THE WIZARD OF OZ to get Ultra Resolution Treatment (1 Viewer)

[Paul Penna]

I don't know if you mean that literally, but having seen both the extended Scarecrow sequence and what remains of the Jitterbug number, I think that the decision to remove them was a good one. They're both fun to see, and I'd like them to be available in the best possible versions, but reincorporating them into the film itself would be a mistake, I think. Maybe that's not what you were saying, though.

 

[Tim Glover]

This is very good news. One of my favorites of all time.

 

[Andrew Budgell]

Slightly off topic, but for those interested in taking a trip down the yellow brick road before seeing it given the Ultra Resolution treament, TBS is broadcasting The Wizard of OZ Friday, Saturday, and Sunday with four airings in total.

Andy

 

[Jay Pennington]

Oh, okay...cool.

 

[Michael Osadciw]

I second that! Now, if only we could get Pink Floyd's Echoes to be the alternate audio track for the 2001: A Space Odyssey release... (begins at "Jupiter and Beyond").

This is great news about Wizard! I hope that the running lenght of the film stays the same, I don't think it would be wise to insert new scenes. Keeping them as a special feature is enough. One can't tamper with a classic like this.

Mike

 

[Peter Svensson]

Does this mean that Warner will do brand new Ultra Resolution restorations of already restored films, like Casablanca and Treasure of Sierra Madre? If so, then I´ll have to rebuy them...

 

[ElAhrai]

Wow, between this news and the Night Court release for next year, Warner has been making me one very happy camper!

 

[Jaxon's Dad]

Great news, indeed. My all-time favorite film, ever.

 

[Peter Apruzzese]

Unless I'm mistaken, the Ultra Resolution process is for 3-strip Technicolor films.

 

[DeeF]

Although the "Ultra-Resolution" process really refers to 3-strip Technicolor films, Gone with the Wind used 4K resolution, and it might be nice to get some old favorites transferred at this level (instead of the 2K which was used).

 

[Eric Paddon]

A new DVD release is needed if only to restore the LD supplements not included on DVD (John Fricke's audio commentary) and also fixing the "Jitterbug" supplement which they botched by using the rehearsal track audio rather than the finished film track performance.

 

[Peter Svensson]

So it´s likely there will be new restored editions of Warner´s previously restored classics?

 

[Jay Pennington]

No, at least no evidence has come up to that effect. He's just saying if they did do it, he'd buy 'em.

 

[Bill Buklis]

Here's an interesting tidbit regarding the stencil printing (taken from imdb's trivia section for The Wizard of Oz, so take it for what it's worth):


So what really is the truth?

 

[Jack Theakston]

Having inspected contemporary and modern IB prints of this film:

a) Reel 2A (Dorothy opening the door) was positively shot in color with sepia lighting/costuming. No stencil color was used in this shot, as that would have effected as a TINT, not a sepia TONE. Technicolor originally printed the entire film (using MGM's toning process that did not effect the soundtrack, previously used in THE GOOD EARTH and THE SEA HAWK). Prints from 1949 on were done at Metro, and were jarring in that Reel 1 was straight black and white, while reel 2A starts out in sepia.

The confusion here may be otherwise. It is well-documented that the original 13 prints of the film (for the major cities) had hand coloring of the tornado to produce a rainbow effect. Only these first 13 prints were hand colored (not even stenciled), no more. MGM did this hoping that the transition to color would be less abrupt, giving to kinder reviews (which it did not). Original plans for the scene would have Dorothy rotoscoped into reel 2 in sepia until she puts on the ruby slippers. This was a pre-production idea only, and was never even considered after MGM found out how much this would cost.


It is most likely that someone has confused these two instances.

 

[john mcfadden]

Wonderful.....I just bought this last week ....

 

[Drew Salzan]

This then would be my SIXTH dip :frowning: . Maybe I should just wait until HD comes along.

 

[Dane Marvin]

If this paves the way for a Warner 4-Disc set on par with the recent GWTW release, this will be right up there with LOTR: ROTK EE as the DVD I've been most anticipating.

 

[Mark Anthony]

The 4K resolution of this new digital restoration is fantastic, as it means the digital master can be output onto film - retaining all the detail of the 35mm original, thus preserving it for generations to come and enabling them to see it on the big screen as good, if not better, than it looked 65 years ago, or even as good on it's 165th birthday - now that's a scary thought!

I would love to see all digital restorations done at this resolution, to allow this possibility, and I'm sure knowing Warner this will be the start of just that.

Of course a 2K digital restoration master is good enough for current dvd and even upcoming hi-def DVD, which will still only be just over half the res of 2K, but using digital restoration for preservational purposes is most effective and accurate at 4K when wanting to retain an accurate 35mm end product.

I wonder how much res is needed to output a 65mm Ben Hur from a restored digital master, as this is the one of the few titles I'm really looking forward to see on hi-def dvd, this time hopefully un-cropped and from 65mm master elements.

M

 

[Bill Buklis]

This is interesting news about the 4K transfer, but I think you would still lose something on final prints. Without the original negatives, I'm not sure how you could make a proper 3-strip technicolor print.

I had heard before that the color was better on these prints then even current films. I found it hard to believe until I saw it myself on the special re-release prints at the theatre. Man! I had never seen The Wizard of Oz look anything like that good before. The color was so vibrant, the image was practically 3-D. The difference between this print and even modern films was obvious even from the opening Warners Bros. logo. Even the logo looked 3-D.

I have the original MGM release on DVD and never got around to purchasing the WB version, so I can't compare the two. But I will say that the MGM release still looks pretty good, but it isn't even in the same universe as the technicolor print.

I pity those poor people who only had the option of seeing a standard 35mm print for the theatrical re-release instead of the true technicolor print. The colors were probably washed out in comparison and to top that many theatres (if not most) cropped it to 1.85.