What's new

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

benbess

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Sep 8, 2009
Messages
5,650
Real Name
Ben
Originally Posted by Douglas Monce





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
Ah yes, it all makes sense now. Thanks, Douglas. It's almost like those keys in the film!


I just finished the second half. I forgot how much I love this film. It's going to make terrific blu-ray.
 

ShowsOn

Second Unit
Joined
Mar 21, 2011
Messages
253
Real Name
Simon Howson
The UK and Australian versions of Dial M for Murder are 1.85:1 - http://www.dvdbeaver.com/film/DVDCompare7/dialmformurder.htm

I'm pretty sure the Australian Region 4 DVD of Dial M for Murder is 16:9. Other than the cropping, it looks like the same as the R1 transfer. It is very confusing that they would release the same film in two totally different ratios. I have seen Dial M for Murder projected in 3D, and I am certain it was presented in 4:3. After all, that clip from the magazine says the "maximum" aspect ratio that a film could be shown in. It doesn't mean that the flat films couldn't be projected in 4:3. After all, there were some films that had to be 4:3, like The Bandwagon that were incorrectly projected in 1.66:1, just so they could be marketed as widescreen, even though that was never the intention of the filmmakers.
 

Douglas Monce

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Nov 16, 2006
Messages
5,511
Real Name
Douglas Monce
Originally Posted by ShowsOn

The UK and Australian versions of Dial M for Murder are 1.85:1 - http://www.dvdbeaver.com/film/DVDCompare7/dialmformurder.htm

I'm pretty sure the Australian Region 4 DVD of Dial M for Murder is 16:9. Other than the cropping, it looks like the same as the R1 transfer. It is very confusing that they would release the same film in two totally different ratios. I have seen Dial M for Murder projected in 3D, and I am certain it was presented in 4:3. After all, that clip from the magazine says the "maximum" aspect ratio that a film could be shown in. It doesn't mean that the flat films couldn't be projected in 4:3. After all, there were some films that had to be 4:3, like The Bandwagon that were incorrectly projected in 1.66:1, just so they could be marketed as widescreen, even though that was never the intention of the filmmakers.

Just for giggles I zoomed in on Netflix feed it to 16:9. Its VERY tight with lots of cut off heads. I can see it being cropped at 1.66:1, but 1.85:1 would be way too tight if you didn't lower the top line. I don't know if thats something they would have done in projection in those days.


Doug
 

Douglas R

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2000
Messages
2,947
Location
London, United Kingdom
Real Name
Doug
Originally Posted by Douglas Monce




Just for giggles I zoomed in on Netflix feed it to 16:9. Its VERY tight with lots of cut off heads. I can see it being cropped at 1.66:1, but 1.85:1 would be way too tight if you didn't lower the top line. I don't know if thats something they would have done in projection in those days.


Doug


There have been discussions on various websites about this which have concluded that the correct projection aspect ratio is 1.85:1. I believe someone once copied and posted technical information stating that.
 

Douglas Monce

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Nov 16, 2006
Messages
5,511
Real Name
Douglas Monce
Originally Posted by Douglas R





There have been discussions on various websites about this which have concluded that the correct projection aspect ratio is 1.85:1. I believe someone once copied and posted technical information stating that.


Yeah I've also seen information saying that there was more than one aspect ratio, 1.66:1 for 3D and 1.85:1 for flat. Frankly I'm not convinced. Again to me 1.85:1 looks VERY tight. The screen shots on DVD Beaver of the 1:85 version clearly show that the extraction area is shifted up from center. Of course its possible, but I find it highly unlikely that they would have shot it with the intention of the frame being shifted down in projection like that. You would end up with a lot of cut off heads from lazy projectionists. Also Rear Window, photographed less than a year later by the same DP wasn't shot that way.


If any cropping was intended at all it seems to me that 1.66:1 would have been the most you could get away with based on the framing that I can see. I'm going to say no on the 1.85:1, possible but unlikely on 1.66:1.


Doug
 

ShowsOn

Second Unit
Joined
Mar 21, 2011
Messages
253
Real Name
Simon Howson
Itt seems that Warner should just split the difference and release it in 1.66:1 I certainly hope they have a 3D Blu-ray of this film in the works, and I think the 3D version may work better in 1.66: or 16:9 rather than 4:3.
 

Mark B

Screenwriter
Joined
Sep 27, 2003
Messages
1,070
Location
Saranac Lake, NY
Real Name
Mark
The source for the Netflix stream and the current DVD of DIAL M have been zoomed on all for sides. Check the Beaver for comparison caps.
 

benbess

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Sep 8, 2009
Messages
5,650
Real Name
Ben
Originally Posted by Mark B

The source for the Netflix stream and the current DVD of DIAL M have been zoomed on all for sides. Check the Beaver for comparison caps.

Interesting. Is that 1.66 to 1???
 

benbess

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Sep 8, 2009
Messages
5,650
Real Name
Ben
deleted by Ben because it belongs in another thread....It's a post about Paramount's Romeo and Juliet....
 

Douglas Monce

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Nov 16, 2006
Messages
5,511
Real Name
Douglas Monce
Originally Posted by Mark B

The source for the Netflix stream and the current DVD of DIAL M have been zoomed on all for sides. Check the Beaver for comparison caps.


The netflix stream doesn't seem to be the same source as the DVD. In the second shot on DVD beaver, the lamp on the lower right hand side of the frame is cut off in the middle. The full lamp is visible in the netflix stream.


Of course this presents an interesting problem for those measuring every inch of the frame to see if something has been cut off. Some players tend to crop the sides of 4x3 material on a 16x9 TV, where others don't. I first noticed this when the last Star Trek TOS (before the new effects remaster) came out. My Samsung player cropped the sides a little, where the Toshiba didn't. It wasn't a zoom in, it was simply that the Samsung's side bars were pushed in slightly more than the Toshiba's and was cutting off some of the picture. I don't know if this is whats going on with the DVD beaver shots or not.


Doug
 

benbess

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Sep 8, 2009
Messages
5,650
Real Name
Ben
I am right now watching another Hitchcock film from Warner--I Confess, starring Montgomery Clift, Anne Baxter, and Karl Malden. When I last tried to watch this one many years ago I was only lukewarm about it. But right now I think this one is a worthy if lesser Hitchcock, and worth releasing on blu.
 

Matt Hough

Reviewer
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Apr 24, 2006
Messages
26,150
Location
Charlotte, NC
Real Name
Matt Hough
While many folks don't think much of Hitch's Warners films I Confess or Stage Fright, I'm fans of both of them. However, I think Warners will give us a Blu of Dial 'M' for Murder and/or Strangers on a Train before we get either of those other films on Blu (or The Wrong Man for that matter, another excellent drama).
 

Vern Dias

Second Unit
Joined
Apr 27, 1999
Messages
353
Real Name
Theodore V Dias
The wild card in the AR game is the original transfer from film to video.

The problem with the first DVD of "Kiss Me Kate" was that the telecine operator zoomed the image so much that a good 20 to 25 percent of the image on the film element was lost. The same issue was present in "Ben Hur". DVD transfer.


In fact, I actually had to post screen shots from the LD and the DVD of "Kiss Me Kate" before WB finally acknowledged the error and released a corrected version.


Here are a couple of links that graphically show the issue:


http://www.widescreenmuseum.com/widescreen/lbx.htm

http://www.widescreenmuseum.com/widescreen/lbx2.htm



Vern
 

AnthonyP

Stunt Coordinator
Joined
Jul 11, 2003
Messages
145
A plethora to choose from but one that comes immediately to mind for me is Seven Days in May.
 

benbess

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Sep 8, 2009
Messages
5,650
Real Name
Ben
Originally Posted by AnthonyP

A plethora to choose from but one that comes immediately to mind for me is Seven Days in May.


Can you remind me about that one. I don't know if I've ever seen it. Is it a political movie about a military take over or something?? Who is in it?


And as I mentioned on another thread, I'm not watching GIANT in a new HD transfer that's popped up on netflix. Looks better than I've ever seen it before. Quite a cast.
 

benbess

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Sep 8, 2009
Messages
5,650
Real Name
Ben
Originally Posted by MattH.

While many folks don't think much of Hitch's Warners films I Confess or Stage Fright, I'm fans of both of them. However, I think Warners will give us a Blu of Dial 'M' for Murder and/or Strangers on a Train before we get either of those other films on Blu (or The Wrong Man for that matter, another excellent drama).


The Wrong Man does have it power, I agree MattH. It's a combination of realism, Kafka, and Hitchcock. It's not for all tastes, but everytime I read some article about someone who has been put away for quite a while, and later turned out to be innocent, I think of this film.
 

AnthonyP

Stunt Coordinator
Joined
Jul 11, 2003
Messages
145
Originally Posted by benbess

Can you remind me about that one. I don't know if I've ever seen it. Is it a political movie about a military take over or something?? Who is in it?

That is the one.


Directed by John Frankenheimer, Rod Serling script (based on the book) and starring Burt Lancaster, Kirk Douglas, Fredric March, Ava Gardner, Edmond O'Brien and Martin Balsam.


http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0058576/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seven_Days_in_May
 

benbess

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Sep 8, 2009
Messages
5,650
Real Name
Ben
Originally Posted by AnthonyP




That is the one.


Directed by John Frankenheimer, Rod Serling script (based on the book) and starring Burt Lancaster, Kirk Douglas, Fredric March, Ava Gardner, Edmond O'Brien and Martin Balsam.


http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0058576/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seven_Days_in_May

I have not seen that one, but I've heard about it for decades. What a cast! Plus Frankenheimer and Serling. Wow.
 

Robert Crawford

Crawdaddy
Moderator
Patron
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Dec 9, 1998
Messages
67,598
Location
Michigan
Real Name
Robert
Seven Days in May is a great film that's been underrated for many years. Frankenheimer has been a favorite director of mine forever. The scenes between Lancaster and Douglas are quite good especially those near the end of the film. I think Giant is playing on HD Net Movies this month or next.








Crawdaddy
 

RobertR

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Dec 19, 1998
Messages
10,675
"Are you sufficiently up on your Bible to know who Judas was?"


"He was a man I respected and admired--until he disgraced the four stars on his uniform".


Great stuff.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Latest Articles

Forum statistics

Threads
356,808
Messages
5,123,533
Members
144,184
Latest member
H-508
Recent bookmarks
0
Top