Gone With the Wind - another restoration? (1 Viewer)

[Stephen_J_H]

Which is why I mentioned that lossless tracks tend to be mastered at lower volume and the solutions to that.

 

[BarryR]

If the current rerelease of WIZARD OF OZ now rates a PG, I guess GWTW is good for a PG13, despite their original ratings. .

 

[Mark Mayes]

Hmmm-I wonder if this will simply be the DCP we've been treated to in LA since 2011? It flows beautifully but skin tones are yellowish. (This is the same issue I had with the blu-ray, but could adjust my color tint when watching.)
I did recently catch the TCM showing in August and I noticed what might have been some color correcting. In any case, I'm bound to get next year's blu-ray. I know there's a new doc on it.

 

[moviebuff75]

Were some of the shots still reframed/cropped in the version you saw in the theater? One way to tell is during the scene of Scarlett and her father under the tree at Tara. They should be towards the bottom of the screen, not in the center.

 

[Andrew Budgell]

In any case, I'm bound to get next year's blu-ray. I know there's a new doc on it.

Mark, I figured there might be since there's a new doc on the upcoming Oz set. What do you know about a new GWTW doc?

 

[Mark Mayes]

Here it is for the board.

http://marietta.patch.com/groups/arts-and-entertainment/p/gone-with-the-wind-documentary-to-film-in-marietta

 

[Andrew Budgell]

Thanks, Mark!It'll be interesting to see what WB has in the works to make this worth re-buying!

 

[Lromero1396]

I've seen claims on this forum (that I can't verify) that the mono mix on the previous BD is not original. All I know is that it suffers from some distortion in explosions or loud passages that is not present on the 5.1. I'd like to see a lossless original mono track on the reissue. Some have also pointed out 'ruddy' looking skin tones and not entirely correct color-timing, despite the fact that the old 8k restoration was supposedly timed according to David O. Selznick's personal print. I'd like to see all issues fixed for the reissue. If any of these issues are original, it should be clarified. By the way, couldn't the cropped shots be digitally stitched together using Selznick's print as well as the OCN scan?

 

[GWTWTOO]

I am dismayed by the recent events involving "Gone With the Wind" and its future with Warner Bros. theatrically and in home video formats. I was hoping there would be theatrical and blu-ray/dvd reissues of the film this year in connection with the 75th anniversary of GWTW, Wizard of Oz, and all the other classic films released in 1939. As it turns out, for some unknown reason, WB has pulled all theatrical licensing of GWTW from theaters that have already booked the film until October. The only showing allowed is at TCM's April festival in LA. All the other showings booked at revival theaters, as previously mentioned, have been canceled. The reason given?--to build interest for a re-release after October. WB has claimed this will not be a theatrical reissue-therefore, it must be a video release. But, have we heard ANYTHING about this? No. Nothing.

Besides, I fail to see how blocking theatrical showings will build interest in yet another home video release, since GWTW has been available since 1985. The blu-ray release five years ago is gorgeous and, by now, unless they're offering that legendary "lost scenes" footage we've heard so much about over the years or something else new (WofOz did have something new--3d), I doubt sales will be fabulous--not unless there's something new to be offered. You can find GWTW for $10 on blu-ray. If they wanted to build interest, they should have blocked television showings and video availability. The people who want to see it in a theater want to see it because it's on the big screen--this has no relation to whether or not they would buy the film on video.

In addition, WB and the Academy also decided to only honor Wizard of Oz at the Academy Awards this year. An interesting article in Entertainment Weekly recently believes this is because it would be in poor taste to honor GWTW with its unfortunate racial depictions on the same program that would possibly be awarding the excellent "Twelve Years a Slave" a Best Picture Oscar. This is probably true...but I at least wish they could have chosen to honor ALL the classic films released 75 years ago.

It may very well be that Oz has a broader fan base than GWTW. For one thing, it appeals to children and many of us remember it as an annual fixture on television. There is nothing objectionable in it, whereas GWTW is understandably controversial because of its negative and stereotypical racial depictions of African Americans. It would be impossible to tell a story from the Confederate point of view and NOT have it be controversial and, yes, it perpetrated the myth of the Glorious Cause and the Old South. It also is perhaps more dated in some ways.

However, GWTW is certainly not without its fans and it, along with Oz and Casablanca remain the most popular classic films every year in revival theaters and classic film festivals. I have attended recent showings that were very well attended by audience members of all ages. It also should be noted that the film has been in theatrical rerelease nationally in the UK since November as part of a celebration honoring Vivien Leigh. It is legendary and one of the greatest classics in film history.

I hope Warner Bros. isn't on its way to pulling this film out of the public eye. Last year, Warner Home Video announced that they would be reissuing both Oz and GWTW. I haven't heard anything about GWTW. Does anyone know anything? I wish I could find out more. Thanks,

 

[FoxyMulder]

I've seen claims on this forum (that I can't verify) that the mono mix on the previous BD is not original. All I know is that it suffers from some distortion in explosions or loud passages that is not present on the 5.1. I'd like to see a lossless original mono track on the reissue. Some have also pointed out 'ruddy' looking skin tones and not entirely correct color-timing, despite the fact that the old 8k restoration was supposedly timed according to David O. Selznick's personal print. I'd like to see all issues fixed for the reissue. If any of these issues are original, it should be clarified. By the way, couldn't the cropped shots be digitally stitched together using Selznick's print as well as the OCN scan?

Who said it was an 8K restoration, that seems overkill to me, i thought it was a 4K restoration. ?

 

[Moe Dickstein]

Meh, I've seen it 3 times in the theater. Interested to see what they have in store for holiday time

 

[DP 70]

The new version is a 4K restoration.

 

[AnthonyClarke]

Isn't it time for a new transfer of 'Casablanca'? I've only bought two Blu ray versions so far....

 

[Rick Thompson]

 

[Rick Thompson]

In addition, WB and the Academy also decided to only honor Wizard of Oz at the Academy Awards this year. An interesting article in Entertainment Weekly recently believes this is because it would be in poor taste to honor GWTW with its unfortunate racial depictions on the same program that would possibly be awarding the excellent "Twelve Years a Slave" a Best Picture Oscar.

If so, it's just another example of bowing to the wishes of those who make a profession out of being offended.

 

[Angelo Colombus]

Maybe the next release will be in 3D? and in a 5 hour director's cut ....

 

[Patrick McCart]

I would hope WB would just do a regular theatrical re-release without IMAX 3-D.

 

[Moe Dickstein]

I wouldn't go back to the theater for this without 3D

 

[Brian McP]

I'd have to agree with you Moe -- the only thing both Warner Bros and MGM haven't done to this movie is probably (these days) the only upgrade one can -- they've 70mmed it, they've given it 'rechanneled stereo effect', they've given it Dolby, dts, remastered the picture nearly as many times as "Rocky" (both Sly Stallone and Clark Gable look younger every time), and have given it more theatrical rereleases than any movie ever made.

I have to admit, they did a great job of "The Wizard of Oz 3D" (rated PG in the US for 'scary scenes', most likely accentuated by the 3D process -- this version still got a G rating here in Australia last year), but there were far more visual effects and movement than GWTW, which has tons of scenes of people just talking to each other -- no 3D process can add anything to that. There would be some standout scenes -- the crane shot with the wounded soldiers, Scarlett shooting that soldier, the burning of Atlanta, the ballroom sequences -- that might make it viable.

But I have to admit, at least here in Australia, the movie is relegated to morning or afternoon programming on free to air and pay television (although, surprisingly, not "The Wizard of Oz" and does appear in repretory theatres at least once or twice a year -- but it's prime time days are over. Sadly, also the case for 99% of movies made before "Star Wars"

3D IMAX would certainly give it a new burst of life in theatres and on home video -- I think the studio is now looking at giving this 8k version, not for theatrical or retail but for future proofing it as a downloadable movie.

I think even they don't care how many units of this version sells -- just as long as it looks good on itunes or through their own website, ready to go like the wind from a cloud when somebody clicks on what will no doubt be a photoshopped poster of Clark Gable and Vivien Leigh, standing back to back, or floating head shots of them or the 1967 poster now with teal and orange somehow all through it....

 

[Lromero1396]

Unless Warner does an MPEG-4 AVC reencode and spreads the film across 2 discs, I won't buy this again. Lossless original mono and the rediscovered scenes would be fantastic as well. However, Warner will probably take the half-assed repackage approach and use the current discs with crap bit-rate which really don't look that good by today's standards. I hope I'm wrong on that, though.