GENTLEMEN PREFER BLONDES on Blu-ray - thoughts? (1 Viewer)

[Chuck Pennington]

I just got this disc for under $10 at Wal-Mart (score!), and I just finished watching it.
There is something about it that doesn't look natural to me. The image is brighter with more detail in it, and it is far more stable than before, but there doesn't appear to be any fine grain visible at all. Even though the resolution is much higher than before and there is more detail on display, it still looked softer than I was expecting. I'm curious to hear what other people think of this transfer. I don't want to claim that it is over-processed and over-scrubbed yet, but it definitely doesn't look right to me. It doesn't look like film.
I was happy to see they expended some effort on upgrading the sound to 5.1, but it was disheartening to see the same old standard definition trailer for the film with excerpts from a deleted musical number but no sign of that number included anywhere on the disc. I wonder if it even exists anymore?
I got other Monroe Blu-ray titles, but now I'm not sure if I should open them or return them sight unseen, be they under $10 or not. In all honestly, GENTLEMEN PREFER BLONDES was the only one I was really interested in keeping in my collection anyway.
Calling Robert Harris!!! I really would love to hear what he thinks of this title as he has the knowledge and a far larger screen to view it on than I.

 

[Mark-P]

My thoughts are that it's not a bad-looking disc, with really bright colors, but it can't compare to Warner's recent ultra-resolution transfers, such as Singin' in the Rain.

 

[Lidenbrock]

I don't want to claim that it is over-processed and over-scrubbed yet, but it definitely doesn't look right to me. It doesn't look like film.
.

Well, I´ll claim it: it´s over-processed and over-scrubbed, and it doesn´t look like film. Certeainly not Patton, but after releasing something like The Sound of Music, I find it an outrage. And it´s in no way related to the ultraresolution process.

 

[Doug Bull]

Thank goodness there are others who think that "Gentlemen Prefer Blondes" looks awful.
I agree with Chuck that it looks strange. (Ugly is a word I would use)
Actually the whole 5 Fox Colored titles are overly soft with heavy blacks, incorrect skin-tones and in some cases swamped in a blue tint.
There are just so many things wrong with this set's PQ.
I'm truly amazed at the positive comments so far.
I've no problems with the sound.
Don't blame the early Cinemascope lens for the softness.(distortion yes)
Check my Avatar, which I scanned from an original 35mm IB Technicolor Scope print. (circa 1955) of "How To Marry A Millionaire"
Compare the skin tones with what's on offer here from Fox.
Doug.

 

[JohnS]

I just DVR'd this on TCM-HD.
Never seen the movie.
I'm going to see what the picture looks like.

 

[haineshisway]

Awful? I must be watching a different transfer of Gentleman Prefer Blondes. First off, you can't cry DNR and then say it has detail - it's on oxymoron. This transfer is VERY sharp. I have no idea what it was taken from, but compared to The Seven Year Itch, which is brown and ugly-looking, this is a stellar transfer and looks very much like the IB Technicolor prints of that era, which were not, I repeat not, larded with grain. Singin' in the Rain, while a noble effort, doesn't look anywhere near what it should look like because it's many generations away from the camera negative. Again, you cannot have DNR and detail without shoving up the edge enhancement tools to sharpen and there is not a whit of edge enhancement in this transfer. There is a LOT of detail and it's VERY sharp.

 

[Chuck Pennington]

Awful? I must be watching a different transfer of Gentleman Prefer Blondes. First off, you can't cry DNR and then say it has detail - it's on oxymoron. This transfer is VERY sharp. There is a LOT of detail and it's VERY sharp.

I figured you would have this reaction. I can offer to post 1920x1080 screen captures, but that will just piss you off as well.
"Crying DNR" and then saying it has detail is not an oxymoron to me. The higher resolution of Blu-ray when compared to DVD pretty much assures that there will be details that couldn't be resolved on that lower resolution medium. There can be some detail heretofore unseen on video in the transfer and it still be scrubbed a bit too much.
Do you see any fine grain at all in the image? Wouldn't there be even a little bit? I was just stating my opinion that it didn't look right. I an have that opinion, and explain why I feel that way. I even qualified my firt post, just asking if other people felt the way I did.

 

[DavidJ]

Well, consider me intrigued. I picked this up today, but was not entirely sure about keeping it. Now I am curious to see for my self. It is, however, a film that I'm not that familiar with.

 

[Chuck Pennington]

Well, consider me intrigued. I picked this up today, but was not entirely sure about keeping it. Now I am curious to see for my self. It is, however, a film that I'm not that familiar with.

Well, it's a darling film, a lot of fun. It isn't the stage show from which it was adapted, but even with all the changes it manages to be its own enjoyable confection. I don't think you'll regret keeping the Blu-ray and viewing it. Even with my reservations, it is FAR from a disgrace. The color is quite stunning, and the film is a LOT of fun. I just think it looks a bit too much like video and not enough like film.

 

[JohnS]

I watched Gentlemen Prefer Blondes on TCM-HD and really enjoyed it.
The colors were really vivid and spectacular.
The print was very clean almost too clean.
I can see what people are talking about that it doesn't look like film.
Still waiting to hear from Robert Harris' opinion.

 

[Anthony Dale]

Awful? I must be watching a different transfer of Gentleman Prefer Blondes. First off, you can't cry DNR and then say it has detail - it's on oxymoron. This transfer is VERY sharp. I have no idea what it was taken from, but compared to The Seven Year Itch, which is brown and ugly-looking, this is a stellar transfer and looks very much like the IB Technicolor prints of that era, which were not, I repeat not, larded with grain. There is a LOT of detail and it's VERY sharp.

I agree one hundred percent!
Bought all five at Wal*mart, and have only checked out this and THERE'S NO BUSINESS LIKE SHOW BUSINESS (I have a weak spot for Johnny Ray) and I have never seen GPB looking or sounding better.
I still wish that FOX had included the deleted numbers from both of these films.

 

[Chuck Pennington]

I watched Gentlemen Prefer Blondes on TCM-HD and really enjoyed it.
I can see what people are talking about that it doesn't look like film.

I wouldn't compare an HD cable broadcast with a Blu-ray. It may not have even been of the same transfer. Certainly the lower 1080i resolution and tons of added compression needed for HD broadcast will affect the way it looks.

 

[Robert Crawford]

Originally Posted by Chuck Pennington /t/322759/gentlemen-prefer-blondes-on-blu-ray-thoughts#post_3957956
I wouldn't compare an HD cable broadcast with a Blu-ray. It may not have even been of the same transfer. Certainly the lower 1080i resolution and tons of added compression needed for HD broadcast will affect the way it looks.

Not only that, but TCM-HD is upconverting their broadcasts so it's not true 1080i.






Crawdaddy

 

[DavidJ]

Well, it's a darling film, a lot of fun. It isn't the stage show from which it was adapted, but even with all the changes it manages to be its own enjoyable confection. I don't think you'll regret keeping the Blu-ray and viewing it. Even with my reservations, it is FAR from a disgrace. The color is quite stunning, and the film is a LOT of fun. I just think it looks a bit too much like video and not enough like film.

Thanks for the follow-up Chuck.

 

[haineshisway]

I figured you would have this reaction. I can offer to post 1920x1080 screen captures, but that will just piss you off as well.
"Crying DNR" and then saying it has detail is not an oxymoron to me. The higher resolution of Blu-ray when compared to DVD pretty much assures that there will be details that couldn't be resolved on that lower resolution medium. There can be some detail heretofore unseen on video in the transfer and it still be scrubbed a bit too much.
Do you see any fine grain at all in the image? Wouldn't there be even a little bit? I was just stating my opinion that it didn't look right. I an have that opinion, and explain why I feel that way. I even qualified my firt post, just asking if other people felt the way I did.

So only you should be allowed to have an opinion I don't think that's the way the world works. I do see some very fine grain, sorry. And I have seen DNR applied to a transfer first hand and not a lot of it, but it totally took detail away from what I was seeing and they brought it back with edge enhancement - but there is no edge enhancement on this transfer, at least that I can see. I'm not talking about the difference between DVD and Blu-ray - you can't possibly think that. Well, maybe you can. And you'll think what you will and I'll think what I will and the world will keep turning. Your post didn't "piss me off" nor was my response directed solely at you, I stated an opposing opinion and my reasons for stating it. If you have an issue with that, all I can tell you is this is a discussion board.

 

[JohnS]

Well at least watching it on TCM-HD made me want to buy it on blu-ray.
When I get it, I can make a true and fair assessment.

 

[Mark B]

With all of the deleted scenes and outtakes, plus screen and costume tests which survive in the Fox vaults and have been seen in the Hidden Hollywood features I find it hard to believe the Marilyn/Jane number from BLONDES is lost. I wish we could get confirmation one way or another. Sheesh, the cover of the BluRay even used a still in those costumes.

 

[Doug Bull]

I had another look at it last night on a different display and I have now slightly softened my criticism of the disc.
My first disappointed viewing was on a calibrated 58" 1080p Plasma.
Last night I watched it on a 720p OLED display.
Surprisingly the color and overall appearance looked much better on the lower resolution OLED, although that unwanted Video look, if slightly less noticeable, was still there.

 

[Chuck Pennington]

So only you should be allowed to have an opinion I don't think that's the way the world works. -

You went on and on how people criticize releases with claims of DVNR and such and how you are one of the only people qualified to make a judgement either way because you've used a telecine. If anyone disagrees with you, they must be fools and not have eyes.
Robert Harris has since posted that it doesn't look all that right to him also, so it isn't just me.

 

[Chuck Pennington]

Not only that, but TCM-HD is upconverting their broadcasts so it's not true 1080i.
Crawdaddy

I saw some of it and it appears to be the old transfer, not the one used on the Blu-ray.