A Few Words About A few words about... The Controversial Classics (1 Viewer)

[Mark VH]

RAH,

Thanks so much for your recommendation of the Controversial Classics set - not that it's really necessary, as this has been a no-brainer for me for months. But having your seal of approval is the icing on the cake for what I'm expecting is another Warner gem.

One question though - in his latest Hollywood Elsewhere column, Jeff Wells states that A Face in the Crowd has been cropped too tightly.

"I absolutely swear to God there's a great-looking Warner Home Video DVD of Elia Kazan's A Face in the Crowd (1957) hitting stores a week from Tuesday (5.10).

It has terrific monochrome values, I mean...sharp and super-clarified and almost color-like in their fullness.

There's only one problem: WHV technicians have cropped the image too tightly and presented it in what looks to me like a 1.85 (or 1.78) to 1 aspect ratio, with too many hairdos and foreheads sliced into for no reason.

A Face in the Crowd was photographed by Harry Stradling, who started out in the 1920s, shot A Streetcar Named Desire and ended his career working on a string of '60s Barbra Streisand movies, including Funny Girl and Hello Dolly.

Trust me when I say that old-fashioned guys like Stradling never used the top of the frame to crop into people's heads, unless there was an emotional or compositional point to be made by doing so.

DVDs of almost all non-Scope movies shot in the 1950s and '60s should be presented with 1.66 to 1 aspect ratios. I don't care if the dp on a certain '50s or '60s film composed the shots with an expectation that 1.85 aperture plates would be used in theatres (because 1.85 was being used back then) -- just use 1.66 and don't think about it and don't get creative and just shut up.

That is, except for special-dispensation films like Shane and Dr. Strangelove, which look much better when presented with a full-frame aspect ratio of 1.33 or 1.37 to 1.

MGM/UA Home Video's DVD of John Frankenheimer's The Train does it right. There's a perfect sense of balance and proportion in every shot, and here are no scenes with anyone's hair or forehead sliced into except when this kind of shot is appropriate and intended."

I imagine you've read this, as I know you and Wells have corresponded a number of times (most memorably on the issue of Lowry Digital's removal of film grain in their DVD transfers). What's your reaction to this?

 

[Robert Crawford]

Maybe, because "Shane" was shot 1.37:1 ratio. People need to remember that George Stevens was a very deliberate filmmaker. It generally took him almost 3 years to complete a film. Though, "Shane" was wide released in August of 1953, it was filmed during the late Summer and early Fall of 1951, which is before widescreen formats were reintroduced to the public.






Crawdaddy

 

[Robert Harris]

I agree totally with Mr. Wells in regard to the look of Face in the Crowd, which is magnificently presented.

I also read his comments, viewed the first reel of the film, and while the compositions are a bit tight, I wasn't troubled.

This is a Great DVD!

As to the Lowry grain removal process, the company is now working with a much more knowledgeable and delicate hand.

The reality of the situation is that of a duality.

Original grain should be retained for film restoration using digital tools, while the advantages of a slight grain reduction for video mastering does create an overall better image for easier and better compression.

RAH

 

[Conrad_SSS]

The AFI catalog lists the OAR of A FACE IN THE CROWD as 1.85:1

I find their information highly accurate.

Incidentally, there's a great article about this boxed set in today's issue of USA Today with comments from Andy Griffith...

Sensational!

 

[Robert Crawford]

Last night, I watched "Bad Day at Black Rock" and I thought the video presentation was fantastic. I was wondering how the train's red color would look like in the opening sequences and to my tired old eyes, it looks vibrant and contrasts well with the rest of the film's look and color scheme.




Crawdaddy

 

[oscar_merkx]

Thanks for all the great comments RAH

 

[Jaime_Weinman]

BTW, there's a big mistake on the box of The Americanization of Emily -- it mistakenly says "Commentary by film historian Drew Casper." Rest assured that, as promised, the commentary is actually by the film's director, Arthur Hiller.