GYPSY (1 Viewer)

[Scott Calvert]

HD masters were going on for LD perhaps 4-5 years before DVD was introduced. If you had a movie from Sony on LD post circa '93 you had a disc from an HD master.

I did not know that. Was anyone else outside of Sony doing that? I was under the impression that LD's always used either NTSC or PAL masters that would not fall into what we today consider "high-definition" i.e. 1080 lines of resolution and that high definition mastering did not become the norm until 1998 or so. I can see LDs of new films in the 97-98 period coming from HD transfers but going all the way back to 1993 is a big surprise.

 

[Brandon Conway]

Originally Posted by Scott Calvert /t/325589/gypsy/60#post_4009949
I did not know that. Was anyone else outside of Sony doing that? I was under the impression that LD's always used either NTSC or PAL masters that would not fall into what we today consider "high-definition" i.e. 1080 lines of resolution and that high definition mastering did not become the norm until 1998 or so. I can see LDs of new films in the 97-98 period coming from HD transfers but going all the way back to 1993 is a big surprise.

1080 isn't the only HD. 720 is also HD, for example. I suspect the earlier ones were not 1080 HD but earlier, lower resolution HD.

 

[Scott Calvert]

1080 isn't the only HD. 720 is also HD, for example. I suspect the earlier ones were not 1080 HD but earlier, lower resolution HD.

Yes, "HD" is a bit of a semantics game. I've heard 720 referred to as both high definition and enhanced definition, for example.
One thing is for sure, a bluray disc coming from a master created for laserdisc would be a heinous thing.

 

[MatthewA]

One thing I am glad to see in this release is that the cut numbers are now in HD. Seamless branching would have been nice (at what point did they get cut?), but at least it's the upgrade from the non-anamorphic versions on the DVDs.

 

[haineshisway]

The numbers were cut long before the release of the film. And you couldn't put that quality into the actual transfer, it would be awful and jarring - they absolutely did the right thing including them as extras.

 

[rsmithjr]

The numbers were cut long before the release of the film. And you couldn't put that quality into the actual transfer, it would be awful and jarring - they absolutely did the right thing including them as extras.

But this is exactly what seamless branching is for. I can't see why it would do any harm for the user to have the option to have the cuts--as bad as they are--put into the movie stream. The screen that turns the option on could have a reminder that the quality is not up to the standard of the rest of the film.

 

[Jace_A]

Realistically, I think Streisand could still play Rose, provided it didn't get dragged out much further than two more years or so.  She looks 20 years younger than she is, and still has amazing pipes (or did last month at both shows I saw at the Bowl) if a bit rough around the edges.  

I love Babs, but she looks her age. Give the role to Catherine Zeta-Jones and leave the Babs version of "Rose" in the lost chances category. Even Ros Russell was way too old for the role (as Rose was only in her 30s during the majority of this story).

 

[Garysb]

I love Babs, but she looks her age. Give the role to Catherine Zeta-Jones and leave the Babs version of "Rose" in the lost chances category. Even Ros Russell was way too old for the role (as Rose was only in her 30s during the majority of this story).

You could say the same thing about Ethel Merman who was 51 when Gypsy opened on Broadway. Roz Russel was only six months older than Merman. I think Streisand could play it. I just hope she would play her as driven and determined and not try to make her loveable. The end of Rose's Turn when she finally admits she did what she did for herself has to be devastating . The film should not have a happy ending. Rose will now have to be taken care of by her children. The parent has become the child. That is a problem I have with the 1962 film. Rose's Turn in the film ends in triumph. It shouldn't. Rose is finished and her life as she knew it is over. There was a song cut from the show because Jack Klugman ( Herbie) did not want to sing. It is called , " Nice She Ain't" It starts off " Her manners charming but nice she ain't. Her smile's disarming but nice she ain't. It goes on to say every place she goes she has a million friends the lady has friends she ain't even used. It really is a great song that describes Rose.

 

[JohnMor]

Originally Posted by Jace_A /t/325589/gypsy/60#post_4010624
I love Babs, but she looks her age. Give the role to Catherine Zeta-Jones and leave the Babs version of "Rose" in the lost chances category. Even Ros Russell was way too old for the role (as Rose was only in her 30s during the majority of this story).

Well, if this is what 70 looks like, I shudder to think how old I look even though I'm 20 years younger...

7/14/2012



August 2012

 

[moviepas]

Was not Gypsy missing some 70mm footage/negative, footage that was in 70mm in the trailer still(or part thereof)?

 

[Joe Caps]

I am still trying to figure out what your question is
A. there would be no 70 mm footage in a 35mm trailer.
the film was not 70 mm or blowup. It was shot and presented in 35mm.

 

[bryan4999]

There is a great moment included in the trailer that was cut from the film: when Gypsy is performing at Minsky's, there is a quick shot of Karl Malden in the audience, with a loving look of admiration on his face. I love that moment and wish it had been left in the film. (And I wish the trailer was on the blu-ray.) EDIT: The trailer IS on the blu-ray, although if it is indeed hi-def, there are some compression issues (jagged edges for instance).

 

[Matt Hough]

Thank you for sharing that. I had never noticed it before, and it is a sweet final moment for Herbie.

 

[bryan4999]

Thank you for sharing that. I had never noticed it before, and it is a sweet final moment for Herbie.

Yes, a lovely bittersweet moment for Herbie, always gives me a lump in my throat, and one of the reasons I wish that the trailer had been included on the blu-ray in hi-def. EDIT: The trailer IS on the blu-ray, although if it is indeed hi-def, there are some compression issues (jagged edges for instance).

 

[GMpasqua]

There's a book which has a segment on "Gypsy" and the film. It's pretty interesting. Originally Rosalind Russel was going to do a film based on the book by Gypsy Rose Lee - it was not going to be a musical. Then WB bought the rights to the stage show - the writers didn't want to sell them at the time but WB said they would cast Judy Garland and the contracts provided they keep at least three songs (to be sung as performance pieces and over the opening credits) Warner had just finished filming the Broadway musical "Fanny" - but the musical score wasn't sung it was regulated to background music.

Russell still wanted to play Rose and Warner thought musicals might come back (West Side Story was getting good notices) Early in 1962 "Gypsy" began filming as a regular musical

At one point early in the opening of "Gypsy" on Braodway, Russell went backstage and said to Merman what a great role she had (of course Russell was after the role herself)

Don't know how true it is but somewhere I read the cut numbers were cut because preview audiences didn't like seeing Karl Madlen sing (although he's not bad and given little to sing)

 

[Brandon Conway]

Originally Posted by rsmithjr /t/325589/gypsy/60#post_4010541
But this is exactly what seamless branching is for. I can't see why it would do any harm for the user to have the option to have the cuts--as bad as they are--put into the movie stream. The screen that turns the option on could have a reminder that the quality is not up to the standard of the rest of the film.

They're not programming chapter selections via the menus for these BD MOD releases. Seamless branching is far from their minds.

 

[bryan4999]

In an above post, I stated that the trailer is not present on the blu-ray. I was mistaken. The trailer IS on the blu-ray, although if it is indeed hi-def, there are some compression issues (jagged edges for instance). I apologize for the misinformation.

 

[bryan4999]

A few things I noticed while watching this again in high-def.
At the end of "Some People", I have never been able to read the year on the calendar. I can now clearly see it is 1920.
At the end of "Ev'rything's Coming Up Roses", there are tears in Roz's eyes.
At the very end, as Rose and Louise exit, the door magically opens on its own.
And in the burlesque house, there is, what appears to be, a caricature of Ethel Merman! Although I had noticed the drawing before, it is only in high def that it struck me as resembling Merman. Could this be? And, if so, is it an ironic comment, an homage, or...?

 

[Matt Hough]

Originally Posted by bryan4999 /t/325589/gypsy/60#post_4010841
A few things I noticed while watching this again in high-def.
At the end of "Some People", I have never been able to read the year on the calendar. I can now clearly see it is 1920.
At the end of "Ev'rything's Coming Up Roses", there are tears in Roz's eyes.
At the very end, as Rose and Louise exit, the door magically opens on its own.
And in the burlesque house, there is, what appears to be, a caricature of Ethel Merman! Although I had noticed the drawing before, it is only in high def that it struck me as resembling Merman. Could this be? And, if so, is it an ironic comment, an homage, or...?

I had noticed that caricature of Merman long before I got the Blu-ray, but it's no accident that it's there. Whether it's to honor Merman or to make a dig at her, I have no idea.

 

[KPmusmag]

I had noticed that caricature of Merman long before I got the Blu-ray, but it's no accident that it's there. Whether it's to honor Merman or to make a dig at her, I have no idea.

Wow, that's really something! I will have to watch MY FAIR LADY again; perhaps there is a picture of Julie Andrews somewhere on the wall of Higgins's study!