HTF REVIEW: The Wizard Of Oz - Three-Disc Collector's Edition (HIGHLY RECOMMENDED). - Page 9

I'm growing tired of these issues effectng Warner's Canadian market...


Now on top of what I spent yesterday exclusively I might add, on Warner product (over the $300 mark), I have to now resort to Amazon.com to purchase the set again to get what I initially paid for and what was advertised as it's content.


And for the record... I still don't have the Val Lewton set due to problems with their Canadian distribution...

So there is a reason not to get rid of the last
Warner Oz release?

Please confirm there is material on the last release
not carried over to the new?



You can bet they are!

Hello,

Does anyone know if the Two-discs Edition is a digipack edition like the Three-disc ?

Thanks,

Val

Val:

The two-disc edition is an amaray. Oddly enough, I think a slipcase was intended since there's no listing of contents on the back cover.

I'm thrilled. I had a feeling once the disc was in hand and folks could see the *moving image* on their screen to compare that the impressions might change (screen shots that are still-frame are NOT the whole story).




Patrick,

Can I just say that your posts at HTF are outstanding and qualify the type of comments that I look forward to reading when I visit the forum. Your enthusiasm, knowledge for film (how it should look), and expertise contribute greatly to us all--novice and expert alike. The screen-shots you post are also excellent aids to discussion like this. Too bad your down in GA--it would be great to be able to get together for some DVD reviews!


-dave

Thanks very much for your answer Patrick .

p.s. only two folks confirmed for the Oz party this Friday at my place (College Park MD...just north-east of DC inside the beltway). There's room for more if anyone else wants to join in (email me).

dave

Interesting article on color-perception all reading this thread should check out:

http://www.rochester.edu/news/show.php?id=2299

In particular, look at this:




And this:


And this:



Remember RAH saying that the absolute color balance of the film is not that great an issue as long as the *consistency* of color balance is maintained so that your eyes can adapt?

That's a superb article David, thanks for sharing!

I also want to extend my appreciation for Patrick's invaluable insights and knowledge. My own appreciation for film has many times been enriched after reading many of Patrick's thought filled posts.

So, does anyone think the audio edit I mentioned was a mistake originally? I think they should have left it as is.

Aside form the color and detail issues which i think goto the older disc, doesnt anyone else hate the fact that they seem to have cropped and stretched the new edition?

Nice to hear Ron.

Good article DaVid.

Henry,

Are you comparing the actual in-motion image of the new disc to the old in your system or is that your impression from the screen caps?

It would be great, now that the disc is available, if all posts going forward compared the actual look of the in-motion DVDs given some of the discrepencies between the various screen-captures (which vary one to the other even when taken from the same DVD)

screen caps

So are the caps incorrect and the new transfer not cropped?

ive looked at more than one comparrison and not just here on HTF.

Hey Henry,

Sorry-my comments were more geared to the color issue (needing to see an actual disc-in-motion rather than just some screen caps). However, the "cropping" may very well be a real issue, but the question to ask is whether it's within the tolerance of a normal projection masking (which RAH has said that it is).

The new edition is not stretched, the old one was squished to make Judy thinner.

I just finished directly comparing the 1999 release with the new 3 Disc Collector's Edition. My impressions are not based on viewing the film in its entirety. I watched from the opening MGM logo through the first time Glinda the Good Witch of the North appears to Dorothy in Munchkinland. My equipment consists of an ISF calibrated Hitachi 57SWX20B 57" widescreen CRT HDTV monitor being fed 480P component video via a high quality solid silver cable from a Denon DVD-2900 DVD player.

The screencaps posted here confirm what I'm seeing in my HT. The new transfer is definitely much warmer than the 1999 release. The older 1999 transfer also exhibits noticably MORE detail than the new release, ironic given the new disc's "Ultra Resolution" label. This is easily seen when comparing the transition from the sepia-toned B&W opening sequence to the Technicolor goodness of the crane shot through Munchkinland. In the 1999 transfer the fake plants in the set show quite a bit of fine detail that's somewhat smeared in the 2005 transfer. The edges of the waterway and the water lilies in the "pond" show more fine detail in the older disc as well - the whole scene has more depth.

That being said the new transfer corrects several issues with the older release:

* The opening title card about the "Young in Heart" has a fairly noticable scratch behind it on the right-hand side of the frame in the 1999 version. It's been removed in the new release.

*The MPEG artifacting that marred the appearance of Dorothy's dress in the sepia sequence on the old disc is almost totally gone in the new release. A good example of this problem can be seen when we first see Dorothy in the road with Toto and she kneels down to talk to him. In this scene the checkerboard pattern on her dress is just swimming with noise. It's almost rock-solid on the new transfer.

* When Glinda's bubble first starts drifting down towards Dorothy in Munchkinland, there are some pretty severe registration problems on the old transfer. You can easily see them around the bottom hem of Dorothy's dress, her lower legs, Toto's body, and the edge of the walkway in front of them. These problems are completely corrected in the 2005 transfer.

The other main impression I got from comparing the two releases has to do with black levels. The 2005 transfer has deeper, more solid blacks than the 1999 transfer, and this translates to a more saturated, colorful image. The new disc definitely looks richer.

As I said, I've only watched the first 25 minutes of each release so my impressions are preliminary. So far my preference is leaning towards the new release. It seems to be more filmlike and has a more "Technicolor" appearance than the 1999 release, which appears slightly harsh and digital in comparison.

More to come later...

Man I'm just pissed that seemingly 20+ Best Buys in Los Angeles are currently sold out of the 3 disc set!

I haven't seen the new DVD. I have seen the 2K master it was made from, on a 2K DLP. The thing I did not like was the way textures in motion looked, especially Dorothy's apron and the yellow brick road. Some of this might be due to DLP technology and the MPEG2 compression (yes, the 2K master was MPEG2 compressed like the DVD, just at about 10 times the bit rate or so). But I think most of it was the use of digital grain reduction. Does anybody else see problems (preferally on a CRT (projector) since LCD and DLP have built in motion rendition issues)?
The 2K master also had some faint scratches in the opening credits and presumably a hair towards the end. Is that on the DVD too?

Ron,

I'd say keep your old DVD. The transfer in some ways seems to be superior.

First Batman Begins, now The Wizard of Oz. Looks like Warner underestimated the appeal of the deluxe edtion DVDs.

Picked the last one up at the Barnes and Noble here near work...I'll *definitely* do some preliminary A/B tonight in "warm up" for Friday's movie fest.

Someone at least try to answer my question....lol.

Or perhaps BB just ordered or stocked just a few per store. My BB had just three when I got there early on Tuesday. They've been burnt before ... can you say Schindler's List?

My Costco had many copies of the 3-disc set today. I'm thinking it was priced at 31.99.

I got the 3 disc set. Disc 1 and 2 were great! Cant say disc 3 was worth the $15 extra bucks i paid. IMO of course.

The extra money for the 3-disc edition does not ONLY include the 3rd disc itself, but other physical supplements that come with the set. Keep that in mind.

None at our BB last nite....

Ronald Epstein wrote:


Same here! I especially liked the part on the film's restoration piece, where one of the lady technicians said she noticed that there was a bolt between the Tin Man's eyes, for the first time. It evidently had always been there since the 1939 film release, but she said none of the past restorations had the needed pixels and resolution for clearly viewing its distinct presence, until now.

Third time for this DVD is definitely the charm!

Now on to disc 2 & 3!

In my collection: The Wizard Of Oz (MGM's March 25, 1997 DVD release, WB's November 16, 1999 release and now WB's October 25, 2005 release.)

Paul

Pros: Kansas scenes look much better
Technicolor is lush
Wonderful detail

Con: The deletion of a portion of Garland's line that I
mentioned earlier...they should have left it alone.