More image on all 4 sides, but most important: the top and bottom.
[url=http://img223.exs.cx/img223/3158/benhur255correct4st.jpg]
[/url] In this picture, the shaded edges show what's cropped if Ben-Hur is shown at 2.55:1 instead of 2.76:1. It's not a big deal at all and it's probably better to gain that vertical resolution.
I know we'll have to wait and see for certain, but if this news turns out to be accurate, that long-awaited and grossly overdue KING KONG SE will be a joke, and a real anti-climactic disappointment. It makes me sick to hear so many Peter Jackson tie-in's announced as "extras," when the man's name shouldn't even be uttered when discussing the 1933 classic, no matter how much of a fan he is. There are plenty of potential extras regarding Ray Harryhausen, Forry Ackerman and other "Kong Historians". This smells as much as our having to endure Sommers' VAN HELSING junk while trying to enjoy the Classic Monsters LEGACY Collections from Universal. And to not include SON OF KONG (and possibly even MIGHTY JOE YOUNG) with the package would be a mistake. I can only imagine how many more years we'd have to wait to get them on their own.
Re: BEN-HUR (1959) -- the greatest film ever made requires no defending. But I will say that as much as I despise recent remakes, the '59 version was still done at a time where Hollywood had mega-talent and knew how to make great motion pictures. And for me, many silent films were always lacking something, even the best ones.
Speaking of which, I've never seen the 1925 BEN-HUR that was the warm-up to the official Wyler version, but if it's included in the new 4 Disc Edition, I may have to check it out. But it will depend on what the other extra features and/or restorations to the 1959 Oscar Winner will be before I decide whether or not to upgrade; the addition of the silent version will not do it for me.
re: THE WIZARD OF OZ -- if the film is restored and the Technicolor enhanced I'd upgrade. If the picture is the same as the current Warner version, I'll pass. The new extras don't sound like much of a big leap.
Warners will deliver the movie in stunning condition. They will blow our collective socks off with a restoration so good, it may damage my optic nerves watching it. That'll do...
Geez, I think some of you guys are a little worried for nothing. Peter Jackson seems like he is going to be a narrator/host for three featurettes and be the focus of one interview. One of those featurettes shows his props that he owns from the movie. The feaute length documentary (in other words, the biggest part of the bonus features) doesn't even mention him. I'm sure he'll be interviewed but so will many other people.
It's not like they are going to put Peter Jackson's face on the cover instead of Kong or have him talking about the movie instead of having the movie on the disc.
Not for me. Not when so many other gorgeous WB 2-disc SE's boast not only an outstanding restoration for the basic film, but also vintage extras to compliment the feature. I think KING KONG is just as worthy as some of their other classics.
You took these words right out of my mouth, John! This was going to be my next reply for any objections that might inevitably come in. As of this point, I'm reacting only to the report on this thread. So for now, I will bow out where it comes to criticizing the DVD release of KONG; let's see what we actually get first.
My great-great-great grandfather has been waiting for KONG on DVD so the movie will do.
It would be nice if some of the earlier versions of WIZARD could be included on the SE. I watched the 1910 version late last year and it was quite a treat to say the least. As for the 1925 BEN HUR, I'm sure many buying this release won't even know the Heston film was a remake.
The original mix of Ben Hur is great - too bad they didn't use it for the dvd. the dvd is a remix from scratch to bad effect. Most MGM music tracks from the time are mixed to three (in ben hurs case sux ) front tracks. Extra mikes were on separate film at the rear of thehall to give it depth and these were mixed into the main music tracks and NOT intended as separate surrounds. It sounds as if most music tracks sved from the fifties are themain msic tracks without the depth tracksmixed in. this is so with Ben Hu. the only alternate way to get depth is adding digitalreverb wihich is not the same as having the sound of the original mgm scoring stage. now everything on the dvd sounds pum,ped up close and with exagerated bass ( tell someone something has more bass and theyassume its better.) there are mistakes in the remix. In the theater, the appearance of the star of bethlehem was thrilling because of the music. The music starts with two notes in the strings and the chorus enters on the third note. In the dvd remix they mistakenly enter on the fourth note because they have been faded in late. if you don't believe me , chaeck out the dvd. the english track is the remix but some of the foreign tracks seems to be th e1959 original. listen to th emistakes in the star of Bethlehem in the English track, then go back and listen to the french track - there the music is correct and one can also hear the ambience of the mgm scoring stage which is mixing in the remix.
Add me to the list of people who want to see silent film versions of The Wizard of Oz added to the SE since I didn't even know they existed! Oz could easily be a 4-discer.
All previous Oz outings, except for the 1933 Ted Esbaugh cartoon, were silents.
Personally, I'd like to see the 1925 version (notable mostly for having Oliver Hardy and Larry Semon), a few of the silent short films, and the complete 1933 cartoon (restored, perhaps? The current DVD's print is horrible).
Oz could easily be a 3-disc edition if the prior versions were included. Disc 1: movie; Disc 2: extras; Disc 3: Extra versions. Heck, a 4-disc edition could be possible if they included the soundtrack CD.
I apologize for my disappearance just when the questions began popping up. With regard to the King Kong release, the survey mentioned it was indeed the 1933 film. The survey also mentioned the special editions of Rebel Without a Cause and East of Eden that have already been mentioned by other sites like Mr. Hunt's The Digital Bits.
I've seen the 1925 Oz and it is enjoyable in its own right. I also caught the surviving portions of the 1910 version (parts are missing) on TCM. Both are fascinating in their own right and probably much more faithful to the book that the 1939 ever was. After all, L. Frank Baum didn't have Dorothy break out into song every chapter.
Add me to the list of people who have no doubt that the Kong release will be spectacular. To criticize what is or is not included on a release that hasn't even been confirmed by the studio yet will only lead to misinformation being spread throughout the internet.
Name me one film historian who knows more about the original King Kong then Peter Jackson. In fact I do not believe there is another individual living today that knows more about the making of this film than PJ.
He has publicly shared his passion for the original King Kong film years before he ever made LOTR. His obsession with that film has gone far beyond just fanaticism. This is after all the same man who owns over a million dollars worth of memorabilia from the original film and who’s efforts helped Warner restore this amazing film. I can not possibly imagine who else would come close to being as qualified as PJ is to discuss this film.
I am just thankful that PJ is being gracious enough to share his knowledge about this film and that his relationship with New Line and Warner allowed for such a fantastic collaboration.
I just hope PJ will do a commentary track for this release as well.
I don't believe that "King Kong" needs the help of Jackson's remake to sell copies. IMHO it can stand on its own very well. Hence I'd like WB to release it ASAP. I sure hope there are better extras than what has been speculated on recently, otherwise I'll be disappointed. But I'll buy it regardless of how it is configured on DVD.