3D Blu-ray Review Dial M for Murder 3D Blu-ray Review (1 Viewer)

[haineshisway]

WarnerColor faded just like any Eastman color prints of that era all the way up until the introduction of LPP. The only stocks that didn't fade were IB Tech and AGFA, Kodak. Fuji held color longer and I have several Fuji prints now that have about sixty percent of their color.

 

[Bob Furmanek]

And Cinecolor.

 

[haineshisway]

I knew I was forgetting one!

 

[Jon Lidolt]

WarnerColor faded just like any Eastman color prints of that era all the way up until the introduction of LPP. The only stocks that didn't fade were IB Tech and AGFA, Kodak. Fuji held color longer and I have several Fuji prints now that have about sixty percent of their color.

Both Warnercolor and DeLuxe color faded, it's just that the DeLuxe features printed on Kodak stock had a shorter life span. DeLuxe color almost always looked awful at our local theatre when I was a teenager (mid 50's). And this was usually only about 5 or 6 months after the first run's in the bigger centres ended. Warnercolor managed to look OK... not great but acceptable. It's got to be pretty bad when a bunch of teenagers actually noticed the poor color quality... but that's the way it was.

 

[Ronald Epstein]

Just finished viewing Dial M For Murder.

Mind you, this is the first time I have ever seen this film.
Fascinating story, and I very much enjoyed the twist at
the end. In all, pretty damn good film.

That being said, I was sort of put off by the transfer.

First, the transfer shows the warts in the projected rear
screen used to show the London neighborhood. It looks
a bit blurred and you can see the seams between the actors
and the backing. This is not anyone's fault mind you, it's
just what the heightened resolution brings out.

What I did find annoying was the amount of ghosting that
was present. Good amount of double imaging here, most
particularly in the darker scenes.

The 3D was awfully subtle, which is fine. There were no
pop-outs that I could see except for perhaps Grace Kelly's
hand extended out during her attack.

In all, I don't quite see how 3D really enhances the overall
story, which seems to stand pretty well on its own without
the extra added dimensionality.

 

[Douglas R]

I remember as a kid that by the time the DeLuxe color movies arrived at our small town theatre, the pictures always had a brownish tint. Even the other kids at the matinees would comment on this, especially if the main feature or the trailers were in blazingly bright Technicolor.

It was exactly the same in the UK at my local cinema in the '50s. If a Fox film was showing I always knew the colour would look lousy

 

[Reed Grele]

What I did find annoying was the amount of ghosting that
was present.  Good amount of double imaging here, most
particularly in the darker scenes.

Ron, so, I'm not the only one who has noticed the ghosting. My usual "ghost free" 65" Panny plasma was full of them!. I'm used to see mild ghosting on my Panny PT-AE7000 projector, but almost every title that exhibits ghosting on the projector, plays just fine on the plasma. I really can't understand it.
Great film though. Glad to hear you enjoyed it.
It's a shame that we can only see a film for the first time once.

 

[Bob Furmanek]

There was no ghosting on the Vizio passive display.

 

[Steve Tannehill]

There was also no ghosting on my Mitsubishi DLP rear projection.

 

[DennisBassi]

I watched it last night and thought it looked great on my WD-73738. The 3D effect was more for depth than pop out and I thought it was rendered quite well and added to the cinematic experience.
And how about the opening credits? Those were totally "popped out."
Overall, given the age of the film, the 3D was better than expected.

 

[Bob Furmanek]

The quality of the 3-D is typical of what was done in the 1950's.

 

[JamesNelson]

We should all remember that when we talk about ghosting, we are describing the properties of our display devices and not any problems or fault of this particular disc.
fwiw, I witnessed very minor ghosting on my Panasonic AE-7000 projector, and zero on my Mitsubishi DLP RPTV. Dial M fared no better or worse than any other disc on my equipment as far as crosstalk.

 

[Cineman]

Just finished viewing Dial M For Murder.
That being said, I was sort of put off by the transfer.
First, the transfer shows the warts in the projected rear
screen used to show the London neighborhood.  It looks
a bit blurred and you can see the seams between the actors 
and the backing.  This is not anyone's fault mind you, it's
just what the heightened resolution brings out.

The quality and care (or, in some cases, the lack there of) put into certain rear screen projection effects in several Hitchcock movies is a subject that is worthy of discussion, imo. And, I suspect, something that will continue to come up as better and better media representations of his work become available (Blu-rays being the issue now).
I think it is very much up for debate whether Hitchcock always wanted every rear screen effect in every one of his movies to reach a beautiful, seamless, unobtrusive level of near perfection and utterly convincing "realism" but occasionally came up short in that goal because someone in the visual effects department dropped the ball, because of budgetary limitations or what have you. Or, worse, that it happened because of Hitchcock's inattention to the detail or perhaps because Hitchcock thought his audience was too unsophisticated to notice or care.
Personally, I believe Hitchcock showed a propensity to utilize sub-par effects (sound, color vs black and white, rear projection, etc.) if he perceived there would be a net gain in the overall. It's a touchy subject to broach without literally saying Hitchcock often chose a "bad" effect if the inclusion of it inched forward some more important element of the work, but I guess that is what I'm saying.
And I'm not saying Hitchcock was never thwarted in a loftier goal for an effect in any of his movies by less than sterling collaborators, disinterested studios or budget limitations. But I don't think I see that in every case. In many of not most cases, I believe Hitchcock saw a net gain in allowing a sub-par effect go through. For example, in the case of Dial "M" For Murder, what would beautiful, utterly realistic rear screen shots of London have accomplished in the fleeting seconds they would have been employed but to have the audience long for getting out of that apartment and back to the "travelogue interludes" they had been inadvertently led to believe might be part of this movie's intention? Particularly when so many other movies of the early 1950s, especially those in 3D, were interjecting just such a "travelogue" element to their agenda.
Instead, we see those brief, ugly rear screen shots of London and we know immediately there will be no "travelogue" element to this movie, that nether the director/filmmakers nor we should be the least bit interested in what is going on down the street for even a moment because that is not what this movie is about, and perhaps most important of all, that when the scene moves to or returns to the interior shots, which are beautiful and crisp by comparison, we welcome the idea of focusing on these people, not scenery, and never for one moment long to return to those "lovely" streets of London since there was nothing particularly lovely about the look of them at all.
Just my humble opinion, of course. But, whenever I see or hear a sub-par effect in a Hitchcock film in terms of not fully representing "reality" as we might have expected it or as other filmmakers strive to achieve, there is simply too much evidence throughout his 50+ year filmmaking career that it was more likely intentional rather than accidental on Hitchcock's part.

 

[Craig Beam]

I'm viewing on a 42" Panasonic 3D plasma set via Sony PS3 with Sony 3D glasses. I'm seeing a shocking amount of ghosting. It's severely distracting, but the image quality itself is for the most part quite nice. I'll probably go with the 2D version in the future, which is damned disappointing.

 

[Mark-P]

I'm viewing on a 42" Panasonic 3D plasma set via Sony PS3 with Sony 3D glasses. I'm seeing a shocking amount of ghosting. It's severely distracting, but the image quality itself is for the most part quite nice. I'll probably go with the 2D version in the future, which is damned disappointing.

Are Sony 3D glasses even compatible with a Panasonic display? The glasses are supposed to be matched to the display, not the player.

 

[Doug Bull]

I just watched it and give the disc the thumbs up.
Warner Color always had it's problems, it had a soft muddy look about it, but Warners have done a very credible job with this disc.
There are a couple of short sequences, especially during the process shots, that are soft and have a strange white halo, but it's very obvious that these are not the fault of the disc mastering but rather stem back to the original source material and I very much doubt anything could have been done to correct them. These are only a few very brief moments in an otherwise excellent 3D presentation.
The depth is subtle, but you really feel drawn into it, which may well have been Hitchcock's intention.
The gray scale is excellent and grain is at an acceptable level.
There is absolutely No 3D ghosting, No crosstalk and No dark image when viewed on my Sony HMZ-T1 OLED personal 3D viewer.
I have yet to view it on my 58" Panasonic 3D Plasma, so it will be interesting to compare the results.
Well done Warners on an excellent job. (It was well worth the wait)
Now bring on Kiss Me Kate. (my most treasured 3D memory from the 50s)

 

[Craig Beam]

Are Sony 3D glasses even compatible with a Panasonic display? The glasses are supposed to be matched to the display, not the player.

I'm using Sony PS3 glasses, which are supposed to be compatible with multiple display brands, Panasonic included. I've never noticed ghosting with any other 3D content I've viewed using this setup (Prometheus, Hugo, Tangled, multiple films via Comcast 3D On Demand, etc).

 

[Yorkshire]

Can anyone confirm if this is region locked?
I'm in the UK, and whilst my Blu-ray Disc player (2D only) is region free, I have a PS3 (my first Blu-ray player) which is steadfastly Region 2/B only, and capable of 3D.
I'll probably be mainly watching this in 2D, but it'd be nice to know if I could give the 3D version a run out.
Cheers.
Steve W

 

[Bob Furmanek]

Excellent review, Doug. We discuss the WarnerColor opticals in our article: http://www.3dfilmarchive.com/dial-m-blu-ray-review

 

[Brandon Conway]

Originally Posted by Yorkshire /t/324315/dial-m-for-murder-3d-blu-ray-review/60#post_3988882
Can anyone confirm if this is region locked?

Warner does not use Region Coding on Blu-rays. It is open region.