What's new

Marty (1955) (Blu-ray) Available for Preorder (1 Viewer)

ahollis

Patron
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Mar 1, 2007
Messages
8,864
Location
New Orleans
Real Name
Allen
Mark-P said:
If it is not zoomed, but simply open-matte, then I wouldn't consider that botched. No more than I would consider the purchase of an unmatted film print to be botched. Why? Because I have the ability to project the image matted to any ratio that I so choose. Others may not have that ability, so for them it can be no OAR no sale.
I agree with you, but from all indications it's zoomed in and not open matte. Mister Lime has not indicated either way and by Kino stating its 1.33:1, it more than likely is zoomed in for television showings. If it was open matte they would be using the ratio of 1.37:1 as was the standard since the early 30's. I'll just wait for the reviews to see.
 

haineshisway

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Oct 26, 2011
Messages
5,561
Location
Los Angeles
Real Name
Bruce
AnthonyClarke said:
It is very probable, considering the debate thus far, that neither MisterLime nor Kino even know whether it's zoomed in or open -matte.
I don't think that's correct - you can correct me if I'm mistaken, but I believe Kino said they'd attempted to matte it to 1.85 and it was way too tight. The ONLY way that could be is if the transfer they were given is zoomed in.
 

EddieLarkin

Supporting Actor
Joined
Oct 16, 2012
Messages
991
Location
Yorkshire
Real Name
Nick
haineshisway said:
I don't think that's correct - you can correct me if I'm mistaken, but I believe Kino said they'd attempted to matte it to 1.85 and it was way too tight. The ONLY way that could be is if the transfer they were given is zoomed in.
They said this, but then MisterLime said the same thing about The Atomic Boy when Frank Tarzi was at Olive; that they tried it at 1.85:1 and it didn't work. So I think it's quite possible this master isn't zoomed and that Kino have a different idea of what works and what doesn't to us.
 

John-Weller

Stunt Coordinator
Joined
Jul 15, 2013
Messages
61
Real Name
John
EddieLarkin said:
They said this, but then MisterLime said the same thing about The Atomic Boy when Frank Tarzi was at Olive; that they tried it at 1.85:1 and it didn't work. So I think it's quite possible this master isn't zoomed and that Kino have a different idea of what works and what doesn't to us.
Is Tarzi MisterLime?
 

FoxyMulder

映画ファン
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Sep 14, 2009
Messages
5,385
Location
Scotland
Real Name
Malcolm
John-Weller said:
Is Tarzi MisterLime?
Here's an interview i found, is it true that Bound uses seamless branching. ?

http://www.blu-ray.com/news/?id=9202

This puts some recent comments on another site that High Noon should have been given a 4K scan at a cost of $150,000 in new light. What do you say about the criticism?I don't get it, frankly. First of all, let's be honest about something: a 4K scan costs nothing approaching $150,000. A full blown restoration? Sure. Maybe even more, maybe as much as $500,000. But in terms of High Noon, I really don't get the criticism. I think the release looks fantastic. I'm really proud of the release.

Just recently there were concerns voiced about your release of Bound, in that it contained two versions of the film on one 25GB disc.Well, what people don't realize is that they're accessing the extra 14 seconds of footage on the Unrated cut via seamless branching, so disc size is not an issue.Well, you're breaking more news, then, because another site was claiming there wasn't seamless branching on this release. What about not including the DTS-HD Master Audio 5.1 sound mix that was available on a foreign release of the title?Well, what you have to realize is that legally sometimes we simply can't use something. Someone may have created that mix and owns the rights to it, and it's just not available to us. Our version looks much better.
EddieLarkin said:
He'll tell you that he isn't, but...
It's an interesting interview, i hope Home Theater Forum owners don't mind me linking to it, if you do then just remove this post.
 

Ray H

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jun 13, 2002
Messages
3,570
Location
NJ
Real Name
Ray
FoxyMulder said:
Here's an interview i found, is it true that Bound uses seamless branching. ?
From what I've seen on other sites, users have used software to analyze the disc, and they've found each version of the film to only take up about 12GBs of disc space.
 

FoxyMulder

映画ファン
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Sep 14, 2009
Messages
5,385
Location
Scotland
Real Name
Malcolm
Ray H said:
From what I've seen on other sites, users have used software to analyze the disc, and they've found each version of the film to only take up about 12GBs of disc space.
Yes, it's called BDInfo, i have the software myself but i don't own the disc.

Of course another easy way to do it is just look in the disc folder via the computer.
 

haineshisway

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Oct 26, 2011
Messages
5,561
Location
Los Angeles
Real Name
Bruce
FoxyMulder said:
Here's an interview i found, is it true that Bound uses seamless branching. ?

http://www.blu-ray.com/news/?id=9202

This puts some recent comments on another site that High Noon should have been given a 4K scan at a cost of $150,000 in new light. What do you say about the criticism?I don't get it, frankly. First of all, let's be honest about something: a 4K scan costs nothing approaching $150,000. A full blown restoration? Sure. Maybe even more, maybe as much as $500,000. But in terms of High Noon, I really don't get the criticism. I think the release looks fantastic. I'm really proud of the release.

Just recently there were concerns voiced about your release of Bound, in that it contained two versions of the film on one 25GB disc.Well, what people don't realize is that they're accessing the extra 14 seconds of footage on the Unrated cut via seamless branching, so disc size is not an issue.Well, you're breaking more news, then, because another site was claiming there wasn't seamless branching on this release. What about not including the DTS-HD Master Audio 5.1 sound mix that was available on a foreign release of the title?Well, what you have to realize is that legally sometimes we simply can't use something. Someone may have created that mix and owns the rights to it, and it's just not available to us. Our version looks much better.


It's an interesting interview, i hope Home Theater Forum owners don't mind me linking to it, if you do then just remove this post.
The cost of a 4K scan (I'm about to do one) is now much less than it used to be for the scan itself. Probably under ten percent of the figure being touted here. The real cost comes after that, depending on what has to be done.
 

FoxyMulder

映画ファン
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Sep 14, 2009
Messages
5,385
Location
Scotland
Real Name
Malcolm
Moe Dickstein said:
How do you know it's not looking at the same 12GB twice.
Because the files in the folder have names, usually a number, you can precisely identify different files, for seamless branching 14 seconds or so it would be a smaller file, much smaller, if seamless branching is being used then you wouldn't see two 12GB files which indicates two encodes. Of course this is assuming the above info about two different files of 12Gb each is correct.

Okay back to Marty.....Normal service is resumed. :lol:
 

ThadK

Second Unit
Joined
Oct 25, 2003
Messages
306
EddieLarkin said:
He'll tell you that he isn't, but...
Frank Tarzi has emphatically denied he is MisterLime, but hasn't revealed who it is. Personally, if I were him I'd be angry someone was posting as an anonymous troll representing my outfit(s) and people were under the impression it was me.
 

bgart13

Screenwriter
Joined
Oct 4, 2008
Messages
1,112
Real Name
Ben
Kino stated on their FB page that an employee posted incorrect information here about the aspect ratio of MARTY. Which would mean...
 

Jari K

Senior HTF Member
Joined
May 16, 2007
Messages
3,288
"Kino stated on their FB page that an employee posted incorrect information here about the aspect ratio of MARTY."Can you post a link?
 

Robert Crawford

Crawdaddy
Moderator
Patron
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Dec 9, 1998
Messages
67,604
Location
Michigan
Real Name
Robert
Jari K said:
"Kino stated on their FB page that an employee posted incorrect information here about the aspect ratio of MARTY."

Can you post a link?
[*]Kino Lorber Studio Classics Your last sentence is very puzzling and it proves that film school has nothing to do with knowledge of aspect ratios and or intended ratios – zoomed in? The original negative of this film is 1.33:1, as the title was shot open aperture, some say the bottom and top parts of the original image should be cropped off to create the intended 1.85:1 and others disagree. We tried to create the 1.85:1 master, but realized that we were loosing too much of the film and decided to go with the preferred aspect ratio of The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences and the studio. An employee made an erroneous listing on HTF and we're sorry if that was misleading to anyone, but in no way that was our goal since this title has not been released yet. Making false claims about what this proves is a waste of everyone’s time, we’re proud to release these studio classics and will be re-mastering the non-HD titles to create an HD master.
June 17 at 7:12pm

[color=rgb(51,51,51);font-family:Helvetica, Arial, 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif;background-color:rgb(240,241,243);]Kino Lorber Studio Classics This article went up after our erroneous listing on HTF [/color]http://www.hollywood-elsewhere.com/.../furmanek.../
Furmanek Influence Leads To Sliced-Down Marty - Hollywood Elsewhere
www.hollywood-elsewhere.comFurmanek Influence Leads To Sliced-Down MartyA Bluray of Delbert Mann and PaddyChayefsky‘s Oscar-winning Marty (1955) will be released on 7.29. It gives me no comfort or satisfaction to report that the Bluray’s aspect ratio will be in the dreaded 1.85 with the tops and bottoms of the protected 1.37…
[/list]
 

Persianimmortal

Screenwriter
Joined
May 22, 2012
Messages
1,376
Location
Canberra, Australia
Real Name
Koroush Ghazi
I'm not sure if there's any need to read too much into the intrigue here. It seems fairly simple to see that Kino is following the Olive route of quantity over quality. I shuddered every time a favorite movie of mine fell into the hands of Olive, and I'm pretty much getting the same feeling with Kino now. To use Kino's own FB post "making false claims ...is a waste of everyone's time", and that's precisely what Kino is doing by claiming Marty is meant to be 1.33:1.

What's really annoying is that aside from Marty, there's at least two other titles in their upcoming list that I would want to buy, but I'm willing to just stick to the DVD versions rather than reward them for their silly behavior. Not to mention I have a strong suspicion there was a reason why these titles were given to Kino rather than a more reputable company - prepare for Olive levels of crapulence.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Latest Articles

Forum statistics

Threads
356,814
Messages
5,123,679
Members
144,184
Latest member
H-508
Recent bookmarks
0
Top