Kenneth Branagh's HAMLET -- the ultimate, merged, when-oh-when thread - Page 4

I'm pretty sure the BBC series is already available. My local library has it. Haven't seen it for sale though.

Didn't Robert Harris tell us once that he would never risk a 70mm element for a video transfer ? The resolution of DVD doesn't allow any of the extra details to be of significant enough value to justify the wear on precious large-format elements.

But, the 35mm dupe seems to be at the wrong aspect ratio.

Dan

They would presumably be using the 70mm to make an HD master which would be down-converted for the DVD.

That's right, there is a 10-minute preview trailer to Branagh's Hamlet. I remember tacking it to the end of my VHS copy of the Zeffirelli Hamlet some years back for my personal collection. It clearly starts off with Hamlet's "To be or not to be..." soliloquy in which he's looking into the mirror and performing the soliloquy.

What would also be a great little extra to include, on either the DVD of the Branagh or Zeffirelli version, would be the 25-minute adaptation introduced by Robin Williams as part of HBO's "Shakespeare: The Animated Tales". That was a pretty good adaptation for 25 minutes.

But the one that will always stand out in infamy is the "Gilligan's Island" segment where the Broadway producer landed on the island and wound up doing his hilarious one-man musical version of "Hamlet". Now THAT would make a hilarious Easter egg!

Rob W wrote:

Oh, no, no, perish the thought. This isn't the case at all, I'm happy to say. Just as with 35mm material, a duplicate 65mm negative would be used for striking 70mm theatrical prints (picture + soundtrack), and these duplicate elements would presumably also be used for the high definition master they'd downconvert for DVD. The original camera negative would never be placed in jeopardy by such a process, just as 35mm negatives are preserved despite master after master from dupes. Back when good dupe negatives were hard (or expensive?) to generate, prints were often struck directly off of camera negatives, but so far as I've heard most everyone in the industry knows better than to risk such elements today.

According to Mr. Harris, the original, non-anamorphic DVD (and previous laserdisc, which I presume is the same master) of his restoration, with James Katz, of Vertigo (an eight perforations high 35mm VistaVision film restored to 65mm to preserve the full resolution and character of the large format original -- ordinary 35mm film is usually four perforations high, and VistaVision gained both width and height by running horizontally, rather than vertically, through the camera -- thus it was around twice as wide, and a bit taller, than standard 35mm film stock) was made from 65mm elements, at great expense to Universal, and this is why that transfer looks so good among non-anamorphic (and many early anamorphic) releases (it was one of the finest looking laserdiscs I ever encountered, much as was the case with Fox's large format Oklahoma!, which I presume was mastered from 65mm, though I'm not certain of this).

65mm picture elements are just as durable (which is to say, just as fragile) as 35mm picture elements, but the process of duping and printing has matured over the years to better care for and preserve original film elements. Large format materials have often been very poorly preserved from the heyday of large format filmmaking (the 50's and 60's, though large format film is more or less as old as the movie camera itself*), which is why so many of the great large format films are in need of extensive restoration -- when they can be saved in their large format form at all. I don't know how the materials for Hamlet have been cared for, but I'd presume well, given not only how recently it was made, but also in whose hands it has rested (major studio hands, so far as I've heard, versus third parties or other distributors).

As an outsider looking in, I may have some of this wrong or incomplete, and I certainly invite Mr. Harris to contribute anything he may know, as a large format film expert, about the state of Hamlet. But there's no reason of which I'm aware, aside from additional expense, why 65mm elements cannot be used in this transfer. And while many disagree with my aesthetics (just as many disagree with the call to anamorphically enhance 1.66:1 films), I maintain that Mr. Harris is entirely correct: we were privileged to see Vertigo from 65mm elements, a process even more expensive at the time, but well worth it for the distinct character of large format which is compromised, even at NTSC/PAL/SDTV resolutions, by reduction printed sources (the better the source, the better the result -- which is why high definition downconversions to DVD resolution often look so much cleaner and better than video masters made at those resolutions in the first place). Compare the laserdiscs of the Todd-AO version of Oklahoma! (a 65mm picture process), or Vertigo (restored at 65mm), to their fellow laser releases of the day, most of which were 35mm sourced, and you'll clearly see the difference**. With DVD's increased resolution and digital precision, this difference should be all the more evident (I've also long called for and hoped to see a new, anamorphic 65mm transfer of Vertigo, which Mr. Harris tells us is financially much more viable today than it was when DVD debuted, but that's another thread and another hotly contested debate).

* You'll find another thread here where a 70mm production from 1930, The Big Trail, and another, The Bat Whispers, are discussed, as examples of early uses of large format.

** Such differences depend on equal care in the presentation of sources for accurate comparison, of course. But a great 35mm presentation on DVD does not have the same character and look of a great 65mm presentation (variant choices within the parameters of cinematography and film stocks, and also the quality of surviving elements, make comparisons of multiple films with one another somewhat specious, but there are plenty of Hitchcock VistaVision transfers at 35mm four perforation reduction with which to compare Vertigo for evidence). I wouldn't call for this on every film made in large format processes (though I'd certainly love to see that large format heritage receive the respect it deserves), but for the very best films of the last century (among them Vertigo, My Fair Lady, and Hamlet, in my estimation ), the expense of ensuring the best possible presentation on each home video format is not only justified, but rightly expected. This is why I continue to urge the involved studios to reissue My Fair Lady and Vertigo in new, 65mm sourced anamorphic transfers (no one, I'm sure, would object to two disc "Deluxe" editions of these films, designed to hit the market as major events and hopefully generate the revenue to justify their remasters, restoring Vertigo's new effects and music track to DTS, etc.), and WB to do Hamlet right the first time -- which I have every faith they will. The urgency of my comments derives from love of the film (and disappointment in the laserdisc), not concern over the studio, for whom I have always had the utmost respect. Warner's is an outstanding studio with a long-standing, admirable commitment to the format, so I'm sure they'll take their time and make this release as special as it deserves to be.

Oh, also, As Dan Hitchman reiterated, there is a descrepancy in ratio that further urges the use of original materials for both Hamlet and My Fair Lady, both of which are Super Panavision 70 motion pictures (so as to avoid needless, albeit minor, changes in composition in the reduction to Panavision).

And as a final post script, allow me to add my continued hope that Disney's upcoming Sleeping Beauty will be mastered from its Technirama (which is essentially VistaVision plus a bit of anamorphic squeeze -- see The Widescreen Museum's website for further details) large format source, and not, as the laserdisc, from a reduction print. What's done is done with that release, as it arrives in only a couple of months ... but I'll be very eager to hear just what sort of effort has been made to preserve its original "event" nature, as intended by Disney. It'll be worth buying in any event, as it's been digitally restored, according to The Digital Bits, and anamorphically enhanced, so should look lovely -- but I trust they've gone "the extra mile" and made a release to truly celebrate.

I'm with you.
I saw this on the big screen many moons ago and loved every second of it, and the only reason I went was because my then-gf had to see it for a class.
Thank God for that class!
Rumors have been swirling but I have seen nothing concrete.
I want my Branagh Hamlet!!

Maybe after Gilligan's Island season 4 is released?

Totally with you, Robert.

I want Branagh's Hamlet too!

Many thanks, Robert -- compliments don't come any kinder than that.

I hope (and I do trust) Warner Bros. understands the quality and import of this unique picture and allows Branagh the opportunity to oversee, as he sees fit, its DVD production, bringing one of the most overlooked masterpieces of the past few decades to homes in a faithful, large format master and transfer that will allow it its proper influence on those new to the picture, and will further offer those who first discovered it in theatres an edition they may proudly own and cherish.

This waiting is killing me. I desperately wanted to see this in theater when it came out, but it had a short 2 week run here in Winnipeg, due to an everly full schedule at the time, unfoirtunately I was unable to attend a viewing. I have long fought the urge to go rent it on VHS (pah, pah, dirty words). And have been saving myself for the DVD release. Hamlet-o, Hamlet-o, where fore art thou Hamlet-o. Soon I hope.

Robert, you've now started five separate threads on this topic, which is four too many. They've been merged into a single thread, along with a few stray threads posted by others.

Any further comments or questions on the subject of Branagh's Hamlet on DVD should be posted in this thread. No more new threads are needed.

M.

Thanks for the mining and merging, Michael.

This is my most anticipated DVD release. Has been for some time. I'm waiting with all y'all, and will be in line on release date when (if) it sees the light of day. I hope it's given the treatment it deserves!

Any news on this? Would be cool to have on dvd with a full cast commentary!!

Which would be kinda hard to do without the use of a medium, I don't think that Jack Lemmon's talking anymore, is he? And John Guelgud's lips are sealed, permanently.

Robert,
As you can see I merged your last thread into this very established thread. Starting more threads going over the same subject matter isn't going to get this film released any sooner on dvd. For the last time, please don't start anymore threads about this title. Thank you.




Crawdaddy

I believe that 2 of the 113 people involved in this thread
might find find it benificial that in Feb, PBS will broadcast and release on dvd In search of Shakespeare.
Should be rewarding for devotees of the Bard.
Best
Greg

This sounds v. much like the BBC production from last year. If so, then don't get too excited.

Okay, according to the recent Warner Bros. chat, the DVD of Hamlet is being held in limbo by "rights issues."

Anyone out there know what those issues are and what the prospects are for a quick resolution?