Public Domain Titles/Quality on DVD (1 Viewer)

[Bill Burns]

White Zombie's worse than that, Larry. I recall blur in faces in a number of brightly lit scenes, including a scene in which the protaganist is playing the piano (I believe Bela Lugosi is standing behind him). Blur is also very noticeable near the very end of the film, after ... um, well, to avoid spoilers, during or after the climactic "event," in a close-up of the protaganist looking suddenly back at someone. This is a darkly lit scene, but the blur is pronounced (and involves the entire head, I believe). I also recall the blur from the coach scene you mentioned, which I believe is at the beginning of the film (the occupants are jossled back and forth, up and down, and that sudden movement reveals the blurring problem very clearly).
It's been four or five years since I last watched it -- this is all that comes to mind. But it was a problem I wasn't looking for and yet one that jumped out at me all the same. Just an FYI to prospective buyers -- for all I know, it's still the best version available.
P.S. Jay, who were you quoting? I didn't say that! I've never seen an Alpha Video release. I looked for the original post, but couldn't find it.

 

[Garysb]

The only public domain title I own is "And Then There Were None" from VCI. Good film , Fair to poor transfer.I enjoy the film and I'm glad I have it but the quality is not much different then video tape.

 

[John Hodson]

I just received the R0 Laureate Meet John Doe and I'm now reminded why I hate Laureate so much. I know this is going to sound a tad anal, but not only have they axed the Warners logo from the start of the movie, but they imposed a 'Laurate presents' logo over the first few seconds of film.

And, having listened to a few brief minutes of commentary, I'm reminded re my previous experience with Charade, that Ken Barnes is the perfect antidote to insomnia. The restoration/transfer itself is okay; it lacks a little depth, and it's not at the cutting edge of, say an R1 Warners or Fox b&w presentation. Picky I know, but I'm afraid I'm getting used to better things!

Meet John doh?

---

So many films, so little time...

 

[Bruce Morrison]

I don't think 'One-Eyed Jacks' has been mentioned yet. I still don't understand how or why Paramount ever allowed this to go into the public domain. Anyway, sadly, all the DVD versions of it that I know of are of very poor quality (most are not even in a wide-screen ratio). I wish Paramount would produce a proper DVD edition of this great movie - they must surely realise that there will be a market for a high-quality version of it.

 

[Gordon McMurphy]

I wish Paramount would produce a proper DVD edition of this great movie - they must surely realise that there will be a market for a high-quality version of it.

Here, here! Well said!
Excellent Western. Why so many shitty editions on DVD? I'd love to see Paramount restore the film to it's original length and give as an anamorphic transfer. And a Brando commentary! That would a hoot to end all hoots!
Is this film really a PD title? Weird.
Gordy

 

[Barrie Maxwell]

Again, I thank everyone for their thoughts so far. If anyone else has titles they'd like to comment on specifically, I'd appreciate your input here.

Barrie

 

[John Hodson]

This is rather second hand, but I'm reliably informed that VCI's noir films are pretty good, notaby Allen Dwan's Slightly Scarlet and Anthony Mann's T-Men and Raw Deal.
Add to that VCI's McCarthy-ite western Silver Lode and the Monte Hellman western - which I can vouch for - The Shooting.
More details over at thedvdforums.com here.
---
So many films, so little time...

 

[Eugene Esterly]

The Dick Tracy Collection for Roan Group is a great DVD set. I owned a copy of this collection for several months & it is excellent. 4 Dick Tracy movies spread accross 2 discs (1 movie each side) & also contains commentary & several Dick Tracy radio shows.

Another good PD movie is Nosferatu (1922 silent horror movie). There are 2 versions of Nosferatu, one from Kino & another from Image. I own the Image DVD & it is also excellent.

Stay away from anything from Madacy. I own 0 DVD's from Madacy & I will never buy anything from Madacy. I have heard so many reports about how horrible the Madacy DVD's are that I will never purchase any DVD which is from Madacy.

 

[AlanP]

I just read that AMC is restoring several domain

titles and releasing them one is "THE TERROR","BUCKET OF

BLOOD",and "THE LITTLE SHOP OF HORRORS" and they are

really doing a BANG UP JOB, from what I read in ENTERTAINMENT MAGAZINE !!!!!!!!

Anyone, else hear about this ?

I WISH THEY WOULD DO "HERCULES" and "HERCULES UNCHAINED"

with STEVE REEVES !!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Bill Burns]

Anyone else hear about this?

Yep:
http://www.hometheaterforum.com/htfo...hreadid=163028
"Bang up job," though? Did they offer specifics? Will The Terror finally make a 16x9 formatted widescreen appearance on disc? Corman commentary? Any details? Read the above link for the brief info DVDFile had to offer, and my own queries about Falcon Pictures Group (I'm still trying to determine if they're associated in any way with the Mr. Wong, Detective: The Complete Collection release, and, if they are, whether or not they're associated with the National Film Museum, cited on the cover of that release).
If we can determine what DVD product Falcon has issued before, and its quality (specific titles, specific quality), then we'll have a better idea what might be in the offing from their new partnership with AMC. With so many (all?) of the titles so far announced already available from other companies, several in very nice editions and one* (The Ghoul) in a nicely restored/remastered version from a major studio (MGM), my excitement is tempered until I can find confirmation that AMC/Falcon won't be re-using old transfers (a practice that could/would be illegal if those transfers are copyrighted, unless they've specifically purchased the masters from the copyright holder), though I give them both the benefit of the doubt in the meantime, and, that determined, get some idea of how these films will be presented, such as the 16x9 widescreen issue with The Terror.
AMC's television track record is not so great these days, with frequent MAR broadcasts and commercial interruption. I trust they'll do right by these releases, but ... who can say? Did Entertainment Magazine offer any further info?
Also, as I mentioned at the above link and earlier on this thread, allow me to again, given Eugene's post, enthusiastically recommend The Dick Tracy Collection from Roan. I wish they were two DVD-9s, rather than two DVD-10s (the side carrying Dick Tracy Meets Gruesome is so badly scratched on my copy that it won't play), but aside from this the set is excellent, one of if not the finest PD offerings for the money (and assuming Roan's elements were, indeed, PD). Dick Tracy Meets Gruesome is, ironically, the only Dick Tracy title announced in the AMC/Falcon deal, so if their edition is a new master/transfer and offers something beyond Roan's, then that disc might be a wise purchase for me. But I won't make any purchasing plans until more is known.
* I'd overlooked Bucket of Blood in the announcement; that, too, is available from MGM.

 

[Bob Engleman]

The non releasing studio titles in my collection run the gamut from quite pleasant to terrible; my comments are as follws:

1.Tank-- Originally from Universal, this Goodtimes release's only fault's that it's cropped. I'd rate this effort a solid "B".

2.Cavalry Charge (The Last Outpost)-- Naturally one of my favorite westerns would be shipped by Paramount to a hack named Ivy. This company should be avoided at all cost, and rates an "F-".

3.The Lone Ranger-- Give VCI a "B" for their 2 disc job of the ' 56 movie debut from Warner.

4.The Warlord-- Another Universal/Goodtimes release, only this time we're treated to the OAR; I rate it a "B".

5.Santa Fe Trail-- Surprisingly, Marengo's turned in a top notch effort with this film Warner allowed to slip away (details appreciated).

I realize that 1-4 above may not literally fit the thread.

Bob Engleman

 

[DaveyM]

I picked up The Legend of Boggy Creek last week at Walmart for $5.88. This appears to be a public domain title, the dvd looks like one anyway.

Fun little movie but the quality is very poor.

Davey M.

 

[Derek_McL]

Watched the second in Siren DVD's Film Noir collection : DOA (1950) the film was better than Detour (1945) and the print/transfer were much better too. Actually I was quite surprised at how good it looked after the first film in the set.

 

[Steve Armbrust]

I've been away from this site for a while (tsk, tsk, bad boy!) but it's good to be back because I was fascinated by this thread. It discusses some of the same topics I've been wondering about lately.

I recently purchased the 50 Movie Pack Family Classic collection from Treeline Films. It's quite a hodge-podge of PD films. I haven't watched all the movies yet, but those I've seen are definitely of mixed quality ('Til the Clouds Roll By is OK, but Let's Get Tough is unwatchable, for example). Seeing all these movies in one set made me wonder:

1. Where does someone go to get all these movies and how would a reputable company legitimately obtain the highest quality version?

2. If someone spent the money and effort to restore some of these films, what's to keep someone else from using and selling that copy. (From this thread, it seems like this is an open question.)

3. If someone used a purely automated restoration technique (i.e. in the most extreme case, pushed the Restore button and came back a week later to look at the results), would that version be copyrightable? Could one argue that the creation of the restoration software was in fact the creative effort that caused the resulting version to be copyrightable?

Thoughts, anyone?

 

[Pete L]

I've had a couple of PD DVD Jodie Foster flicks in my collection. One is Five Corners by United American Video (there are at least 2 different editions of this on DVD). This one is utterly atrocious; P&S, it's so soft and shaky it looks to have been duped right from an EP mode VHS tape. And to think, Criterion did the Laser edition...
The other one is Mesmerized aka Shocked. There are several DVD editions of this title, and to be honest I can't recall which one mine was, but I think it was from DMM (Digital Multi-Media). But I can tell you it was pretty shoddy; not as bad as Five Corners, but not far off.
Another PD title is Death Ride To Osaka aka Girls Of The White Orchid, a TV title from Simitar. Like the two above, pretty crappy.
A more recent release, and somewhat controversial, is Convoy. Warner/Studio Canal owns this one overseas, but here in the states it's apparently fair game, as two cut-rate DVD production companies have released subpar editions of this recently: Cheezy Flicks and Triumph Marketing / Pacific Family Entertainment. It appears that both of these DVDs have been "mastered" directly from the European DVDs from Warner / Canal; the 2.35:1 picture is "squeezed" (just like watching a PAL image poorly converted to NTSC) and the film is missing a 3 minute scene that was also cut from the European editions. The "controversy" here is that if the title is not actually Public Domain, it leaves only one other possibility as to the existence of these two DVDs...

 

[Damin J Toell]

A more recent release, and somewhat controversial, is Convoy. Warner/Studio Canal owns this one overseas, but here in the states it's apparently fair game, as two cut-rate DVD production companies have released subpar editions of this recently

It isn't fair game in The States. It's not a public domain film. It's not safe at all to assume that a title is in the public domain just because a number of grey market distributors have put it out.

DJ

 

[TimJS]

I forgot all about this thread (& don't mean to threadcrap Steve's question), but took the plunge on Alpha's Of Human Bondage & Nothing Sacred (not to mention The Scar aka Hollow Triumph) Although it was not much money, I was moved to tears by how horrible a film could look; I didn't get more than 10 - 15 minutes into either disc. Bondage looked like it was taped via a video camera on a late night showing from an independent station broadcasting from Tijuana...very dark, grainy, dirty, tears, awful sound, a travesty! Nothing Sacred was cleaner, but misframed & the technicolor faded to the point that it was closer to techni-tint.
Didn't have the heart to look at what they did to Alton's photography on The Scar .
Tim

 

[Pete L]

The "controversy" here is that if the title is not actually Public Domain, it leaves only one other possibility as to the existence of these two DVDs...

Edit: Incidentally, I did email Warner Home Video a while back to alert them to this situation. Not surprisingly I never got a reply. This is another "grey" area: someone may actually hold the rights to a property, but where are they when those "grey market distributors" are releasing their own dubious editions of the property?

 

[Robert Harris]

The problem with fending off illegal copiers of one's film elements is not based upon the law, but rather, upon the cost of litigation.

The legal concept behind preventing illegal use of one's elements is "conversion," ie. taking something that someone has invested in or published and literally taking that element and duplicating it...

or converting it.

Unfortunately, it all comes down to dollars.

There is no doubt whatsoever that each and every company currently publishing titles such as the British Hitchcocks without the underlying license to do so are breaking any number of international copyright laws.

RAH

 

[Damin J Toell]

Umm, yeah... My thoughts exactly. This was my point when I went on to say:

You seemed pretty uncertain of the film's copyright status (as you said it's "apparently fair game" and pondered "if the title is not actually Public Domain"). I tried to clear the matter up for you: the film is not in the public domain. No apparentlys or ifs about it.

DJ