A Few Words About A few words about... The Sound of Music (1 Viewer)

[rich_d]

Roger that.

I certainly don't remember all the specifics of its run near me (near Hartford, CT) but it was still playing Spring 1966 (a year after its release). I also remember that my sister and I begged my mother to get the TSoM's soundtrack.

Thunderball was another one of the same era ... released fairly late in 1965 it played locally at one theatre until summertime 1966.

Seems to me that The Sound of Music polarizes audiences. Certainly never hip, its 'spoonful of sugar' (to borrow from another Julie Andrews' film) is hard for some to swallow. I can understand that. For me, it seems that way for most musicals (of which TSoM was at the tail end of a era) something to be appreciated for its musical storytelling.

Sorry to hear that the new DVD is not up to snuff. I never bought opting to wait. Looks like my wait continues.

 

[Michel_Hafner]

"The camera lies all the time. It lies 24 times a second."
-- Brian De Palma
"Film is lies 24 times a second"
-- Errol Morris
"Film is truth 24 times a second"
Goddard

 

[Michel_Hafner]

I have seen a scene in original 4K of "Sound of Music" on the Sony 4K projector. So there probably exists a complete 4K master already.
Scanning 65mm material from 35mm elements is a bad idea if there are usable lower generation 65mm film elements available. There is nothing to be gained from a 35mm resolution bottleneck in the processing chain except that, loss of resolution, which is never good.

 

[Marty M]

That summed up my sentiments for the movie when it first came out in 1966. I was 17 at the time, and thought I was way too cool to go see the movie. I never did see it at the theater. The first time I saw this movie was when my daughters wanted to see it on TV for the first time years ago.

 

[TedD]

I wonder if it has the red bleeding issues that are present on the new DVD. Check the scene with Maria when she first arrives at the gate of the Von Trapp villa and look at the red bleed visible on the bars and the masonry on the right side of the image.

Ted

 

[Tony Kwong]

What transfer was used for the aborted D-Theater D-VHS version? I haven't seen the entire movie on D-VHS. Was the quality of the transfer the contribute to why it was aborted? Maybe that's why this version is not so hot?

 

[Rob_Ray]

At Houston's Alabama Theatre, it ran from March 1965 to December 1966, as I recall. It was replaced by Hawaii, another Andrews pic, while TSOM moved to a downtown movie palace for a non-roadshow first run lasting several more weeks. Off and on, it played theatres to nearly 1969 or so.

 

[Joe Caps]

Rob is quite right. Im my small home town it played until 1969. It was off the screen for a year and came back as a reissue in 1970- till 1971.
It seems this is one of those musicals that even people who don't like musicals like anyway.

 

[TonyDale]

Even Colin Jacobson, who admits his dislike for musicals, doesn't disdain THE SOUND OF MUSIC.
DVD Movie Guide

 

[Vincent_P]

To DaViD Boulet:

I have to say that your reviews are among the most informtative I read ANYWHERE on the web OR in print when it comes to the image quality of DVDs, and you consistently make it a point to mention your viewing system, viewing distance, etc. As for this:


The above reminds me of an e-mail exchange i had with a reviewer at DVD Verdict re: their review of ATTACK OF THE CLONES, wherein the reviewer posted that because the movie was shot anamorphiclally (!!!- as we all know, it was not- it was 24P High-Definition video matted down to 2.35:1), it exhibited "grain" (!!!- another imposibility, since video DOES NOT have grain) due to the use of anamorphic lenses during filming...

I tried to explain to the reviewer via e-mail that A. ATTACK OF THE CLONES was not shot with anamorphic lenses as it was shot digitally using the Sony/Panavision 24P sytem, and B. even if it had been shot anamorphically, that wouldn't lead to an increase in grain, since in fact the anamorphic 35mm film frame has more negative area than (and, as a result, is more grain-free than) "standard" 1.85:1 35mm, but said reviewer didn't seem to get it and stood by his review...

I only wish truly asute and knowledgable reviewers like David were the standard rather than the exception on the internet these days.

Vincent

 

[ChristopherDAC]

I thought that Lucas used anamorphic lenses on the 24p HiVision cameras, to avoid matting down the 1080-line image, but I could be wrong. Isn't there a greater appearance of grain in anamorphic 35mm filming due to the higher film speed needed to deal with the reduced illumination? In video work one experiences a lower signal-to-noise ratio with increasing aspect ratio, and I'm pretty sure the same idea applies here.
All this off-topic of course, except insofar as it encouraged the development of large-format film stocks for widescreen photography, and by extension the [modified] TODD-AO system used for TSoM, and the reasoning behind trying to use the original 65mm element instead of printed-down 35mm.

 

[Yumbo]

based on the opening mountain shot, the EE is abound aplenty...not our favourite thing.

this is on the 50" plasma. colours seem to be ok.

will do a PJ test later.

for now.

 

[Paul Anthony]

I just watched portions of the 40th Anniversary of "The Sound of Music" on my 36" Sony XBR Wega, couldn't have looked any better.

 

[Joe Caps]

Reviewers should not only educate, but both reviewers and the public should be educated at times. DVD Times. announced yesterday the UlK. release fo the four disc Ben Hur. One of the replys they got from a consumer is that its a pity that Warners is not including the original MONO too, the way they did with GONE WIth THE WIND.
AAAAAARGH !!!!

 

[Steve JD]

I agree Joe! I see comments like that often.

And what I find annoying is when studios include a mono track on the DVD for a film that was originaly released to theatres in stereo. For example "Three Coins in the Fountain". That just confuses people even more, leading them to beleive this is a newly create stereo track of a mono film. Why bother doing that?!

Most people who saw Star Wars and Superman on the big screen in the 70s watched them in mono (in my area anyway), but we don't have a mono track on thoses DVDS!

 

[Joe Caps]

A lot of what Fox does confuses me and makes no sense.
Why they spend time and money on those fake stereo tracks on every release makes no sense to me whatsoever.
Thier ultimate in this area is their release of the westen, WARLOCK available in mono, fake stereo. Meanwhile, the same week they release this, Warlock is in true stereo on the Fox Movie Channel.
Next year, we get the restored longer version of South Pacific from Fox, a two disc set, the other disc is the standard short version - what for? Use that space to give us the opening two reels with the European continuity, all the trailers, etc. How about a nice documentary about themaking of the film? They could include filmed interviews with surviving cast members Mitzi Gaynor, John Kerr, and France Nuyen.

 

[Mark Zimmer]

Is there any way to tell "fake stereo" from "true stereo" if you haven't seen the movie before?

 

[rich_d]

In a word ... yes. As you undoubtedly know the external auditory canal of both ears are the same - it is the processing that occurs with the cochlea and the nerve that transmits messages from the inner ear to the brain (the eighth nerve) that are different. That is why headphones have left and right ear cups.

Thus to check for "fake stereo" you can do the opposite (if you will). Simply reverse a pair of headphones so that the left 'cup' is on your right ear and vice-versa. Listen to the DVD (a section with a music score not a section of just dialog) now repeat the experiment with the headset correctly over your ears to same section of the film. If they sound identical both ways, it is "fake stereo."

 

[TonyD]

i thought that was just mono from both speakers or 2 channel mono.

 

[Steve JD]

If you can hear certain instruments coming from only the left or only the right, that's true stereo. Fake stereo just sounds like broad-mono, and unnatural. Both channels have the same sound, but one side seems more hollow than the other.

With Fox dvds of 50s widescreen movies, you can tell right away if it's true stereo or fake stereo by listening to the Fox Cinemascope opening logo (Fox Fanfare theme). "Bus Stop" is one that is true stereo, "Three Faces of Eve" is fake stereo.

Fake stereo sounds pretty awful on the Fox dvds... I much prefer mono.