3D Gog (1953) (1 Viewer)

[Bob Furmanek]

In general, 3-D movies are the red-headed stepchild and there has been very little interest in their preservation. That's why I began my work 30+ years ago to try and make a difference.


http://www.3dfilmarchive.com/home/history-of-the-archive

 

[Dstevenb]

I agree with the Furmanek restoration quality. I took out the Bubble and watched it again. I love that movie. So cool and creepy.


Thanks Bob for the update. I am more than happy to wait for the fantastic product. I will be ordering The Mask today to tide me over until Gog!!

 

[Bob Furmanek]

Thanks, I only wish we had more time and funds because Greg could do even better work with both on his side. THE BUBBLE would have benefited tremendously from additional image clean-up and more advanced color timing of the faded negative.


It's pretty much a case of making it happen with very limited resources.

 

[Dstevenb]

Bob, my wife and I work in the TV industry and both of us were commenting on how good and vibrant The Bubble looks. Our professional opinion was that it look absolutely stunning the way you fixed it up already! Around my circles you get the high praises for your work.


Have you thought about crowdfunding the restorations you do? I'd be more than happy to fork out a bit extra for a BRD with your John Hancock on the cover, if it helped you get the financing you would need.

 

[Bob Furmanek]

Thank you, your comments are very much appreciated. We try our very best!


Funny you should mention that. While everything we've done so far has been on our dime, we're going to fundraise for an upcoming project because the licensing/scanning costs are higher than usual.


But it's a 3-D film that has not been seen anywhere in 50+ years so it has to be done.

 

[Mike Ballew]

When [Greg] finishes a reel, the files are then sent to Thad Komorowski for additional image clean-up and dirt removal.

Bob, given the participation of you, Greg, and now also Thad Komorowski, it's too bad we can't work up a behind-the-scenes, "Restoration Of" VAM featurette, because now I have the perfect title:


Three Gogfathers.


The memory of Forrest Ackerman abides.

 

[Bob Furmanek]

For the first time in over 60 years, the 1954 science-fiction classic GOG will be available in 3-D, color and 1.66:1 widescreen!

This special restored edition from the 3-D Film Archive will be released on 3-D Blu-ray by Kino Lorber Studio Classics on March 1, 2016.

Working from master left/right 35mm materials, this 3-D rarity has been beautifully restored shot-by-shot by Archive Technical Director Greg Kintz for optimum stereoscopic presentation.

Every shot in the film required up to six levels of correction. We have done extensive color restoration as the only surviving 35mm left side element is totally faded, image stabilization, flicker reduction, stereoscopic vertical alignment and left/right panel matching. With additional dirt/damage clean-up by Thad Komorowski, we are proud to present GOG looking better than ever before.

PLEASE NOTE - This original trailer has not been restored.

 

[bujaki]

Thank you, your comments are very much appreciated. We try our very best!


Funny you should mention that. While everything we've done so far has been on our dime, we're going to fundraise for an upcoming project because the licensing/scanning costs are higher than usual.


But it's a 3-D film that has not been seen anywhere in 50+ years so it has to be done.

You can count on my monies for this one, Bob!

 

[LouA]

Mr. Furmanek. Will the non-3D version be included? I like 3D myself , but my wife says it gives her a headache. Come to think of it she says that about me too!

 

[Bob Furmanek]

Oh yes, indeed. The film can also be viewed flat on the 3-D Blu-ray!

 

[Dick]

Thank you, Roland. You'll be amazed at what titles are in the pipeline!

So many thanks for your great work! But you keep baiting us with quotes like this, and it's excruciating!

 

[Bob Furmanek]

Thanks, Rick!


I wish I didn't have to be so cryptic but until official announcements are ready and cleared by the necessary parties, my hands are tied. I hope you understand.

 

[Todd J Moore]

Well, if as many titles are coming as you hint, you'll have money from home!

 

[revgen]

Well, if as many titles are coming as you hint, you'll have money from home!

If so, then I'm not surprised that Bob has suggested crowdfunding. 6 rolls of film were shot for that film and Flight to Tangier. The scanning costs will be incredibly expensive if the rolls still exist.

 

[Mike Ballew]

In general, 3-D movies are the red-headed stepchild and there has been very little interest in their preservation. That's why I began my work 30+ years ago to try and make a difference.


http://www.3dfilmarchive.com/home/history-of-the-archive

Owing to the advances in digital technology, I am persuaded that 3-D cinema is here to stay. But it seems always to be settling into a new equilibrium, in terms of supply and demand. Stereoscopic 3-D does not yet enjoy the same firm acceptance in the industry or among critics and the academy (lowercase, in the sense of scholarship) as do, say, color, sound and widescreen.


That being said, I think all prior examples of stereo cinema are long overdue for critical and scholarly examination and reassessment.* I honestly think that some dismissals of stereo cinema in past works of film scholarship have been made by people who never had the chance to view the films in 3-D, or who only saw occasional, slipshod presentations. In other cases, dismissal has been reflexive, a parroting of entrenched attitudes of indifference or even hostility. But going forward, truly sensitive and open-minded scholars and historians will surely wish to trace the development of stereo cinema as a distinct medium, and to give careful, individual consideration to each film in turn. And this can only be done if the films are available to view.


From my perspective, Bob and Greg, you two and others of like mind, like Jack Theakston and the late Dan Symmes, are working to preserve a neglected part of our cultural heritage. Let me amplify that: Our shared cultural heritage. It is a part of our cultural heritage that has long been marginalized, and indeed is still being marginalized. But the tide is turning, as it must. If 20, 30, or 50 years from now smart people are able to hash over and weigh the relative merits of 3-D films of decades past, it will be owing in considerable measure to your efforts. Even those films that you gentlemen have not touched with your own hands will have benefited from your tireless efforts to promote understanding, acceptance, and enthusiasm for this wonderful and unique art form.


Be strong and of good courage. Do not be dismayed.




* - Except for Flesh for Frankenstein. And maybe The Stewardesses.

 

[StephenDH]

It's always struck me as odd that movie directors are always striving to give depth to 2D movies with all the various visual means at their disposal but most of them shun the very technology which would actually enable them to do it.

 

[LouA]

Oh yes, indeed. The film can also be viewed flat on the 3-D Blu-ray!

Thanks . I'll be enthusiastically watching it in 3D , but in case Gail wants to watch too, I have that option.

 

[Dick]

Thanks, Rick!


I wish I didn't have to be so cryptic but until official announcements are ready and cleared by the necessary parties, my hands are tied. I hope you understand.

I do, of course. For some reason I could not attach a smiley to my post that day. You have my/our full support.

 

[Bob Furmanek]

For those that can view cross-eyed 3-D, there's a GOG treat coming soon.

 

[GregK]

A 2-D left eye peek as well as a R/L crosseyed 3-D version: