Spielberg's new mantra for Blu-ray?

Discussion in 'Blu-ray and UHD' started by Paul Hillenbrand, Jun 5, 2011.

  1. Paul Hillenbrand

    Paul Hillenbrand Screenwriter

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 1998
    Messages:
    1,508
    Likes Received:
    256
    Real Name:
    Paul Hillenbrand
    Steven Spielberg has now been quoted to say:


    Source


    What I don't understand is that film has more resolution than Blu-ray and how it is displayed in the first place, so what was in the film was already brought out in all it's potential glory on the large theater screen. Weren't we used to seeing these obvious flaws at the time and subconsciously blocking them out, allowing the psyche to imagine the fantasy stimulation to be the feeling of reality? Why change the historical creation in the first place? People can still imagine.


    Paul
     
  2. Towergrove

    Towergrove Screenwriter

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2011
    Messages:
    1,101
    Likes Received:
    285
    Real Name:
    Sarah
    Good article Paul. I always wonder why we notice things in films now when we didn't in the theater. I guess our eyes have become trained to see these things over the years or maybe like you said subconsciously we have blocked them out.

    Im glad he plans to leave his film in the form they were presented to us in the theater at the time they we first saw them.
     
  3. Cinescott

    Cinescott Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2010
    Messages:
    848
    Likes Received:
    162
    Location:
    Milwaukee, WI
    Real Name:
    Scott
    I'm certainly not an expert, but I often think theatrical prints are sometimes multiple-generations removed from negatives, so through a process of steadily-reduced resolution, some of the flaws we see on Blu-ray may not have been noticeable in a theater. Add to the mix the inevitable scratches and wear that happen with film and there would be a thousand other flaws vying for our attention in addition to a couple of wires.


    That being said, I don't really have a horse in this race either way. I believe in preserving original presentations, but do make an exception for any correction that really doesn't interfere with the structure of the image. In other words, hiding wires with a computer isn't a big deal to me. It's still the same movie IMO. Also, Blu-ray often requires a bit of electronic tinkering to make the image palatable. Scratches and dirt are electronically scrubbed from film all the time. I don't see a lot of people complaining about that. The scratches were there at the source, so by the same argument isn't it wrong to remove them? Maybe they're a product of age and wear as opposed to technical limitations, but it's a pretty fine line. Since many wires may not indeed have been visible during a theatrical showing, why would it be wrong to stay in the same spirit of that showing? The resolution on our HDTVs is still only a fraction of that on film. It's a mistake to think that by not performing any changes to film whatsoever via a computer that we're honoring the spirit of film, because at the end of the day film and video are two different mediums. Blu-ray can come a lot closer to film via video than ever before, but we all need to keep in mind that many of these titles were designed to be projected on enormous screens via a bright bulb shining light through a piece of celluloid. If directors want wires removed, OK. If, ala Spielberg nothing will be removed (a change of tune on his part), then that's OK as well.


    I would wager that there are changes made to titles each of us considers "reference" that we're not even aware of.
     
  4. Worth

    Worth Screenwriter

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2009
    Messages:
    1,731
    Likes Received:
    637
    Real Name:
    Nick Dobbs

    That's a common misconception. The original 35mm camera negative has more detail than blu-ray, but typical release prints - what you actually see in the theatre - have about the equivalent of 720p video. Added to that, you can have imperfect focus, projector gate weave, dust and scratches etc.
     
  5. Paul Hillenbrand

    Paul Hillenbrand Screenwriter

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 1998
    Messages:
    1,508
    Likes Received:
    256
    Real Name:
    Paul Hillenbrand
    That would explain a lot.




    No one but the people who are privy to actual comparisons would be able to make the determination and IMO, rightfully so.


    The question I now have is WHY such a change in Spielberg's attitude? Frustration from fans & critic's comments?

    His thinking that the only way to teach the public consumer is to actually author the actual problem image with no enhancements?


    Paul
     
  6. AaronMan

    AaronMan Second Unit

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2003
    Messages:
    286
    Likes Received:
    0
    Real Name:
    Aaron
    So hopefully when E.T. is released on Blu-Ray, we'll get the original version, and not the cops-with-walkie-talkies edition?
     
  7. ahollis

    ahollis Lead Actor

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2007
    Messages:
    6,545
    Likes Received:
    1,515
    Location:
    New Orleans
    Real Name:
    Allen
    Seems like he and George Lucas need to step outside for a discussion on this.
     
  8. Ethan Riley

    Ethan Riley Producer

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2005
    Messages:
    3,582
    Likes Received:
    348


    I'm with Nick on this one. For example, in 1941 I honestly never even noticed the wires on the airplane. In Jurassic Park, I never noticed the rope pulling the tree when the dinosaur is eating the leaves. I certainly can see these flaws on the current dvds of these. Blu-ray will make those wires and ropes more noticeable. And yeah--especially back in the day, moviegoers would have to put up with bored projectionists ordering pizza while the film goes into imperfect focus. And prints certainly got beaten up after playing for just a few days.


    In all, blu-ray offers far, far more flaws than were ever noticeable in theaters. I wonder if it's also because the screen is so much smaller at home that our eyes can take in the whole picture easier and we notice everything. If Spielberg wanted to remove those wires and ropes, I wouldn't fault him, but it doesn't really hurt those movies either way.
     
  9. Josh Steinberg

    Josh Steinberg Producer
    Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2003
    Messages:
    5,822
    Likes Received:
    3,494
    Real Name:
    Josh Steinberg
     
  10. Douglas Monce

    Douglas Monce Producer

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2006
    Messages:
    5,514
    Likes Received:
    12
    Its not just a matter of resolution. I too have read the study that the average release print shown in the average theater has no more resolution than 720p, and that sounds about correct to me. However there is something else that resolution doesn't take into account. Video, even HD video, has a considerably lower dynamic range from brightest to darkest parts of the image than film does. This means that the garbage mattes in Star Wars for example, vanish into the black of the space background on film, but black is so close to visible, on video, that they stick out like a sore thumb. The same is true of many things that were likely not visible in the theater, but suddenly show up on video, particularly in HD, like the wires holding up the Lion's tale in Wizard of Oz. With the contrast of the original Technicolor IB prints, the wires likely blended into the backgrounds 90% of the time. Doug
     
  11. Mark-P

    Mark-P Producer

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2005
    Messages:
    3,038
    Likes Received:
    900
    Location:
    Camas, WA
    Real Name:
    Mark Probst
    So... does this mean the Blu-ray for "Raiders of the Lost Ark" will have the reflection in the glass put back in for the scene with the Cobra? Wonder how old George will feel about that!
     
  12. Josh Steinberg

    Josh Steinberg Producer
    Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2003
    Messages:
    5,822
    Likes Received:
    3,494
    Real Name:
    Josh Steinberg


    We'll probably never hear about it officially, but I bet the two of them will have an interesting discussion about that. In the end, I think Spielberg probably gets his way if the two of them having conflicting views -- otherwise the title card on that movie would have been changed by Lucas to "Indiana Jones and the Raiders of the Lost Ark" years ago...
     
  13. Jeff Ulmer

    Jeff Ulmer Producer

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 1998
    Messages:
    5,584
    Likes Received:
    0
    I have no problem with alterations that respect the original intent - ie. removing wires/matte lines that were never intended to be seen, or if they were visible in release prints, were only there because there was no way at the time to remove them. No one wants a print that is riddled with scratches or other debris, but grain structure is a part of film and should be left.


    I do have issues with digitally updating effects, especially if they are obvious.


    George should hire Steven to oversee his releases....
     
  14. Josh Steinberg

    Josh Steinberg Producer
    Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2003
    Messages:
    5,822
    Likes Received:
    3,494
    Real Name:
    Josh Steinberg

    In this (not-so-humble) poster's opinion, George and Steven should get together with Harrison and do another Indy film. Because good or bad, it's still more fun than 99.9% of the other things out there, and I liked the last one.
     
  15. Worth

    Worth Screenwriter

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2009
    Messages:
    1,731
    Likes Received:
    637
    Real Name:
    Nick Dobbs


    As long as Lucas is confined to producing and has zero say in the story and script.
     
  16. Jeff Adkins

    Jeff Adkins Screenwriter

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 1998
    Messages:
    1,771
    Likes Received:
    15
    Real Name:
    Jeff Adkins


    Judging by this quote in the new interview, I'd say that's a certainty.






    The entire interview has been posted now.


    http://www.aintitcool.com/node/49921
     
  17. Douglas Monce

    Douglas Monce Producer

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2006
    Messages:
    5,514
    Likes Received:
    12
    Agreed. I really enjoyed the last Indy film and I'm ready for some more! Doug
     
  18. Josh Steinberg

    Josh Steinberg Producer
    Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2003
    Messages:
    5,822
    Likes Received:
    3,494
    Real Name:
    Josh Steinberg
     
  19. Bob McLaughlin

    Bob McLaughlin Screenwriter

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2000
    Messages:
    1,129
    Likes Received:
    3
    Real Name:
    Bob
    Glad Spielberg is saying this. I suspect the backlash he got for the digital removal of federal agents; rifles in "E.T." might have made him more aware that fans of his movies really do care about the movie itself and don't just treat it as product.


    Now if Steve could just talk George into releasing the original untouched Star Wars movies on Blu Ray...that'll never happen, though.
     
  20. Douglas Monce

    Douglas Monce Producer

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2006
    Messages:
    5,514
    Likes Received:
    12
    I think the expectations for that film were WAY too high for many people. Folks just had ideas of what it SHOULD be rather than just enjoying what it was. For me it was like visiting with an old friend for 2 hours. But obviously many people agree with both of us. A film that people don't like doesn't make $800 million on its own. Doug
     

Share This Page