- Joined
- Feb 8, 1999
- Messages
- 18,407
- Real Name
- Robert Harris
DeeF is quite correct.
The current DVD has nothing to do with the 1998 "restoration."
And, yes,
I abhor the 1998 "restoration."
Word leaking about the grapevine is as follows, and may be inaccurate in some regards:
1. At least one disc will feature the film with its original 1939 heavy, de-saturated look, based upon a complete 1939 print which the studio is apparently telling the press that it possesses.
2. If this print exists (only a certain number of reels were previously known, plus a print in an archive in China) then the cropped shots should be able to be restored digitally.
If the studio is actually going the 1939 route, I would expect that they would, in addition, be forced to also include a second version based upon more publicly accepted color.
This would be superb, and would make a great release, as there have been at least three major variantions of color design as released thus far.
As I've mentioned in the past, although many people have requested the original 1939 color, densities, etc. which are quite beautiful and would be historically accurate and interesting, the general public circa 2004 would not be terribly complimentary toward such a DVD, finding it faded looking, dense and not terribly pleasing to the eye.
None of the above informatiion comes from studio sources, and with the exception of comments in regard to 1939 color design and its perception by modern audiences, may be totally inaccurate.
RAH
The current DVD has nothing to do with the 1998 "restoration."
And, yes,
I abhor the 1998 "restoration."
Word leaking about the grapevine is as follows, and may be inaccurate in some regards:
1. At least one disc will feature the film with its original 1939 heavy, de-saturated look, based upon a complete 1939 print which the studio is apparently telling the press that it possesses.
2. If this print exists (only a certain number of reels were previously known, plus a print in an archive in China) then the cropped shots should be able to be restored digitally.
If the studio is actually going the 1939 route, I would expect that they would, in addition, be forced to also include a second version based upon more publicly accepted color.
This would be superb, and would make a great release, as there have been at least three major variantions of color design as released thus far.
As I've mentioned in the past, although many people have requested the original 1939 color, densities, etc. which are quite beautiful and would be historically accurate and interesting, the general public circa 2004 would not be terribly complimentary toward such a DVD, finding it faded looking, dense and not terribly pleasing to the eye.
None of the above informatiion comes from studio sources, and with the exception of comments in regard to 1939 color design and its perception by modern audiences, may be totally inaccurate.
RAH