A Few Words About A few words about...™ My Fair Lady -- in Blu-ray (1 Viewer)

[David Weicker]

So, we have My Fair Lady and West Side Story which are both 'maybe's. Neither is perfect, but neither is truly awful either - both are 'acceptable'
Several people are using these as examples that 'quality no longer matters', and therefore Blu Ray is doomed and over.
And yet, there are many 'quality' releases that are coming out, but of films not quite the stature of these. So I'm not sure what this means.
Did we have too high of expectations for these 'crown jewels'?
Plus we have the Mysterious Island issue - where a company decides that there isn't a demand for classic movies and gives distribution to another company who charges double the going rate (and therefore decreases demand - a self-fulfilling prophesy).
I'm just very confused. I've only been into Blu-Ray for about a year, and my head is spinning.
David

 

[Who's On First?]

Streaming and "Digital Copy" are to movies what Itunes is to music, and it is not at all difficult to see where content distribution is heading. I will continue to purchase BDs as long as the format is available, and RAH's posts will help me make judicious choices in those purchases

 

[willyTass]

maybe he's just disheartened because if struck from the LARGE FILM ELEMENT this would have been a home run and sold by the truckload
its a bit like being forced to listen to ipod when u know the analogue Vinyl is out there

 

[rsmithjr]

One of the tricks of this hobby is that you tune yourself to be very particular about things but then sometimes have to be both realistic and patient.
I have seen so many travesties occur in this business that I have to say, things have really gotten a lot better over time. Blu-ray, when it is really good, is really good; and sometimes when it is mediocre, it isn't that bad either.
I was a projectionist in the "golden age", and it wasn't all that golden:
-- the distributor promised you a 70mm print but delivered a 35mm and you tried for weeks to fix the situation
-- you got a 70mm print but, after 2 weeks of advertising "70mm', they took it back for a 35mm print
-- you knew there were magnetic prints and you had to drive 100 miles to get one
-- the intermission was missing because some projectionist added it to his collection
-- you get a faded EK print when you knew the first print run was IB Tech
-- the cleaning staff starts cleaning the auditorium near the end of Lawrence of Arabia at the Michael Todd Theatre in Chicago.
I am sorry that things are not perfect, but they truly are getting better. A few notes:
1. I take Twilight Time's entry into Blu-ray as a very positive sign. These companies that have specialized in sound tracks know their product and their market very well. So what if it's $40 for a Blu-ray! The Egyptian disk is a great product and I welcome it, bring on more.
2. Yes, I miss the overture on Scrooge, I have it on an LD. But, golly, the Blu-ray is overall so much better than the LD. BTW: I don't think the overture was used at Radio City when I saw it during the original run.
3. The fade-out in WSS is annoying. But it seems that overall this will be a huge huge improvement. And, no, I don't think that MGM does a very good job overall.
4. But give MGM some kudos for Mad^4 World. In no way had I expected something that good.
5. My Fair Lady sounds suboptimal. I am sorry for Mr. Harris, CBS has shown him no respect. But I bet a better version comes along.
6. Spartacus? An utter travesty of course. But, slowly, Universal is learning the ropes I think.
7. I could list a huge number of films that have blown away my wildest dreams. A Passage to India. The Guns of Navarone. Kwai. South Pacific and The Sound of Music. Never thought any of these could look as good as their Blu-ray disks.
The way I see it, the digital world that is coming will require the very best transfers in order to monetize the assets. It isn't happening all at once, but already, we are far ahead of where I thought we would be a decade ago, and I was optimistic then.
Peace

 

[Robert Harris]

Originally Posted by rsmithjr /t/315932/a-few-words-about-my-fair-lady-in-blu-ray/60#post_3867241
One of the tricks of this hobby is that you tune yourself to be very particular about things but then sometimes have to be both realistic and patient.
I have seen so many travesties occur in this business that I have to say, things have really gotten a lot better over time. Blu-ray, when it is really good, is really good; and sometimes when it is mediocre, it isn't that bad either.
I was a projectionist in the "golden age", and it wasn't all that golden:
-- the distributor promised you a 70mm print but delivered a 35mm and you tried for weeks to fix the situation
-- you got a 70mm print but, after 2 weeks of advertising "70mm', they took it back for a 35mm print
-- you knew there were magnetic prints and you had to drive 100 miles to get one
-- the intermission was missing because some projectionist added it to his collection
-- you get a faded EK print when you knew the first print run was IB Tech
-- the cleaning staff starts cleaning the auditorium near the end of Lawrence of Arabia at the Michael Todd Theatre in Chicago.
I am sorry that things are not perfect, but they truly are getting better. A few notes:
1. I take Twilight Time's entry into Blu-ray as a very positive sign. These companies that have specialized in sound tracks know their product and their market very well. So what if it's $40 for a Blu-ray! The Egyptian disk is a great product and I welcome it, bring on more.
2. Yes, I miss the overture on Scrooge, I have it on an LD. But, golly, the Blu-ray is overall so much better than the LD. BTW: I don't think the overture was used at Radio City when I saw it during the original run.
3. The fade-out in WSS is annoying. But it seems that overall this will be a huge huge improvement. And, no, I don't think that MGM does a very good job overall.
4. But give MGM some kudos for Mad^4 World. In no way had I expected something that good.
5. My Fair Lady sounds suboptimal. I am sorry for Mr. Harris, CBS has shown him no respect. But I bet a better version comes along.
6. Spartacus? An utter travesty of course. But, slowly, Universal is learning the ropes I think.
7. I could list a huge number of films that have blown away my wildest dreams. A Passage to India. The Guns of Navarone. Kwai. South Pacific and The Sound of Music. Never thought any of these could look as good as their Blu-ray disks.
The way I see it, the digital world that is coming will require the very best transfers in order to monetize the assets. It isn't happening all at once, but already, we are far ahead of where I thought we would be a decade ago, and I was optimistic then.
Peace

As to item 5, this is not about me. You've got that one wrong. It is, at the most basic level, about respect for an art form, and understanding what to do with a film element when one is selected for image or audio harvest.

Nothing more.

Any relationship that I had with CBS ended 17 years ago.

And that was a far different CBS.

RAH

 

[rsmithjr]

Mr. Harris,
Thanks, I understand what you are saying.
I do have respect for your work and ideas. But I know it is not about you.
I am sure that the owners of MFL will have another go at it later, perhaps getting it right. The half-life of a studio exec is not that long.
I guess I am an optimist.

 

[MatthewA]

Did Paramount do anything other than put their name on the label? Perhaps if Paramount had had control over the mastering it might have been better.

 

[marsnkc]

Spartacus? An utter travesty of course. But, slowly, Universal is learning the ropes I think.
7. I could list a huge number of films that have blown away my wildest dreams. A Passage to India. The Guns of Navarone. Kwai. South Pacific and The Sound of Music. Never thought any of these could look as good as their Blu-ray disks.
The way I see it, the digital world that is coming will require the very best transfers in order to monetize the assets. It isn't happening all at once, but already, we are far ahead of where I thought we would be a decade ago, and I was optimistic then.
Peace

Great post, Robert, but I have to ask myself: Why should the people responsible for the beauties you list in #7 (add to those The Ten Commandments, Ben-Hur, Oz and GWTW!) bother to continue putting in the time and gold to produce others like them, if they know we're willing to buy comparatively sub-par product now and 'hope', and pay yet again for, a 'better' transfer down the road (whenever that might be!)? But will the next hoped-for improvement be only an incremental one, so that five years after that- if we're still around - we can say again, "Not yet definitive, but they're getting there, slowly but surely. Let's wait for the next one in five more years, that'll crack it...."
We're a bit too far in for studios to still be learning the ropes - on our dime! Or continuing to take cynical advantage of people's gullibility in believing that anything in a blue box is a guarantee of quality, 'the best it can be!'
I've seen people excusing sub-par releases because 'the price is right.' That's another ploy to get punters to keep buying product no longer selling on DVD. Stick the tired old master on a BD with its built-in apparent 'upgrade', price it at DVD levels, sit back and watch it squeeeze yet more greenbacks from an exhausted market. The immediate consequence of this approach is hard core film fans being deprived of a good replica of the original that they'd be willing to pay more for - as they've demonstrated - while the far-reaching one might be of people finally catching on that not everything that comes in a blue box is all it's cracked up to be, resulting in their appraising every 'old' movie on the shelves with a jaundiced eye and lumping your Ben-Hurs in with your Pattons. That would really put the kibosh on any hopes for future goodies from the guys who care.
The further excuse that cash-strapped studios can't afford to pour money into upgrading the elements necessary for a quality job, or that there just isn't the market for an MFL to justify the cost, is a non-starter for me. Where do your Criterion, Blue Underground, Twilight Time and Eureka boutiques get the wherewithal from? As Mr. Harris has had to say, too many times on too many occasions, a quality BD is usually achievable with comparatively little (and easily recoupable) cost. That all that's lacking is the will and/or competency.
Your mention of the unfortunate Spartacus is apropos. The lessons I thought were learned from that and other high-profile debacles, and the stunners we've been gifted with since, had me thinking that we would never again be lamenting the quality of a transfer of a much-treasured gem.

 

[Robert Harris]

Originally Posted by MatthewA /t/315932/a-few-words-about-my-fair-lady-in-blu-ray/60#post_3867321
Did Paramount do anything other than put their name on the label? Perhaps if Paramount had had control over the mastering it might have been better.

Paramount merely distributes.

 

[Robert Harris]

Great post, Robert, but I have to ask myself: Why should the people responsible for the beauties you list in #7 (add to those The Ten Commandments, Ben-Hur, Oz and GWTW!) bother to continue putting in the time and gold to produce others like them, if they know we're willing to buy comparatively sub-par product now and 'hope', and pay yet again for, a 'better' transfer down the road (whenever that might be!)? But will the next hoped-for improvement be only an incremental one, so that five years after that- if we're still around - we can say again, "Not yet definitive, but they're getting there, slowly but surely. Let's wait for the next one in five more years, that'll crack it...."
We're a bit too far in for studios to still be learning the ropes - on our dime! Or continuing to take cynical advantage of people's gullibility in believing that anything in a blue box is a guarantee of quality, 'the best it can be!'
I've seen people excusing sub-par releases because 'the price is right.' That's another ploy to get punters to keep buying product no longer selling on DVD. Stick the tired old master on a BD with its built-in apparent 'upgrade', price it at DVD levels, sit back and watch it squeeeze yet more greenbacks from an exhausted market. The immediate consequence of this approach is hard core film fans being deprived of a good replica of the original that they'd be willing to pay more for - as they've demonstrated - while the far-reaching one might be of people finally catching on that not everything that comes in a blue box is all it's cracked up to be, resulting in their appraising every 'old' movie on the shelves with a jaundiced eye and lumping your Ben-Hurs in with your Pattons. That would really put the kibosh on any hopes for future goodies from the guys who care.
The further excuse that cash-strapped studios can't afford to pour money into upgrading the elements necessary for a quality job, or that there just isn't the market for an MFL to justify the cost, is a non-starter for me. Where do your Criterion, Blue Underground, Twilight Time and Eureka boutiques get the wherewithal from? As Mr. Harris has had to say, too many times on too many occasions, a quality BD is usually achievable with comparatively little (and easily recoupable) cost. That all that's lacking is the will and/or competency.
Your mention of the unfortunate Spartacus is apropos. The lessons I thought were learned from that and other high-profile debacles, and the stunners we've been gifted with since, had me thinking that we would never again be lamenting the quality of a transfer of a much-treasured gem.

I could not have said this better myself.

Thank you.

Now if everyone reading this would kindly take a deep breath.

Exhale.

And repeat these words.

Blu-ray is not a guarantee of quality.

Do not purchase hastily or without reading reviews from competent writers.

If you have been led to mistakenly purchase a Blu-ray of questionable quality, return it.

The Blu-ray logo is meaningless.

Now breathe normally.

RAH

 

[FoxyMulder]

I agree with some of what has been said but Blue Undergrounds Italian sourced transfers have suffered from issues due to LVR using a CRT scanner and analog noise making the film grain look decidely unnatural and over exaggerated. The latest release Zombie aka Zombie Flesh Eaters ( UK ) looks to have had noise reduction applied to try and counter this issue.

Good post about that at this blog and part 1 had comments from a guy who has tested this theory of why the transfers look this way by using a CRT scanner himself.

http://www.kentaiblog.com/2011/10/i-am-going-to-eat-you-part-2.html

As far as disappointing transfers, well i already made my feelings known about Jurassic Park and some of the Star Wars films, i tend to agree that at this stage some of the studio's are taking a "its good enough for the masses" approach, who can blame them when even reviewers at large online sites and magazines and newspapers rate them highly and give them overwhelming positives because they are so much better than the DVD and so its high scores all round, i think sometimes the casual mass market who may read online reviews skip over the actual review section and just look at the video and audio scores.

Then you have some of the mistakes to transfers such as The Big Country, i would have bought it in a heartbeat but still have not due to issues pointed out, i'm actually getting a little disappointed in the direction blu ray is heading, sure most new releases look great, we know why, but too often i see not enough effort being made to the catalog releases, and in particular i think Universal fails to do it right, i find they add a little bit of sharpening to their releases, not enough for the average viewer to notice, apparently you have to go up to the screen to see it. ( yeah right - i don't )

Oh this is really for the 3D thread, you can calibrate the 3D section of a display and get those colours looking good but the new standard for glasses ( when it comes ) will help immensely, last years Panasonic Plasmas, had real world contrast ratios of below 2000:1, this years have 5000:1 and considerably better brightness, this should also help with 3D, things are improving quite fast.

 

[Robert Harris]

-

 

[ahollis]

Originally Posted by Robert Harris /t/315932/a-few-words-about-my-fair-lady-in-blu-ray/60#post_3867330
Blu-ray is not a guarantee of quality.

Do not purchase hastily or without reading reviews from competent writers.

If you have been led to mistakenly purchase a Blu-ray of questionable quality, return it.

The Blu-ray logo is meaningless.

Now breathe normally.

RAH

This is exactly why I depend on your thoughts and the reviewers here on this forum. Also the thoughts of other posters. While the decision is all mine, I do enjoy "a little help from my friends."

I have chosen not to buy West Side Story and on fence for My Fair Lady. I will wait to see what MGM/Fox does for WWS and would like see all the fall out from MFL before I make my decision. I learned a long time ago that Blu-ray does not guarantee perfection. That I learned with Patton.

 

[FoxyMulder]

Originally Posted by ahollis /t/315932/a-few-words-about-my-fair-lady-in-blu-ray/60#post_3867382

This is exactly why I depend on your thoughts and the reviewers here on this forum. Also the thoughts of other posters. While the decision is all mine, I do enjoy "a little help from my friends."

I have chosen not to buy West Side Story and on fence for My Fair Lady. I will wait to see what MGM/Fox does for WWS and would like see all the fall out from MFL before I make my decision. I learned a long time ago that Blu-ray does not guarantee perfection. That I learned with Patton.

I learned that from day one when i bought Basic Instinct ( Lionsgate ) that release is a poster child for having just about every issue possible, very poor.

 

[Charles Smith]

I learned (also with "a little help from my friends") in 1984 or thereabouts that CDs weren't necessarily "perfect sound", forever or otherwise.

 

[FoxyMulder]

Originally Posted by Chas in CT /t/315932/a-few-words-about-my-fair-lady-in-blu-ray/60#post_3867394
I learned (also with "a little help from my friends") in 1984 or thereabouts that CDs weren't necessarily "perfect sound", forever or otherwise.

Its all in the mix.

 

[Mark-P]

Remember when DVD first hit the market, everyone thought that the DVD logo guaranteed quality? How quickly that was debunked as decades-old transfers, and public domain companies hijacked the format.

 

[Robert Harris]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ahollis /t/315932/a-few-words-about-my-fair-lady-in-blu-ray/60#post_3867382
This is exactly why I depend on your thoughts and the reviewers here on this forum. Also the thoughts of other posters. While the decision is all mine, I do enjoy "a little help from my friends."

I have chosen not to buy West Side Story and on fence for My Fair Lady. I will wait to see what MGM/Fox does for WWS and would like see all the fall out from MFL before I make my decision. I learned a long time ago that Blu-ray does not guarantee perfection. That I learned with Patton.

I've now had a chance to review MFL again, and here are the thoughts with which I've come away.

This is a release that is will meet consumer happiness based upon play back system.

On a 55" LED/LCD the image looks very nice, with the exception of the lack of density at the sides. On occasion timing is slightly off, but this again will go unnoticed by most consumers.

Dupes look fine with the exception of the their slight twitchiness, which is almost transparent at 55".

As I've said before, the general public will be thrilled with this Blu-ray.

In projection, the image, which is quite clean, but could still use a few hours of cleansing, seems to be constantly on the move, exhibiting the bob and weave that one sees in theaters, but is no longer a quality of digital image harvests. A bit of image stabilization is in order. The lack of density at the sides becomes very apparent in any shots that might be a bit thin to begin with -- anything at night, for example will exacerbate the problem.

Color remains solid with few exceptions, but shot to shot timing is occasionally problematic.

As an overall concept of what I'm seeing, or not seeing, one would expect this Blu-ray to match the quality of the Fox large format releases dealt with under the guidance of archivist Schawn Belston. It doesn't, and looks more like a nice 35mm production.

No reason why this should not look every bit as good as The Sound of Music, or for that matter, the main body of West Side Story, but it does not.

RAH

 

[Charles Smith]

Apologies if I missed an earlier explanation, but what causes the lack of density at the sides?

 

[Robert Harris]

Originally Posted by Chas in CT /t/315932/a-few-words-about-my-fair-lady-in-blu-ray/60#post_3867415
Apologies if I missed an earlier explanation, but what causes the lack of density at the sides?

Most large format film has a slight bit, but between the 2.21:1 aspect ratio, which does a slight crop of the sides, and the contrast of print stock, it becomes invisible.

My guess would be that in the creation of the 35mm reduction element, the optical printer may have been ever so slightly off, yielding a bit less exposure at the sides. This becomes more obvious in a digital scan, but can be dealt with in a few different ways.

RAH