New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The Ten Commandments

post #1 of 31
4/3/10 at 5:01pm
Thread Starter 
ABC is showing The Ten Commandments in HD right now and it looks beautiful! The missing bits of music have been restored, the DNR is gone, and the detail is amazing. The only thing is that it looks dark and not as saturated as before. I wonder if this is correct? If so, I am VERY excited about the future Blu-Ray release. It looks as if they have worked on this, due to the corrections I noted.
Edited by eric scott richard - 4/3/10 at 5:17pm
Reply
post #2 of 31
4/4/10 at 2:55am
 Great reading. Thanks for your observations. I look forward to every classic getting out in HD. It's like watching these movies for the first time, when they're restorated right. I do hope Spartacus has recived the same treatment.
Reply
post #3 of 31
4/4/10 at 4:27am
I watched parts of this last night and it has never looked better on video. I look forward to a Blu release of this later.
Reply
post #4 of 31
4/4/10 at 8:16am
I almost always get sucked into watching this every year! "Oh Moses! Such over acting! And I am not putting the movie down at all. They just don't make them like this any more. I would like to see this on blu ray too. I thought the broadcast version did look great. The optical effect limitations weren't too bad. I can't help wonder what a CGI makeover would do to just subtly tweak this film. Nothing major, just help smooth out some transitions from live action to new animation of things like when Moses drops his walking stick and it turns into the serpent, or the animated flames when he is about to separate the water. The recent work done on Star Trek TOS was just right, not over done. Pretty spectacular DeMille entertainment, even if you ignore the subject matter being depicted!
Reply
post #5 of 31
4/4/10 at 1:23pm
It would be great to get a Paramount DeMille Blu-ray collection

The Ten Commandments (including the 1923 version)
The Buccaneer (including the 1938 version)
The Greatest Show On Earth
Samson & Delilah

Also find a way to include the the 90 minute 1963 TV special The World's Greatest Showman: The Legend of Cecil B. DeMille as an extra.

That is one collection I would be all over.
Reply
post #6 of 31
4/4/10 at 4:44pm
Next year is the film's 55th anniversary (hint, hint), and while I only caught a few minutes, I was overwhelmed. The picture quality is leaps and bounds above what I've seen. But for the eventual release I've got some commandments of my own for Paramount:

1. Thou shalt not use DNR.
2. Remember the original sound mix to keep it lossless.
3. Thou shalt port over all the extras from the existing DVDs.
4. Thou shalt not gouge us with a big box exclusive release (African Queen gave us a choice).
Reply
post #7 of 31
4/4/10 at 7:14pm
they cropped it on abc again didn't they?
Reply
post #8 of 31
4/4/10 at 7:31pm
Thread Starter 
How was it cropped? It was 1.78:1.
Reply
post #9 of 31
4/4/10 at 7:35pm
The aspect ratio for The Ten Commandments is much wider than that.
Reply
post #10 of 31
4/4/10 at 7:53pm
I thought for VistaVision it was more or less up to the exhibitor what the aspect ratio, though according to the American Widescreen Museum site, 1.85 was recommended, so ABC was not far off.  I did see the 70mm version created about 20 years ago which was around 2.20 ratio and it looked bad.  At least it is not as bad as the cropping for ABC FAMILY's showing of SOUND OF MUSIC tonight at 1.78 from a 2.20 original... in some shots you lost a Von Trapp or two.  It is too bad now with HD we still have to fight the battle of correct aspect ratio.
Reply
post #11 of 31
4/4/10 at 8:17pm
Thread Starter 
The Ten Commandments was a 1.85:1 Vista Vision film in 1956. That's pretty much the same as what was broadcast last night.
Reply
post #12 of 31
4/4/10 at 10:14pm
 The original camera aspect ratio of VistaVision, which is 8-perforations running horizontally (exactly double that of 4-perf vertical of standard 35mm film) is 1.50:1, however VistaVision allows matting from 1.66:1 to 2.00:1 but strongly recommends 1.85:1. Here's my source from Widescreen Museum:
http://www.widescreenmuseum.com/widescreen/vistavisionspecs.htm
http://www.widescreenmuseum.com/widescreen/wingvv1.htm
Reply
post #13 of 31
4/5/10 at 12:15am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark-P View Post

 The original camera aspect ratio of VistaVision, which is 8-perforations running horizontally (exactly double that of 4-perf vertical of standard 35mm film) is 1.50:1, however VistaVision allows matting from 1.66:1 to 2.00:1 but strongly recommends 1.85:1. Here's my source from Widescreen Museum:
http://www.widescreenmuseum.com/widescreen/vistavisionspecs.htm
http://www.widescreenmuseum.com/widescreen/wingvv1.htm

10 cannot be run at 1.66, as there is lack of usable image not far beyond 1.75.  Anything outside of that is garbage.
Reply
post #14 of 31
4/5/10 at 7:28pm
What I saw was fantastic, much better than the DVD releases. Film weave was gone, and I didn't see a single speck or scratch. The colors were great, more natural than DVD. I also wouldn't mind a little CGI to very subtly augment the errors and limitations, but not make it look "new" either. The animation is just jarringly out of place, and calls attention to itself. Also the blue screen effects at times could use some smoothing out, edges look bad. I'm sure this film has made enough money for Paramount, please help this classic out. This may be my favorite movie, just because it's so big. Overacting included, but they were making an epic.
Reply
post #15 of 31
4/5/10 at 7:33pm
This looked fantastic! This is my favorite movie, and waiting for Blu. Digitalbits listed this as a rumor a couple years ago. I can only guess that further restoration was deemed necessary to account for its delay. Color and detail were superb, and no film weave or specks or scratches anywhere.

I too would encourage a CGI spiff up, the animated sequences are just cringe worthy, and really pull yourself out of the movie. Some of the bluescreen effects also need touch ups, edges look bad at times. Otherwise the epic nature of the movie is engrossing, even the overacting. You can tell deMille poured himself into this movie.
Reply
post #16 of 31
4/5/10 at 7:33pm
Thread Starter 
The presentation was cropped more tightly on the left than the dvd. I hope when this gets to blu-ray that Paramount checks the framing carefully when preparing the blu-ray. Also, the voice of God sounded much more clear and out front in the soundstage during the burning bush scene, but still muffled during the writing of The Ten Commandments. I don't know if this was intentional or not.
Reply
post #17 of 31
4/5/10 at 7:34pm
Sorry for the double post there, I got an error the first time, and looks like it did go through. Carry on...
Reply
post #18 of 31
4/5/10 at 9:15pm
I too think an alternate version ala the Star Trek releases that cleaned up the mattes would be a great seamless branched option on the bluray.  I don't think they really need to redo the animation or any of the other effects, but some of the mattework is really bad, iirc from my last theatrical watching of the film.
Reply
post #19 of 31
4/5/10 at 11:54pm
Has the studio indicated yet if this title is in the works for a blu ray release?  Or are we just assuming it'll eventually come out within the next couple years?

And on a related note, why was "The Greatest Show on Earth" never given the special edition treatment?  I recently had the desire to get that film on DVD and discovered that the only release out there is from 2004 with no extras.  Even at its cheap price (under $10 most places) I decided to hold off on getting it until a special edition is ever released. 
Reply
post #20 of 31
4/7/10 at 11:41am
Put me down for a Blu-ray copy of The Ten Comandments - can't wait. I watched it in hi-def on ABC too and was happy to note that it retained much of that famous VistaVision clarity, so the Blu-ray should be outstanding. I did note that the color timing was off in a few scenes. The skin tones were too yellowish and the contrast seemed a bit flat. 

As to the some of the amateurish animation such as the pillar of fire, apparently even DeMille didn't like it, but they had a premiere date that couldn't be changed which explains the quality issue. Should it be changed? I'm not sure. And the same applies to the travelling matte shots. They'd have to have the original elements to rectify those problems and it would probably be cost prohibitive. On the other hand, why not go whole hog and convert it to 3-D? I don't know about anyone else, but I'd be the first one in line at the theatre. 
Reply
post #21 of 31
4/7/10 at 12:26pm
To me changing (correcting?) a 50 plus year old film is like colorizing a Black and White film.  The film and its special effects/ process shots are what they are and shouldn't be changed for modern tastes. Would you change every film from the 30's and 40's where the actors are standing in front a screen, pretending to be outside when it is obvious that it was shot on sound stage? For example would you change Hitchcock's  'Notorious?" Should these films be redone to look more realistic? Its great what can be done today. What is done today will probably look bad when compared to what can be done tomorrow. Leave films to look like they did at the time they were made.
Edited by Garysb - 4/7/10 at 12:46pm
Reply
post #22 of 31
4/7/10 at 7:05pm
Garybs, normally I would agree with you. I do believe films should not be changed - Unless - the reason was that the film wasn't finished and the intent was to make the changes when the film first came out. If the "Ten Commandments" editors ran out of time before the opening I can understand wanting to have the mat lines fixed.
 
The "Ten Commandments" was a Roadshow film which meant tickets were sold months in advance so there was no way the film company could move the opening (Same thing happened to "South Pacific" and the color filters - there wasn't time to fix them)
Reply
post #23 of 31
4/7/10 at 9:28pm
We're not talking about destroying or making unavailable the original film here, that would be a crime. The visual detail and stunning epic nature of this film is marred by a few substandard effects shots that I would like to see subtly improved so that they do not detract from the movie's experience. The time and technological limitations are really unfortunate here. The improvements I would advocate would be invisible to a viewer that was not aware of the original limitations. It should be a labor of love and an homage to the films' creators.
Reply
post #24 of 31
4/8/10 at 6:12am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel Bakken View Post

...this film is marred by a few substandard effects shots that I would like to see subtly improved so that they do not detract from the movie's experience. The time and technological limitations are really unfortunate here. The improvements I would advocate would be invisible to a viewer that was not aware of the original limitations.
 


That's exactly what George Lucas would say about the Star Wars special editions though. If, as people always say, they want the original version of a movie, they should want the original version warts and all. A change is a change whether it's removing a matte line or putting in some crazy CG.
Reply
post #25 of 31
4/8/10 at 8:40am
After 54 years, the picture is what it is, cartoonish Pillar of Fire and all.  If all the original elements exist so that they could be recombined using 100% 1956 source material, I wouldn't have much of a problem with that.  But I mainly want just to have the VistaVision picture looking as clean and blemish-free as possible and make the sound as clean and impressive as it was on Joe Caps' laserdisc edition.

The colors on the DVD are way too garish.  The lighter blue fabrics look like they would glow in the dark.  And the entr'acte sounds like it's rechanneled from mono on the DVD.

Done properly, this could be a spectacular BluRay.  It's one of Paramount's crown jewels.  And unlike so many movies made today, its appeal spans all generations, "young and old" as DeMille says in his introduction.
Reply
post #26 of 31
4/8/10 at 11:18am
Quote:
Originally Posted by TravisR View Post



That's exactly what George Lucas would say about the Star Wars special editions though. If, as people always say, they want the original version of a movie, they should want the original version warts and all. A change is a change whether it's removing a matte line or putting in some crazy CG.

And as much as I dislike George Lucas's changes he was alive to make them, while DeMille has been dead for 51 years.

I agree with Rob_Ray that to clean up matte shots (didn't Warner try to do this with Ben-Hur?) or to recreate the 1956 effects without the loss of generations which was the only way to combine shots back then (that's a big IF, when one takes into account that even if they are there, they'd likely be pretty faded) would not be problematic. It is when they try to create something new out of whole cloth that bothers me.
Reply
post #27 of 31
4/8/10 at 8:45pm
Wow, I stepped away from the thread for awhile and I didn't't expect this much discussion on some CGI tweaks I was mentioning off the cuff!

The beauty of the work on Star Trek was they made the original optical effects and audio track as an option. So as been discussed, CBS/Paramount did a great favor to the fans! A win-win!

One thing that I noticed was how great the opening titles looked during last weekends airing!
Reply
post #28 of 31
4/12/10 at 11:37am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eric Scott Richard View Post

The presentation was cropped more tightly on the left than the dvd. I hope when this gets to blu-ray that Paramount checks the framing carefully when preparing the blu-ray. Also, the voice of God sounded much more clear and out front in the soundstage during the burning bush scene, but still muffled during the writing of The Ten Commandments. I don't know if this was intentional or not.

Comparison of DVD to ABC broadcast - http://cineramahistory.com/10dvdabc.htm
Reply
post #29 of 31
4/12/10 at 1:01pm
Thread Starter 
I stand corrected on the cropping!
Reply
post #30 of 31
4/13/10 at 10:50pm
Any info from Paramount on this as a Blu Ray? I'm waiting.
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Blu-ray