Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Richard--W
If only MGM would release BILLY THE KID.
Excellent, informative post Simon. Thank you for posting those links.
I've been comparing my home-recording of the 70mm widescreen broadcast of THE BIG TRAIL to the 35mm full-frame DVD. It is a fine film in both versions. Unless Fox screws up the transfers -- and I can't imagine they would -- film buffs can't go wrong in buying this new special edition. I think most people will find the pictorial values of the 70mm widescreen alternate preferable to the 35mm full-screen, but it's a wonderful film and a rewarding film in either aspect ratio.
It does seem as if the industry has taken two steps backward in evolution. One step backward in terms of aesthetics, with desaturation and murky lighting, and another step backward in terms of technology. Today's audiences are accustomed to poorer quality than yesterday's audiences. Arthur Edeson's hope for widescreen stereoscopic films becoming the standard is more feasible and economical now than ever before, and the only real obstacle to it happening are ignorance and prejudices within the industry. Studio execs and exhibitors should ask themselves, what progress would Walt Disney have made in 1937 if he had listened to warnings that audiences would get headaches from watching a feature-length film in color? To much color or too long an exposure to color will make you go blind. The stereoscopic film faces the same fundamental misunderstanding.
|
It seems to me that many technologies introduced these days are designed to improve production efficiency (i.e. find cheaper ways of doing something) rather than adding novelty. For example, surely 35mm anamorphic (Panavision) cinematography is the highest quality film format still commonly used. But many productions (roughly 1/4 to 1/3) are shot on Super 35, because the image quality is considered good enough. Especially considering most people watch films on TV, rather than at the cinema.
Perhaps CGI sits in the middle of these two motivating factors. On one hand, using CGI to create massive crowd scenes is much cheaper than filming hundreds or thousands of extras. But alternatively, sometimes it seems to me that CGI as special effects are designed to be noticed. They want the audience to be amazed by what the computer artists can do.
I may eat these words, but I don't think 3D will ever take off in a big way until they figure out a system that doesn't require glasses. If they could use holograms or something so the image seems to hang in front of your eyes, but without having to wear something on your head, then I think it will take off, and become a standard.
You mention colour which of course was very high quality (and expensive) when the first full colour system 3 strip Technicolor was introduced.
This is a fabulous book on three strip Technicolor style. It argues that the earliest films were all about exhibiting what colour could do, followed by a couple of years of more restrained films that tried to make colour a "normal" feature of Hollywood filmmaking, and then a third, mature stage that tried to find a middle way between these earlier tendencies. The author's point is that a new technology like sound, colour, or widescreen has to offer something that is attractive to audiences to justify its introduction, but the new technology can't be so complex that filmmakers can't find a way to integrate it into pre-existing production norms.
Lastly, I forgot to mention the title of King Vidor's biography:
A Tree is a Tree. Because he once requested to film something on location in the south, but was told by his producer "A tree is a tree, go film it in central park".
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Lord Dalek
According to Wikipedia, the original Grandeur negative for Big Trail fell apart in the 60's so I assume they're going to use the CinemaScope version.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by john a hunter
That's what I recall at the time. It only now exists in 35mm Scope.
|
Any ideas when it was restored to 'Scope?
It's sad the 70mm negative couldn't be saved, but I'm still very excited about this release.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Richard--W
If only MGM would release BILLY THE KID.
|
I assume Warner own this. They should hop to it! Fox are leading them in the 70mm 1930s film department 1 - 0