"Fiddler on the Roof" April 5th from MGM (2 Viewers)

[Ethan Riley]

The bluray.com article more than answered any questions I had (I was a little on the fence). The disc sounds outstanding, IMO. I don't expect (or want) crystal-clear quality from a 40 year old movie; it should look the way it looks (I still can't tell if that bit about them filming some of it through women's stockings is a joke or if they really did it lol). The only thing that really keeps me away from any older release blurays is digital problems; not filmmaking techniques. It sounds fine and the reviewer got me real curious about the soundtrack--it sounds like we're gonna hear this great music better than ever before. I'm heading out to Target in a few hours to pick up a copy!

 

[JohnMor]

Was very pleased with the disc. My only comment (not complaint) is that the only English track (the new 7.1) is awfully low. I had to pump my volume up WAY beyond what I usually set it at, then turn it way down when I popped over to the commentary track. But the track itself is gorgeous. Heard balalaIkas in the Bottle Dance orchestration I hadn't noticed before.

 

[GMpasqua]

Originally Posted by Ethan Riley
I don't expect (or want) crystal-clear quality from a 40 year old movie

Many films 40 - 50 years old have excellent sharp images. Many 40 year old films look better than some of the newer ones. You should always expect the best. Setting your expectations low may be a problem with younger generations. You should always expect the best, no matter what you buy - otherwise why should a company put any quality into thier products

 

[GMpasqua]

Living in Los Angeles we have the opportunity to see many older films with newly restored prints presented in the best theaters, with the best sound and in some cases 70MM projection.

Some films from 60 years ago look even better than many films shot today. I have not spoke to one person who saw the restored "Ten Commandments" last year who did not comment on how truly beautiful and sharp it looked - like it was filmed yesterday.

I have had the same experience with many older films, and quite the opposite effect with many newer films

You would be surprised how sharp and colorful the FOX 70MM prints screened in the last ten years look on the big screen - they really do not make films like this anymore (maybe once in a while) but such care was taken by the cinemagrapher and production design...many films today can not afford that luxury

 

[GMpasqua]

I was quite amazed with 'How the West Was Won" 91962) I couldn't believe the three projectors were able to stay in sync for over 3 hours!

So many DVD/Blu-rays have out of sync problems at various points throughout a film (some tranfers are adjusted, some not ..the picture track and sound track come from two different elements in the processing, which is why the sound will go out of sync on the discs - it only takes a frame ot two here and there).


I was surprised how razor sharp the WTWWW image was, how colorful and how inky the blacks were. And this film is from 1962! Plus it sounded great!

And a well made Blu-ray can give a very fair representation of that experiance at home, HTWWW on blu-ray looks great - especially in smilebox!

 

[benbess]

I agree--HTWWW looks and sounds GREAT on blu, esp. in smile format. Very good film. A classic Western in my book.

 

[Aaron Silverman]

IMO HTWWW is just a pretty good film, but the smilebox BD presentation is so spectacular it really elevates the entertainment value.

 

[GMpasqua]

MGM will be issuing "Hair" and "New York, New York" on blu on June 7th....I will definately be waiting for the reviews before purchasing ("Hair" hasn't be issued since the late 90's and in desperate need of a new transfer)

 

[Matt Hough]

Originally Posted by GMpasqua
MGM will be issuing "Hair" and "New York, New York" on blu on June 7th....I will definately be waiting for the reviews before purchasing ("Hair" hasn't be issued since the late 90's and in desperate need of a new transfer)

And as I recall, the DVDs weren't anamorphic, so the Blu-ray should at least give us a step up in that regard.

 

[dana martin]

was just at the bits, pre release art for those two titles is up , did one of the people in the art dept of MGM/Fox read the hell that has rained down lately about horrible coverart, because both of those look pretty damn sweet, now if whats on the disc can match the package then it will be all good

 

[kagemusha98]

Just watched "Fiddler".....The transfer is spectacular!!!!!!!

 

[Brian Borst]

Originally Posted by Ethan Riley
The bluray.com article more than answered any questions I had (I was a little on the fence). The disc sounds outstanding, IMO. I don't expect (or want) crystal-clear quality from a 40 year old movie; it should look the way it looks (I still can't tell if that bit about them filming some of it through women's stockings is a joke or if they really did it lol). The only thing that really keeps me away from any older release blurays is digital problems; not filmmaking techniques. It sounds fine and the reviewer got me real curious about the soundtrack--it sounds like we're gonna hear this great music better than ever before. I'm heading out to Target in a few hours to pick up a copy!

I thought that was a well known technique? George Lucas made Gilbert Taylor shoot the desert scenes from Star Wars with a stocking over the lens, although you probably would never guess that when you watch its recent version (so much for intent, I guess).

 

[kagemusha98]

Just as seen in the theaters...on occasion you can see the mesh of the stocking. The cinematography is outstanding...not to mention Oscar winning. The Blu Ray does it full justice!!!!

 

[Scott Calvert]

The 1080P screenshots posted on bluray.com tell you just about all you need to know. This is more than just a "pretty good" release.

 

[JoHud]

Definitely will be picking up this. Personally, I won't mind if MGM Blurays tend to be just be "pretty good" because so many of their DVD titles were passable/mediocre and some not getting anamorphic releases, that a "pretty good" release on Blu still seems like a huge upgrade. The release will have to be very half-arsed for me to pass up (which seems to be the recent TGSET blu)

 

[benbess]

Just got this at a place I almost never go to, Wallmart, but they had it for $15. Looking forward to it. It's one of my favorite musicals of all time.

 

[Ethan Riley]

Originally Posted by GMpasqua
Many films 40 - 50 years old have excellent sharp images. Many 40 year old films look better than some of the newer ones. You should always expect the best. Setting your expectations low may be a problem with younger generations. You should always expect the best, no matter what you buy - otherwise why should a company put any quality into thier products

What I meant was that I didn't want them to use any digital tinkering to sharpen up the original image quality of Fiddler. And they didn't.

I just watched it and the pantyhose lens is in plain view whenever you see the sky in Act Two. Some people will think it's digital distortion; it isn't! It's the pantyhose! What's on view in the bluray is what's supposed to be there. Notice the detail, for example, on Tzeitel's bridal veil. And you can notice it now--you couldn't on the older dvds. On the old dvd it just looked like a very plain white veil but on the bluray you can truly see the fine lattice work.

The sound is vastly improved over the old dvd (I only ever had the 2001 release); its only flaws are the same flaws that were done at the time of recording back in the 70s. I think they might have done some noise reduction--the soundtrack is suspiciously soft in a few places--but they did do a very, very good job of it. It doesn't sound muffled or degraded as in some dvds where they went hog wild removing tape hiss (hello, Dolly...) Fiddler sounds crystal clear for the most part and you'll probably pick up instruments and underscoring that you never noticed before. One thing that I enjoyed was the slight reverb used on the principal vocalists during the Dream sequence (Grandma, Fruma Sarah, even Tevye). I never really noticed it before, and it makes the whole thing a lot spookier! (I also agree with the person who said the soundtrack was very quiet and they had to turn up the volume quite a bit. So did I. I honestly have no idea why they record blurays so quietly and here's another example. It doesn't really matter--you can turn up the volume and it sounds fine, but why do they want us to that in the first place? Is there some reason?)

Another good reason to upgrade to the bluray is solely for the acting performance of Topol. Dozens of his more subtle facial expressions shine through on the bluray. Tiny, slight smiles, a mini-eyebrow raise here and there. The bluray has completely changed the way I've always regarded his acting ability, simply because those details weren't nearly as apparent on standard def. We always talk about aspect ratios, and DNR and digital artifact problems on bluray. Why don't we ever discuss that fact that with bluray you can see the actors' faces so much more clearly, and that the tiniest details of their performances are now on view and add to the story? In the case of Fiddler, it really made a difference in getting Tevye's story across.

And the bluray also adds about two dozen familiar faces to the cast. How/why? Because on the old dvd you just see a bunch of bearded guys with hats moving around. In the bluray you can tell all those people apart, identify with them as characters and follow them from scene to scene. It seemed like a totally different viewing experience.

I can tell you I've seen Fiddler about 40 times, but that would be a lie. I've really only seen it once--today. This has to go on the shelf with the best kind of blurays--one that sticks to the original filmmaker's vision. A bluray that looks like you're actually in the theater, watching a movie.

 

[benbess]

Ethan: Thanks so much for this great review. I completely agree with you that one of the pleasures of a good blu is that you can experience good and even great acting more immediately, as if you're there. I love this film, and I'm glad the blu seems worthy of it.

 

[GMpasqua]

Quote:

Originally Posted by JoHud /forum/thread/308710/fiddler-on-the-roof-april-5th-from-mgm/90#post_3798279


Definitely will be picking up this. Personally, I won't mind if MGM Blurays tend to be just be "pretty good" because so many of their DVD titles were passable/mediocre and some not getting anamorphic releases, that a "pretty good" release on Blu still seems like a huge upgrade. The release will have to be very half-arsed for me to pass up (which seems to be the recent TGSET blu)




JoHud..you are sending MGM the wrong messages. What you are saying is:

"MGM you don't have to do a great job anymore...just do a pretty good job and I'll keep buying from you"

 

[Ethan Riley]

Originally Posted by benbess
Ethan: Thanks so much for this great review. I completely agree with you that one of the pleasures of a good blu is that you can experience good and even great acting more immediately, as if you're there. I love this film, and I'm glad the blu seems worthy of it.

I think the bluray producers' intent was to preserve the film that we've all enjoyed for 40 years, without using digital magic to "enhance" it to today's standards. I don't want to carp on Disney, but we all know that they overdo their classic releases; Fiddler seems immune to that kind of tinkering.

You know, when they "restore" a classic painting for museum viewing, they just clean off the dirt so you can see it better. They don't reframe it to a different size than the artist intended and they don't recolor it. I have no idea why some dvd producers do just that to the classic films they're working on, because what is a classic film other than a work of art? If you have a good bluray collection, then you have your own museum of film--and that's what they should do: care for these movies like they're caring for a classic painting, and not, eh, "fiddle" with it.