The V.I.P. edition transfer presents a Red Push on skin tones. The 2.35 framing has additional matting over DP Jost Vacano's supervised original 2.10 framing.
I echo your echo. The MGM seems to have a steely blue cast to the colors, which is not how I remember it looking in theaters. The pro-logic sound on the Criterion is also better than the new 5.1 remix. I wish the compression was a little better on the Criterion, though.
Do you mean compared to the Masterpiece Collection? That reminds me - that's the only disc out of the collection I haven't seen yet. I already sold the 2001 edition. Oh, well. See above about "ignorance," "bliss," and "me..."
I second that. The slowed-down versions of the First National shorts are unwatchable (don't know what Chaplin was thinkiong on some of those). Reminds me of the old Magnetic Video releases on VHS. Thanks goodness I'd gotten most of the Image releases. I never did get The Kid, but I even prefer my laserdisc version to the newer one.
The only one I like of the newer set(s) is The Gold Rush with the piano score. I've never liked the narrated version of that film.
I'm surprised no one has mentioned GUYS AND DOLLS (though I do admit to preferring the newer version. Far less aliasing even if the color is flatter and the image cropped a bit.)
I'm not sure yet, but the new version of 'The Searchers' is somewhat jarring to look at. The differences in colors between the old-and-the-new DVD releases are somewhat unsettling. I have only watched the first 30 minutes of the latest Ultimate edition, so I don't want to say this will be my final answer...I could come around to everyone's point of view.
How so? The Masterpiece Collection is vastly sharper. In the shot with Jeffries writing the letter, you can see that the stripes on his shirt are razor sharp. They're blurry on the old DVD.
Very true, it is noticeably sharper (which in turn accentuates the grain to a sometimes distracting effect, though I'm always an advocate of proper grain structure) but the color timing changes just don't sit right with me. The 2001 release has a warmer feel to it, which goes wonderfully with the summertime heat in the movie. The shots of the apartment complex at sunset illustrate this the best; the breathtakingly gorgeous hues in the original release aren't quite so emotionally stirring in the Masterpiece version. I'd say the flesh tones look more accurate in the 2001 version as well.
I completely forgot about that - I love that they added it in. Definitely the highlight of an otherwise so-so purchase.
I'll always have a soft spot for the '42 version, though. Watching that was my introduction to Chaplin and to classic film, in general. On Magnetic Video, no less!
The 25th Anniversary edition has much weaker colors in many places in the film, and the color timing is different, making scenes that are supposed to be set in autumn look like spring (when the film was actually shot). Instead of having subdued browns, some scenes look too green. Here is a page highlighting some of the differences: http://www.horrordvds.com/reviews/a-.../compare.shtml
It's a shame that the 25th Anniv. DVD is so sharp, because the color timing differences ruin it for me. Good to keep for the commentary, but the 1999 version is much more enjoyable to me.
Is the television version bonus the only difference between that one and the "Restored Limited Edition" also on Amazon? I suppose they otherwise have the same transfer, extras etc?
Looks gorgeous on a 100" screen to me. Yes, there's some grain in a few shots, but it's film grain, so it's supposed to be there. As for blurry, well, I don't think we're watching the same DVD.
Upon closer viewing, I found that it has too much DVNR and it has interlacing glitches at nearly every splice. The DVNR is bad because it smears the great Saul Bass main titles. It doesn't help it's the general release cut either, but I guess that's what we have to live with now. :frowning: