A Sneak Peek at Zulu and Khartoum (1 Viewer)

[haineshisway]

It's hilarious to see you starting this discussion again when most people are still waiting for their discs.When I get my version I will happily report what version I like better and why.

You've already decided which you like better - I've seen the posts Why even bother to watch

I didn't mean to be hilarious, but am always glad when it happens. The gentleman who put out the disc and I watched it together - oh, wait, that's all in my first post.

 

[rsmithjr]

Having seen these in original releases (Khartoum Cinerama 70, Zulu 35mm) and on LD, I thought I would make a few comments.

Technically:
1. Zulu has apparent edge enhancement but still watchable.
2. Khartoum looks somewhat murky. Image is too blue but can be corrected (my opinion).
3. Both have decent 2.0 soundtracks, why this is "best possible" is beyond me, especially for Khartoum.
4. Khartoum's mattes and special effects are substandard even for 1966.

Cinematically:
1. Khartoum is something of a mess. Heston give it a try, Olivier can be brilliant but seems uninvolved. The fact that Olivier was not on location is obvious.
2. Khartoum's score is a pistache of themes nearly copied from films like The Great Escape, Cleopatra, and Lawrence. Doesn't work for me.
3. Zulu is a very fine film in every respect. Interplay between Baker and Caine is very good, entire cast is involved, Zulus are totally credible. Cherish this one.

 

[Dubstar]

The 70mm Ultra Panavision print screened at Bradford a few years ago used a DTS/Datasat 5.1 track.

as were the 70mm prints that were screened at the AFI Silver and the Film Society of Lincoln Center - how DTS/Datasat got the original mix and was able to archive it and encode it on discs for select 70mm prints - and then for MGM to blatantly say to Twilight Time the sound elements are now 'gone' - what? in under two years time, the just up and got lost... I don't buy it for a single second.

 

[OliverK]

You've already decided which you like better - I've seen the posts Why even bother to watch

Why not watch it? After all I already wasted my money on the UK/Paramount version. And if the caps are any indication the MGM version is not exactly the greatest thing since the invention of the format either so a bit of fun can be had comparing the strengths and weaknesses of both

I didn't mean to be hilarious, but am always glad when it happens. The gentleman who put out the disc and I watched it together - oh, wait, that's all in my first post.

Yes I know you watched it together which is nice for you but still I prefer to watch these myself. Just reading about you watching them is not quite the same

 

[OliverK]

as were the 70mm prints that were screened at the AFI Silver and the Film Society of Lincoln Center - how DTS/Datasat got the original mix and was able to archive it and encode it on discs for select 70mm prints - and then for MGM to blatantly say to Twilight Time the sound elements are now 'gone' - what? in under two years time, the just up and got lost... I don't buy it for a single second.

According to a German report from Wolfram Hannemann (laserhotline) at the time of a UK Widescreen Weekend 2009 screening of Khartoum the DTS-sound of the new 70mm print was taken "only" from 4-track sound elements. Still better than stereo but it might be interesting to hear from Datasat what they were able to work with and if the results of their work would have been available for Twilight Time(maybe a licensing issue).

 

[Stephen PI]

The original mix of "Khartoum" is 4-track.

 

[Dubstar]

The original mix of "Khartoum" is 4-track.

still, even remixed to 6-track, the music sounded ultra-vivid and spread across the wide 2.76 imagery to spectacular effect.

 

[David_B_K]

Having seen these in original releases (Khartoum Cinerama 70, Zulu 35mm) and on LD, I thought I would make a few comments.

Cinematically:
1. Khartoum is something of a mess. Heston give it a try, Olivier can be brilliant but seems uninvolved. The fact that Olivier was not on location is obvious.
2. Khartoum's score is a pistache of themes nearly copied from films like The Great Escape, Cleopatra, and Lawrence. Doesn't work for me.
3. Zulu is a very fine film in every respect. Interplay between Baker and Caine is very good, entire cast is involved, Zulus are totally credible. Cherish this one.

1. I probably like Khartoum more than you do. This Blu-ray was my first viewing of the entire film since the DVD came out. It's certainly not at the level of Lawrence, but it is literate and never descends to campiness as some epics do. I actually enjoyed it this time more than I thought I did. Maybe it was the spectacular Uultra-Panavision visuals on this stellar disc. It is sad that they could get any pick-up shots of Olivier on the exterior sets. However, I still found his performance rather charmingly chilling.

2. I thought the only pastiche-like element of the score was the main theme, which Cordell endowed with an Elgarian sweep. This was appropriate IMO for a film set during Victoria's reign (though it might have been better to just use some Elgar music as was done with Young Winston.)

3. I agree that Zulu is a fine film. I watched it countless times on TV and later on laserdisc, DVD and Blu-ray. I'm still on the fence about getting a second Blu-ray version.

 

[cineMANIAC]

Cinematically:
1. Khartoum is something of a mess. Heston give it a try, Olivier can be brilliant but seems uninvolved. The fact that Olivier was not on location is obvious.
2. Khartoum's score is a pistache of themes nearly copied from films like The Great Escape, Cleopatra, and Lawrence. Doesn't work for me.
3. Zulu is a very fine film in every respect. Interplay between Baker and Caine is very good, entire cast is involved, Zulus are totally credible. Cherish this one.

Damn, I wish I hadn't read this. Now I'm going to be looking for bad mattes, patchwork music and actors who wish they were somewhere else while filming. Wait, according to the above comments, Olivier WAS somewhere else. It's kind of like reading spoliers. Bummer

 

[David_B_K]

Damn, I wish I hadn't read this. Now I'm going to be looking for bad mattes, patchwork music and actors who wish they were somewhere else while filming. Wait, according to the above comments, Olivier WAS somewhere else. It's kind of like reading spoliers. Bummer

Yes, the mattes are bad, but they are few and far-between. Most of the film is the real thing with real people on location in the desert.

I don't know why Olivier didn't go on location. All of his scenes are shot with him either in his tent, or standing in front of his tent. In the scene in front of the tent, where the Mahdi is addressing his followers, a stand-in is used for long shots, while the cut-ins to medium and close shots are Olivier in the studio. It's not that disctracting to me because I know movies were often shot that way. Actually, Zulu did some of this as well. The scenes with Hook and the others in the bunks in Zulu were shot in the studio as they were all interiors. The actors in those scenes did not go on location.

I did not find Khartoum's picture to be "murky" at all. I thought it looked spectacular.

 

[SAhmed]

My copies of Zulu and Khartoum arrived late Saturday. As mentioned by an earlier post, the first thing I had to do was "throw out" the eco packaging. Got around to "sampling" Zulu this morning but was immediately hooked and had to watch it in it's entirety - loved the presentation but don't know how it compared with the Region B. It was of course superior to both the DVD and the Criterion LD that I have.

It may be my imagination but the speech seems ever so slightly out of sync around the time of Allendorf introduction and the Witt's arrival at Rorke's Drift. Imagination or not this is best presentation that I have seen of it - never saw it in the cinema.

Looking forward to Khartoum at the weekend.

Regards,

 

[Reed Grele]

Well, some good news. I watched the TT's ZULU last night, all the way through, with an appreciative audience.

Very little to complain about. I was on the lookout for excessive DNR, ringing, waxiness.... But happily didn't notice anything truly wicked.

It's not the transfer of the year, but it'll do.

 

[JoHud]

Just got a shipping confirmation for my other 2 items. A heads up for those still waiting for that confirmation.

 

[ahollis]

I just got my shipping confirmation for the three I ordered MAN IN THE DARK, KHARTOUM, and ZULU. Should have a fun weekend.

 

[rsmithjr]

Damn, I wish I hadn't read this. Now I'm going to be looking for bad mattes, patchwork music and actors who wish they were somewhere else while filming. Wait, according to the above comments, Olivier WAS somewhere else. It's kind of like reading spoliers. Bummer

I wouldn't take my comments as so serious as to not buy the films. I already owned both on LD and knew the drill myself.

The mattes are bad but there aren't that many of them, most of the what you are seeing is real stuff. Modern audiences react more strongly to such things than 1966 audiences did, we all know too much now about what used to be "secrets" known only to a few people.

The Blu-rays are probably the best we are going to see. In the case of Zulu in particular, the true stereo (even if only 2.0 Surround) is well worth the price of admission.

 

[Robert Crawford]

I just got my shipping confirmation for the three I ordered MAN IN THE DARK, KHARTOUM, and ZULU. Should have a fun weekend.

Same here!

 

[Rob_Ray]

Same here!

Me three. I'm looking forward to all three. Between these and that Criterion title, I'm going to have the most exciting backlog of BluRays in quite some time!

 

[JohnMor]

Mine is still "Pending." LOL.

 

[AnthonyClarke]

So when can we expect a thorough comparison of the two Zulu editions?

 

[JohnMor]

So when can we expect a thorough comparison of the two Zulu editions?

And then the inevitable and ubiquitous battle back and forth about how one side isn't really seeing what the other side is and how they're completely blind to the color and dnr in one or the other.