There one other title that keeps popping up on the forums and WAC's Facebook that they talk about heavy expenses in releasing it and that is THE WONDERFUL WORLD OF BROTHERS GRIMM. I thought of this title first, for Elizabeth Taylor and Monty Clift would make RAINTREE COUNTY a bigger seller. I hope its Grimm their referring to than RAINTREE for that gives up still hope for a release of RC.Andrew Budgell said:
I'm pretty sure the roadshow version shown on TCM in the past does not have the MGM Camera 65 title card. I thought this was strange as the source that was sent to them had it. But if it did, the opening titles would not look as good.Roger Grodsky said:
Yes, it must be Raintree that Ron was referring to.Andrew Budgell said:
I hope so too, Allen. (No offense, Wonderful Word of Brothers Grimm fans!ahollis said:
)
I also think that the title is most probably Raintree County. Ben-Hur was rumored to have had a Million Dollar budget and there is no reason to think that the cost for Raintree County will be less.Imo Warner should do what preservation they have to do anyway to keep the film secure for the future and then do a raw scan of at least 4k - this will not cost that much and they can give the digital files away to a licensee who can arrange for a more cost effective to bring this to market on Blu-ray.And then they can bring it to Warner Archive, it is too late now for a simple DVD version!Andrew Budgell said:
And I'd be thrilled if they did just what you propose! Does anyone have any idea what it would cost to bring it to Blu-ray that way, rather than a full fledged Ben-Hur type of restoration? I just fear that WB are such perfectionists (which under most circumstances is a great thing!) that they'll never go for this. I truly hope it's not an all or nothing type of situation.OliverK said:
Just the scan of an IP and low cost further work may cost as little as 100000 depending on where it is done. As RAH said in another post: It all boils down to time spent doing the job. Now I am not saying that as little should be spent bringing Raintree County to Blu-ray but as Warner apparently sees very few commercial opportunities in it a move to lower cost methods seems to be the way to go.Andrew Budgell said:
Things change and with traditional and extremely costly restoration projects not being possible for every title I think that even Warner will change their way at some point. Of the higher profile large format titles Raintree County is only exceeded by One Eyed jacks when it comes to neglect on home video - for both titles the last thing officially released in the US was a widescreen LD some 20 years ago!Andrew Budgell said:
But wouldn't Warner want to take steps towards preserving Raintree County anyway before the OCN has faded so much that we will have a situation similar to the one with the OCN of The Alamo?I guess that again it is a matter of a huge number of movies needing attention with most of them requiring not nearly as much effort in order to preserve them for future generations.Robert Harris said:
Pretty much....Jari K said:
I didn't know it was that complex. Well, that's my daily dose of gloom. I think that I'll turn to something with more of a positive tilt, like news from the middle east.Robert Harris said:
Along with THE WONDERFUL WORLD OF THE BROTHERS GRIMM.Jari K said:
Not quite I would guess as I have not heard about Warner rejecting outside funding, nor has the existing Roadshow print been rejuvenated to my knowledge.I wonder if there is some effort being made to preserve the existing assets for future generations regardless of bringing the movie to home video?If a wetgate archival IP of the general realease version was produced (like with for example Oklahoma!) then this could also be the starting point for a relatively low cost home video release as scanning such an element and bringing it to releasable 4k data is much less costly than scanning and piecing together all the surviving parts of a roadshow print in their various forms (35mm IB Tech and 65mm OCN).With 4k data one could then produce the usual plethora of releases in different formats:4k DCP for the special screenings and festivals4k version for an upcoming 4k Disc format IF that ever comes1080p version for Blu-raySD version for a decent DVD releaseand the various versions for streaming, download and TV in 480i, 576i, 720p, 1080i, 1080p and now even 4kI am just naming all of these to show the different venues where Warner could try to recoup their money. If we go from the assumption that at some point and with a proper assets protection program an archival IP will have to be created anyway then from there it is a much less costly undertaking to finally bring the movie to the many formats that are now available for distribution.I also would say that with regard to cost it differs from the Wonderful World of the Brothers Grimm that is an even more difficult movie to tackle - less popular and probably more costly to prepare than at least the general release version of Raintree County.atfree said:
In terms of its release history on home media, particularly the roadshow version, I would still say pretty much.....OliverK said:
This is too good to be true!!!!Andrew Budgell said:
I find Raintree County fascinating as it holds quite a few distinctions:- the only big roadshow epic to have been shot in 65mm but then not released in 70mm- the only big movie shot in a new widescreen format that was not shown in the intended premium exhibition format of the process- the only big 65mm epic from a major studio that wasn't even released on DVDRegarding the Roadshow version The Alamo got its LD release and Raintree County did not - only the general release version is available on LD.Looks like the most neglected of the bigger large format epics to me.atfree said:
