campaign to put it on Blu-ray officially makes you the chief architect of its film restoration project.

Oh I suppose we should get them plaques too. Their 50 bucks to "crowdfund campaigns" is greatly appreciated.Oh wait, $50 is low..... welp my budget might not be as big as hers (lyonne). What do you suppose 50 dollars could do to help a film like rebel be restored? Maybe buy a drink for the person doing some real work on it. Hehe

 

[Robert Harris]

Oh I suppose we should get them plaques too. Their 50 bucks to "crowdfund campaigns" is greatly appreciated.Oh wait, $50 is low..... welp my budget might not be as big as hers (lyonne). What do you suppose 50 dollars could do to help a film like rebel be restored? Maybe buy a drink for the person doing some real work on it. Hehe

This is not about anyone who might have contributed to any specific campaign, or the background of said campaign.

That “fifty bucks” can go a long way if contributed toward transparent and legitimate crowd-funded campaigns to digitize and / or restore films in jeopardy.

Many of these tiny campaigns successfully save (especially) silent films for $3-5,000, and make Blu-rays or DVDs available to collectors outside of normal distribution channels.

These are the halo campaigns, done not for profit, but simply so that an unseen film can have a new life with collectors, fill in gaps in cinema history, and allow new evaluations of a filmmaker’s work.

There are huge differences in the internal machinations of varied public funding campaigns, and digging into the details can reveal a myriad of facts about those behind them, the reality of the funds requested (or actually needed), and what becomes of the work financed by numerous small(ish) contributions.

For example, does the entity - and I’m not referring here to any specific campaign here - use the funds to create a project desired by others, and then end up with any passive income from public presentations, Blu-ray / DVD sales, et al?

If that’s the situation, what all those “fifty bucks” contributions are funding is the lifestyle of the original request or of funds. Certainly an interesting business model.

In the end, there is a huge difference between a campaign that seeks $5,000 to save a rare silent film, with those funds used solely to cover costs, and those that personally profit.

If you visit a wonderful site - Nitrateville - you’ll find discussions of important unseen silent films being saved for minimal sums, and made available with nary a profit motive in sight. I love these campaigns.

Fundraising for larger projects - I’ll use The Alamo as an example, during the period MGM permitted the project - was toward corporate sponsors, not generally individuals, as my feeling was that something owned by a huge entity was being saved, with over a million dollars necessary - and that the owner would gain long term profits. My company would receive a small fee - and all major contributors would benefit with the names of their entities attached, along with benefit screenings toward their own supported charities.

Very different than a crowd-funded campaign.

Before anyone asks the question whether I would personally use a Kickstarter (or other) campaign toward a smaller passion project, the answer is that I might. Dependent upon costs and intent.

For The Johnstown Flood, we decided to self-fund. Not because the project was inexpensive. It wasn’t. But because we felt that we had a decent shot at break-even. It was also a personal means of giving back to our industry and it’s history.

If funds were necessary for a larger project, we‘d consider using a campaign to partially defer expenses. But all of our personal time and labor is unpaid. There needs to be a balance.

This is a long way ‘round the mulberry bush (an interesting film) of saying that there is nothing inherently wrong with various campaigns to save cinema, as long as they‘re dealt with honestly and transparently.

And for all those tiny, passion projects to save silent films, your “fifty bucks” allows it to happen and is of great importance.

 

[rojobin]

As noted earlier, our memories of films always somehow relate to where or with whom we saw them, or other special circumstances.

This is another oddity, an old friend was doing lighting for A Fortune in Men's Eyes in NY, and Sal Mineo was having a gathering at this apartment of those involved, and miscellaneous others. As I had a beautiful 16mm dye transfer print of Rebel, my friend asked Sal if he's like to run it at the gathering. Turned out that he not only wanted to do so, but had never seen the final film, being so distraught over the passing of James Dean.

Seeing Warner Bros. new 4k UHD release of the film, I can tell you as an absolute, that while the colors and densities on my dye transfer print were nice enough for government work, it wouldn't have held a candle to what I'm seeing on this new disc.

A new 4k scan from the OCN, in the original and proper 2.55:1 aspect ratio, and 4-track stereo.

And while there are occasional WarnerColor oddities (never problematic), and original mumps inducing CinemaScope optics, I've never seen Rebel looking anywhere like what I'm seeing here in projection. I never get over the fact that these little shiny discs are a miracle of modern technology, or can be, as long as what's being encoded to them is as perfect as possible.

And here, that's the case.

For slipcover lovers, this one is a bit special. Same WB 100, but with a very elegant satin finish as opposed to gloss with metallic lettering. First printing only. Future collectible. No idea. Future Rarity on eBay. Goes without saying.

Like clockwork, WB has given us three extraordinary films from 1941, 1955 and 1967 - all letter perfect in every detail.

More please!


Image - 5

Audio – 5 (Dolby Atmos)

Pass / Fail – Pass

Plays nicely with projectors - Yes

Makes use of and works well in 4k - 4

Worth your attention - 10

Upgrade from Blu-ray - Absolutely!

Very Highly Recommended

RAH


Thank you for supporting HTF when you preorder using the link below. As an Amazon Associate, HTF earns from qualifying purchases. If you are using an adblocker you will not see link.

See on Amazon

"original mumps inducing CinemaScope" This is something that ALWAYS bothers me. Can't they 'correct' that? For me, it's like when a friend has their TV set on "Wide" when they watch The Three Stooges. (or anything that is 1.33:1)
I can't imagine that this can't be repaired 'digitally'. ... or would that be considered altering the film?

 

[Kevin Antonio (Kev)]

This is not about anyone who might have contributed to any specific campaign, or the background of said campaign.

That “fifty bucks” can go a long way if contributed toward transparent and legitimate crowd-funded campaigns to digitize and / or restore films in jeopardy.

Many of these tiny campaigns successfully save (especially) silent films for $3-5,000, and make Blu-rays or DVDs available to collectors outside of normal distribution channels.

These are the halo campaigns, done not for profit, but simply so that an unseen film can have a new life with collectors, fill in gaps in cinema history, and allow new evaluations of a filmmaker’s work.

There are huge differences in the internal machinations of varied public funding campaigns, and digging into the details can reveal a myriad of facts about those behind them, the reality of the funds requested (or actually needed), and what becomes of the work financed by numerous small(ish) contributions.

For example, does the entity - and I’m not referring here to any specific campaign here - use the funds to create a project desired by others, and then end up with any passive income from public presentations, Blu-ray / DVD sales, et al?

If that’s the situation, what all those “fifty bucks” contributions are funding is the lifestyle of the original request or of funds. Certainly an interesting business model.

In the end, there is a huge difference between a campaign that seeks $5,000 to save a rare silent film, with those funds used solely to cover costs, and those that personally profit.

If you visit a wonderful site - Nitrateville - you’ll find discussions of important unseen silent films being saved for minimal sums, and made available with nary a profit motive in sight. I love these campaigns.

Fundraising for larger projects - I’ll use The Alamo as an example, during the period MGM permitted the project - was toward corporate sponsors, not generally individuals, as my feeling was that something owned by a huge entity was being saved, with over a million dollars necessary - and that the owner would gain long term profits. My company would receive a small fee - and all major contributors would benefit with the names of their entities attached, along with benefit screenings toward their own supported charities.

Very different than a crowd-funded campaign.

Before anyone asks the question whether I would personally use a Kickstarter (or other) campaign toward a smaller passion project, the answer is that I might. Dependent upon costs and intent.

For The Johnstown Flood, we decided to self-fund. Not because the project was inexpensive. It wasn’t. But because we felt that we had a decent shot at break-even. It was also a personal means of giving back to our industry and it’s history.

If funds were necessary for a larger project, we‘dd consider using a campaign to partially defer expenses. But all of our personal time and labor is unpaid. There needs to be a balance.

This is a long way ‘round the mulberry bush (an interesting film) of saying that there is nothing inherently wrong with various campaigns to save cinema, as long as they‘re dealt with honestly and transparently.

And for all those tiny, passion projects to save silent films, your “fifty bucks” allows it to happen and is of great importance.

Oh, Im simply kidding. I would think any amount of money regardless of big donation or small matter to furthering this process for cinema, and with that said, enough praise can't be given to the people donating time and effort on these projects. My attempt st humor really goes towards credit. I can't give more credit to someone who donated a few bucks to someone who literally donated hrs of their time cleaning up a film ( even if both money and time are necessary).As always your response was a education in itself, and I appreciate it Mr harris.

 

[Robert Harris]

Oh, Im simply kidding. I would think any amount of money regardless of big donation or small matter to furthering this process for cinema, and with that said, enough praise can't be given to the people donating time and effort on these projects. My attempt st humor really goes towards credit. I can't give more credit to someone who donated a few bucks to someone who literally donated hrs of their time cleaning up a film ( even if both money and time are necessary).As always your response was a education in itself, and I appreciate it Mr harris.

There is no place for Humour on HTF.

 

[Paul Penna]

There is no place for Humour on HTF.

Good thing we know you're kidding.

 

[jayembee]

There is no place for Humour on HTF.

Not so. To read HTF, I need working eyes. Working eyes need both vitreous humour and aqueous humour.

 

[Kevin Antonio (Kev)]

HTF is a funny place.

 

[dpippel]

Not so. To read HTF, I need working eyes. Working eyes need both vitreous humour and aqueous humour.

 

[Tino]

There’s no laughing in here. This is the Humour room!

 

[Kevin Antonio (Kev)]

I received my disc today for Rebel. It's truly remarkable what was accomplished.

 

[B....]

This one is precious! Thanks to all for previously posted insight.

 

[Garysb]

$14.99 Amazon Prime Day

See on Amazon

 

[SD_Brian]

HTF is a funny place.

 

[Kevin Antonio (Kev)]