Hitchcock on Blu-ray? (1 Viewer)

[Hollywoodaholic]

"Having shot Dial M for Murder in 3-D, Alfred Hitchcock was so displeased by the result that he released it in 2-D at its New York opening."

From Roger Ebert's article disdaining 3D in the current Newseek.

www.newsweek.com/id/237110

 

[ajabrams]

Having seen the 3D version of "Dial M" I have to say that the process doesn't really add a lot. It's used very conservatively and apart from the scissor stabbing, there's not a whole lot more that's memorable about the use of 3-D in this particular film.

 

[Matt Hough]

I saw a 3-D reissue of Dial 'M' for Murder at some point during the 1982-1983 revival of interest in the process. The thing I noticed most especially about the director's use of 3-D was not in the things-in-your-face aspects of the production but that fact that the apartment where most of the action takes place seemed ACRES larger than it does in 2-D. Because these are folks living a fairly lavish lifestyle, the more spacious seeming apartment appeared much more logical when watching the movie in 3-D. All of those furniture pieces Hitchcock placed in the foreground seem cramped in 2-D but wildly dimensional in 3-D. I'd love to experience this film again in 3-D.

 

[benbess]

I like Matt's review. I'd like to see this one in 3D too...That stuff about the apt. makes sense. I does seem a bit cramped in the regular version...Although in London, like in NY, even well off people live in relatively small flats sometimes.

 

[Ken_McAlinden]

I saw "Dial 'M' for Murder" in 3D last September at the Redford Theater in Detroit. As Matt pointed out, the 3D is used mostly to create a sense of space in the apartment. For most of its running time, it does not so much give the sense of things sticking out of the screen as an extended depth *into* the screen, kind of like a stage play with camera angles. The reaching for scissors effect and the arrangement of elements like lamps and titles in the extreme foreground are the occasional purposeful exceptions.

Regards,

 

[MatthewA]

Originally Posted by MattH.

I saw a 3-D reissue of Dial 'M' for Murder at some point during the 1982-1983 revival of interest in the process. The thing I noticed most especially about the director's use of 3-D was not in the things-in-your-face aspects of the production but that fact that the apartment where most of the action takes place seemed ACRES larger than it does in 2-D. Because these are folks living a fairly lavish lifestyle, the more spacious seeming apartment appeared much more logical when watching the movie in 3-D. All of those furniture pieces Hitchcock placed in the foreground seem cramped in 2-D but wildly dimensional in 3-D. I'd love to experience this film again in 3-D.

I was at the 3-D Film Festival in Hollywood in 2003 where I saw this and six of the other classic 1950s 3-D features in true, polarized 3-D. My sentiments echo yours, and I'd buy a 3-D BD of this in a second.

After the debacles of Out of Africa and Gladiator (a Paramount release with a master supplied by Universal), which are Best Picture Oscar Winners for crying out loud, should we be worried about the quality of the eventual Hitchcock BDs?

 

[benbess]

Originally Posted by MatthewA




I was at the 3-D Film Festival in Hollywood in 2003 where I saw this and six of the other classic 1950s 3-D features in true, polarized 3-D. My sentiments echo yours, and I'd buy a 3-D BD of this in a second.

After the debacles of Out of Africa and Gladiator (a Paramount release with a master supplied by Universal), which are Best Picture Oscar Winners for crying out loud, should we be worried about the quality of the eventual Hitchcock BDs?

As a big Hitchcock fan, it's distressing to me to how many of his titles are owned by Universal. Even with RAH's measured and diplomatic words about their operation, I'd say there's trouble in river city...

 

[Jack Theakston]

The last time I spoke to someone at WB (November), there were no plans to release DIAL 'M' on BD. There is a French BD coming out from what I understand.'


Hitchcock had nothing to do with the film's flat engagements. During its premiere, it was found that running the film flat was drawing better than in 3D (sync problems were keeping patrons away from theaters). WB decided to drop the 3D angle, although it was still available for booking that way. It was almost unanimously played flat in 1954, but there are a few theaters I've run across advertisements for playing it in 3D.


Unfortunately to some, it is ok to glance over little facts like that.

 

[Adam_S]

your facts keep getting in the way of the autruth, Jack.


Better not post that info at that other forum, facts are nasty business over there.

 

[Jack Theakston]

Everybody's an "expert." Also, the oft-printed statement that Hitch did 3D against his will is bunk— paperwork at USC on the film shows he was very enthusiastic about shooting in the new format.

 

[MatthewA]

Originally Posted by benbess



As a big Hitchcock fan, it's distressing to me to how many of his titles are owned by Universal. Even with RAH's measured and diplomatic words about their operation, I'd say there's trouble in river city...

Tell me about it. I assumed they would be forced to remaster "Spartacus" because of that studio fire that destroyed many of the existing telecine masters and release prints in the vault. Regretfully, that's one of the ones that survived.

 

[Nelson Au]

Thought I'd bump this thread.

 

I'd be curious to see what we have on blu ray so far: And is coming.
 

These are the titles I know of. What else?

 

1. North By Northwest

2. Psycho (UK now and US in October)

 

 

 

[John Hodson]

The 39 Steps (UK)

 

[Hollywoodaholic]

Weren't Vertigo and The Birds already mentioned as being prepared in HD? I hope so because I already traded in my DVD copies.

 

[Nelson Au]

Vertigo is the other one I want to see! And if Mr. Harris is involved, that would be even better!

 

I'd also like to see Rear Window, The Birds, Dial M for Murder and the Selznick films, Notorious, Spellbound and Rebecca. And To Catch a Thief of course!

 

I've seen other sites mention these titles as well as a lot of the older ones like Strangers on a Train and Lifeboat.

 

Didn't know about The 39 Steps in the UK!

 

[Brian Borst]

Universal probably wants to wait and see how well Psycho will be doing on Blu-ray. I can't imagine that it won't do well, since it looks to be a great disc, so we can probably look forward to more Hitchcock on BD.

 

[Brian W.]

DVD Beaver has its review of the UK Blu-Ray of "Psycho" up, with screen shots. The reviewer said it should be the same transfer as the US vesrion. He also had some discussion with Robert Harris about it, and says both agree it looks fabulous:

 

http://www.dvdbeaver.com/film/DVDCompare6/psycho.htm

 

Though it is framed at 1.85. There was some discussion here somewhere that the proper aspect ratio for "Psycho" is 1.78.

 

 

[Brandon Conway]

1.85:1 and 1.78:1 are basically interchangeable when it comes to home video releases. Most studios don't even recognize them as different aspect ratios. Same with 1.33:1 and 1.37:1, or 2.35:1, 2.39:1, and 2.40:1.

 

[Nelson Au]

Some of those screen grabs from the blu-ray looked like really good black and white prints!

 

I can imagine what his older films will look like.

 

[Doug Otte]

Originally Posted by Nelson Au

Some of those screen grabs from the blu-ray looked like really good black and white prints!

 

I can imagine what his older films will look like.

Max has recently shown most of the Universal HItchocks in HD. I recorded them and am currently going through them. They look pretty good, but are obviously older masters. TMWKTM is the same master used on the DVDs, with egregious boosted contrast and sharpening. They do look better than the DVDs, obviously, but as I watch them I'm imagining how much better they could look as 1080p BDs from new masters.

 

Doug