Recommend a classic pre-1970 for Warner to release on blu (1 Viewer)

[Eerik]

These are not quite pre-70s, but...


Ernest Lubitsch's The Merry Widow (1934)


Orson Welles' The Magnificent Ambersons (1942)


Antonioni's Blow-up (1966) and Zabriskie Point (1970)


Nicholas Roeg's Performance (1970)


Ken Russel's The Devils (1971)


Terrence Malick's Badlands (1973)


Akira Kurosawa's Dreams (1990)



Or they could just start licensing to Criterion.

 

[David Coleman]

East Of Eden and Dial M For Murder. Sent from my HTC Glacier using Tapatalk

 

[Douglas Monce]

Originally Posted by David Coleman

East Of Eden and Dial M For Murder.

Sent from my HTC Glacier using Tapatalk

Dial M for Murder just showed up on Netflix streaming in HD.


Doug

 

[benbess]

Originally Posted by Douglas Monce





Dial M for Murder just showed up on Netflix streaming in HD.


Doug

Thanks for the heads up! ++++


I've started watching it. And I know it's not a blu-ray, and I know it's not in 3D, but short of that it's pretty good. Hitchcock and Grace Kelly in hd are more than that, of course...This is a classic film. It's an adapted play, and so it's stagey and talky and puzzle-like, but if you're ok with that I think it's excellent. Love the detective with his mustache comb!


The fact that they've prepared an HD master makes me think that the blu-ray may not be that far behind. But I could be wrong about that....

 

[Matt Hough]

Originally Posted by Douglas Monce





Dial M for Murder just showed up on Netflix streaming in HD.


Doug

What aspect ratio are they using?

 

[benbess]

Originally Posted by MattH.




What aspect ratio are they using?

4:3

 

[Matt Hough]

Originally Posted by benbess




4:3

[sigh] Once again, they get it wrong. Look at this which was posted here a couple of years ago:

 

[benbess]

I guess I'm a little confused. Dial M is a 4:3 film, isn't it?

 

[Matt Hough]

One of our experts on aspect ratios probably knows the definitive answer, but I'm guessing that during the couple of years of transition between Academy ratio and the widescreen ratios, many films were shot open matte with these instructions for projectionists about framing them for wider screens. Kiss Me Kate is another one that was issued on 1.33:1 on most discs for home video but was once issued in a 1.75:1 letterboxed edition on laserdisc.

 

[Scott Calvert]

Originally Posted by MattH.

One of our experts on aspect ratios probably knows the definitive answer, but I'm guessing that during the couple of years of transition between Academy ratio and the widescreen ratios, many films were shot open matte with these instructions for projectionists about framing them for wider screens. Kiss Me Kate is another one that was issued on 1.33:1 on most discs for home video but was once issued in a 1.75:1 letterboxed edition on laserdisc.

Not just during the few years of transition, and not just many. The vast majority of 35mm films shot with spherical lenses are photographed for matting in projection. I'm talking about actual film projection. I dunno how digital works.

 

[GMpasqua]

Originally Posted by MattH.

One of our experts on aspect ratios probably knows the definitive answer, but I'm guessing that during the couple of years of transition between Academy ratio and the widescreen ratios, many films were shot open matte with these instructions for projectionists about framing them for wider screens. Kiss Me Kate is another one that was issued on 1.33:1 on most discs for home video but was once issued in a 1.75:1 letterboxed edition on laserdisc.

"Kiss Me Kate" had other problems - since it was shot in 3D. The 3D camera had two negatives (prints) One had more information of the left side, the other had more information on the right side (and the met in the middle) The original DVD only used the print with more information on the right side and so characters on the left were cut off. WB later corrected the problem. Not sure what was done for the flat version or if the movie was filmed twice (3D and Flat - the flat version may have been filmed with a wider OAR) The second laserdisc release was letterboxed (and may have been cropped on the top and bottom) but the DVD was not


Since 3D could only accomadate 1 hour projection (break was needed - though I do not remember why) the film was divided into to parts with the intermission coming right after "I Hate Men" and not where it did in the stage show.


"Brigadoon" and "Seven Brides For Seven Brothers" were shot twice (1954) - once in the standard (not sure which OAR) and once in Cinemascope 2:35:1

Vista Vision films could be projected and matted anywhere from 1:33 to 2:0 (the VHS of "Li'l Abner" has so much empty information on the top and bottom, the DVD is matted for a widescreen. This was common in the late 50's since many theaters did not yet have widescreens installed

 

[Joe Caps]

By mid 1954, most theaters had installed widescreens (scope) they had to to compete.


Mgm, I am told double shot ALL of thier scope films right up to Jupiters Darling. - and thats released in 1955.


Fox never sdouble shot anything except for the Robe.

 

[Brianruns10]

God, this is so abusing the original spirit of the tread, but one of my most wanted blu-s is of "Ryan's Daughter" which was released by MGM in 1970 but is now under Warner's purview.


Apart from that, I'd love for some classic, vitaphone films to hit blu-ray, especially their two Technicolor horror films, "Doctor X" and "The Mystery of the Wax Museum"

 

[benbess]

Originally Posted by Brianruns10

God, this is so abusing the original spirit of the tread, but one of my most wanted blu-s is of "Ryan's Daughter" which was released by MGM in 1970 but is now under Warner's purview.


Apart from that, I'd love for some classic, vitaphone films to hit blu-ray, especially their two Technicolor horror films, "Doctor X" and "The Mystery of the Wax Museum"

Oh, 1970 is close enough. And I so agree on Ryan's daughter, which might actually look better than any other film Lean made. I mean the only other one shot on 70mm was Lawrence, right? And we know that one was practically cut to ribbons and some of the ocn is lost. So, Ryan's Daughter might end up being Lean's prettiest daughter...

 

[Douglas Monce]

Originally Posted by benbess

I guess I'm a little confused. Dial M is a 4:3 film, isn't it?

Robert Harris may know more about this than I, but from what I've been able to tell, Rear Window was Hitchcock's first widescreen film. His next film was To Catch a Thief in VistaVision as were his next 5 films (with the exception of The Wrong Man) .


Dial M for Murder actually began shooting in August of 1953, about 4 months before The Robe was released and changed everything. I think its likely that it was intended as a 1.33:1 3D film.


Doug

 

[Douglas Monce]

By the way I must say that Dial M looks FANTASTIC on netflix. A beautiful transfer and seems to have gone through some clean up with out eliminating the grain. I do hope that a blu-ray is in the works.


Doug

 

[benbess]

Originally Posted by Douglas Monce

By the way I must say that Dial M looks FANTASTIC on netflix. A beautiful transfer and seems to have gone through some clean up with out eliminating the grain. I do hope that a blu-ray is in the works.


Doug

I pretty much agree, although I haven't finished it yet. So far there were a few medium shots that seemed slightly blurry or double image-ish to me, but maybe it was my eyes or that the streaming slowed down. For the most part it looked clearer than I've ever seen it before, esp in the close ups. Since it is like a stage play, it's kind of like you're front row center for that play--and once in a while get a glimpse into Grace Kelly's eyes!

 

[Douglas Monce]

Originally Posted by benbess




I pretty much agree, although I haven't finished it yet. So far there were a few medium shots that seemed slightly blurry or double image-ish to me, but maybe it was my eyes or that the streaming slowed down. For the most part it looked clearer than I've ever seen it before, esp in the close ups. Since it is like a stage play, it's kind of like you're front row center for that play--and once in a while get a glimpse into Grace Kelly's eyes!

I noticed that too in the first wide shot of Grace Kelly. My guess is it has something to do with the film elements. There are one or two shots that are wonky like that in It Came From Outer Space also. I wonder if it had something to do with the 3D process?


Yes exactly. Like sitting in a seat on the stage with the actors right in front of you.


Another interesting note is that it includes the intermission. Now obviously the intermission was required for the 3D version of the film, but seeing as it was only shown in 3D in a few theaters, did the flat version also have the intermission?


Doug

 

[benbess]

Yes, the intermission was a shock to me! I don't think I've ever had that for this movie before. Guess it shows they really went back to the original elements. It is perfectly placed, however, even though the film is not of a length to warrant it. Why did 3D at that time need an intermission??

 

[Douglas Monce]

Originally Posted by benbess

Yes, the intermission was a shock to me! I don't think I've ever had that for this movie before. Guess it shows they really went back to the original elements. It is perfectly placed, however, even though the film is not of a length to warrant it. Why did 3D at that time need an intermission??

Because both projectors were being used at the same time, one for each eye, so no switch over was possible. About the longest they could get on a standard reel (no platters in those days) was around 50 to 55 min. That was about the limit of a carbon arc as well. Hence the intermission for a movie that is a little over 90 min.


Doug