Jump to content



Sign up for a free account to remove the pop-up ads

Signing up for an account is fast and free. As a member you can join in the conversation, enter contests and remove the pop-up ads that guests get. Click here to create your free account.


Photo
* * * * * 2 votes

One Eyed Jacks on Blu-ray

Universal

  • You cannot start a new topic
  • Please log in to reply
98 replies to this topic

#81 of 99 OFFLINE   rsmithjr

rsmithjr

    Supporting Actor



  • 943 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 22 2011
  • Real Name:Robert Smith
  • LocationPalo Alto, CA

Posted July 20 2015 - 10:23 AM

The clipping from One Eyed Jacks was from Boxoffice Magazine I think.   I looks like their style.

 

In practice, technical information about a film had to be taken with a grain of salt, just as must be today. 

 

I have seen VVLA titles run at 2:1 (generally in theatres that ran Cinemascope at the same AR!) but I cannot imagine doing it myself.  

 

The houses I worked at (indie mostly) back in the day generally had the attitude that we were responsible for what we put on the screen (and the sound) and made our own choices about these matters.  We were fastidious about quality and consulted industry pubs and studio stuff but, hey, plenty of room for individual choices.   Some of my favorite films were photographed in VVLA.



#82 of 99 OFFLINE   PaulaJ

PaulaJ

    Supporting Actor



  • 594 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 09 2000

Posted July 20 2015 - 06:20 PM

Apologies, I should have included the information that the clipping was from Box Office magazine, as rsmithjr indeed guessed correctly.
PaulaJ

#83 of 99 OFFLINE   OliverK

OliverK

    Screenwriter



  • 2,004 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 01 2000

Posted July 20 2015 - 08:20 PM

The recommendation of 1.85:1 for VistaVision was on the early titles. At some point in the mid-50's, the recommendation was changed to 2:1.

 

WHITE CHRISTMAS premiered at Radio City Music Hall in 1.97:1.

 

Here's the framing guide seen on-screen in the upper right at each reel change.

 

attachicon.gifVistavisionframing.gif

 

So it should be assumed that by that time cinematographers would be aware and protecting for a 2:1 aspect ratio.



#84 of 99 OFFLINE   Robert Harris

Robert Harris

    Archivist



  • 8,257 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 08 1999
  • Real Name:Robert Harris

Posted July 20 2015 - 10:46 PM

The recommendation of 1.85:1 for VistaVision was on the early titles. At some point in the mid-50's, the recommendation was changed to 2:1.
 
WHITE CHRISTMAS premiered at Radio City Music Hall in 1.97:1.
 
Here's the framing guide seen on-screen in the upper right at each reel change.
 
attachicon.gifVistavisionframing.gif


Question is, did Christmas run in 35/8 or 35/4? If 8, an extraction was possible.

"All men dream: but not equally. Those who dream by night in the dusty recesses of their minds wake in the day to find that it was vanity: but the dreamers of the day are dangerous men, for they may act their dreams with open eyes, to make it possible. This I did." T.E. Lawrence


#85 of 99 OFFLINE   Robert Harris

Robert Harris

    Archivist



  • 8,257 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 08 1999
  • Real Name:Robert Harris

Posted July 20 2015 - 10:54 PM

So it should be assumed that by that time cinematographers would be aware and protecting for a 2:1 aspect ratio.

No. There was nothing to protect. 2:1 was a massive crop.

Please keep in mind what VVLA was, and wasn't.

It was a superb taking mechanism, that had the capability, in ether 8 or 4 perf, of yielding a superior, velvety image, unless over-cropped and over-magnified in 35/4.

It was also a Paramount system, that was not welcomed by the rest of the industry, which used anamorphic 35mm, as well as 55 and 65 for widescreen quality.

VVLA was a failed attempt to be a Swiss Army knife. A one size fits all affair, which never worked.

It was far more sizzle than reality.

RAH

"All men dream: but not equally. Those who dream by night in the dusty recesses of their minds wake in the day to find that it was vanity: but the dreamers of the day are dangerous men, for they may act their dreams with open eyes, to make it possible. This I did." T.E. Lawrence


#86 of 99 OFFLINE   Bob Furmanek

Bob Furmanek

    Producer



  • 4,281 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 10 2001

Posted July 20 2015 - 10:54 PM

35/8 at RCMH.


Bob Furmanek

www.3dfilmarchive.com


 


#87 of 99 OFFLINE   Robert Harris

Robert Harris

    Archivist



  • 8,257 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 08 1999
  • Real Name:Robert Harris

Posted July 20 2015 - 11:21 PM

35/8 at RCMH.


That's what I presumed. I remember seeing N x NW at the Hall and marveling at the quality. Never absolutely certain of the format.

The only titles of which I'm aware, that definitely ran 35/8, were White and Strategic, which as I recall, was the first V production, but second to hit theaters.

Have you found definite data as to others?

"All men dream: but not equally. Those who dream by night in the dusty recesses of their minds wake in the day to find that it was vanity: but the dreamers of the day are dangerous men, for they may act their dreams with open eyes, to make it possible. This I did." T.E. Lawrence


#88 of 99 OFFLINE   OliverK

OliverK

    Screenwriter



  • 2,004 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 01 2000

Posted July 21 2015 - 12:26 AM

No. There was nothing to protect. 2:1 was a massive crop.

Please keep in mind what VVLA was, and wasn't.

It was a superb taking mechanism, that had the capability, in ether 8 or 4 perf, of yielding a superior, velvety image, unless over-cropped and over-magnified in 35/4.

It was also a Paramount system, that was not welcomed by the rest of the industry, which used anamorphic 35mm, as well as 55 and 65 for widescreen quality.

VVLA was a failed attempt to be a Swiss Army knife. A one size fits all affair, which never worked.

It was far more sizzle than reality.

RAH

 

Of course it was a massive crop but if cinemas were really supposed to show these movies in 2:1 I would think that the cinematographer was made aware of that. But then Paramount saying that things should be projected a certain way is one thing, what cinemas actually did was probably a much different thing.

 

My personal opinion is that it is a shame to throw away so much of the negative real estate so it was a good thing that Technirama and Super Technirama 70 were introduced and actually a shame that use wasn't more widespread compared to VistaVision.



#89 of 99 OFFLINE   Robert Harris

Robert Harris

    Archivist



  • 8,257 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 08 1999
  • Real Name:Robert Harris

Posted July 21 2015 - 04:18 AM

Of course it was a massive crop but if cinemas were really supposed to show these movies in 2:1 I would think that the cinematographer was made aware of that. But then Paramount saying that things should be projected a certain way is one thing, what cinemas actually did was probably a much different thing.

My personal opinion is that it is a shame to throw away so much of the negative real estate so it was a good thing that Technirama and Super Technirama 70 were introduced and actually a shame that use wasn't more widespread compared to VistaVision.

Vista was a great process for 1.66 - 1.85.

"All men dream: but not equally. Those who dream by night in the dusty recesses of their minds wake in the day to find that it was vanity: but the dreamers of the day are dangerous men, for they may act their dreams with open eyes, to make it possible. This I did." T.E. Lawrence


#90 of 99 OFFLINE   Dr Griffin

Dr Griffin

    Screenwriter



  • 1,442 posts
  • Join Date: May 30 2012
  • Real Name:Stanley
  • LocationThe wilds of Pennsylvania

Posted July 21 2015 - 06:12 AM

There's been a lot of arguing over aspect ratios in the Blu-ray era. With Vista Vision, it sounds like there's a sweet spot at 1.85. So getting back to One-Eyed Jacks, should we see this on home video at 1.85?



#91 of 99 OFFLINE   Reggie W

Reggie W

    Screenwriter



  • 1,443 posts
  • Join Date: May 31 2004
  • Real Name:Gregory Arkadin
  • LocationPallookaville, USA

Posted July 21 2015 - 06:14 AM

Personally, and I'm no expert...I think it should be 1.85 for the blu-ray. 



#92 of 99 OFFLINE   Peter Apruzzese

Peter Apruzzese

    Screenwriter



  • 2,899 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 20 1999
  • Real Name:Peter Apruzzese

Posted July 21 2015 - 06:17 AM

I saw a 35mm IB Technicolor print of Jacks in a private screening a few months ago, it was run approx. 1.85 and looked fine to my eyes. Hard to say if 2:1 would look better since we didn't try it.


Read the blog (please): www.bigscreenclassics.com


#93 of 99 OFFLINE   Bob Furmanek

Bob Furmanek

    Producer



  • 4,281 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 10 2001

Posted July 21 2015 - 08:24 AM

That's what I presumed. I remember seeing N x NW at the Hall and marveling at the quality. Never absolutely certain of the format.

The only titles of which I'm aware, that definitely ran 35/8, were White and Strategic, which as I recall, was the first V production, but second to hit theaters.

Have you found definite data as to others?

 

No, WC was first. It began filming on September 21, 1953 and SAC began late March, 1954.

 

No definite data on others exhibited 35/8.


Bob Furmanek

www.3dfilmarchive.com


 


#94 of 99 OFFLINE   ahollis

ahollis

    Producer



  • 6,135 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 01 2007
  • Real Name:Allen
  • LocationNew Orleans

Posted July 21 2015 - 11:18 AM

No, WC was first. It began filming on September 21, 1953 and SAC began late March, 1954.

No definite data on others exhibited 35/8.


I have been told by people that knew that SAC played 35/8 at the Saenger Theatre in New Orleans. That was the only time 35/8 was used at the theatre.
"Get a director and a writer and leave them alone. That`s how the best pictures get made" - William "Wild Bill" Wellman


#95 of 99 OFFLINE   marsnkc

marsnkc

    Supporting Actor



  • 510 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 22 2006
  • Real Name:Andrew

Posted July 21 2015 - 11:56 AM

A few stills from that version here: http://www.altadefin...netrable-layons

 

And the translated comment, "The visual quality of this Blu-ray is terrible, with a look of VHS video showing a discolored picture, no sharpness, no contrast and with a halo around the edges. In addition, the sharpness is absent in the whole film".

 

No change there then!

 

The Spanish reviewer in Douglas's link cites the AR as 1.77:1. I gave away the Entertainment One BD in 2011 after suffering through 20 minutes of it, but assuming it was 1.85, it would be interesting to compare the purported 1.77 captures (if native and not resized for the page) with it.

 

I was hoping to take a photo of the laserdisc image on my TV for the experts here to compare, since 1.75 appears to be a compromise between 1.66 and 1.85. My player, after years of neglect, has given up the ghost, repeatedly rejecting the disc with a grinding sound reminiscent of the Titanic's engine getting under way.

 

Peter Bogdanovich wrote an indewire article in 2010. Apparently the line I earlier ascribed to Brando, "Get up, you scum-sucking pig" was written by Calder Willingham, as well as the marvelous, "He didn't give me no selection"........ :P (I met Ben Johnson ca. 1976 at my doctor's office, of all places. Just the two of us in a tiny reception area. A decade later he was one of the celebrities at a rodeo in Burbank. Extraordinary to see a man of his age going at full gallop with both hands twirling the rope).

 

(Unbelievably, people on Amazon are trying to flog the Entertainment One travesty starting at $119.81. Back in 2011, I quoted from the 'Editorial review' on the Amazon page on another thread here:

'Pain-staking, re-mastering and re-colorized. Enhanced digital sound. A true western drama masterpiece made even better'. I pointed out that 'Pain-staking' is what you do to Dracula. This joke should have suffered a similar fate).



#96 of 99 ONLINE   Billy Batson

Billy Batson

    Screenwriter



  • 1,827 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 19 2008
  • Real Name:Alan
  • LocationLondon

Posted July 21 2015 - 01:50 PM

With 1:66 there's black lines left & right, 2:1 black lines top & bottom. I'd really prefer the no black lines option.

#97 of 99 OFFLINE   OliverK

OliverK

    Screenwriter



  • 2,004 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 01 2000

Posted July 21 2015 - 07:44 PM

Vista was a great process for 1.66 - 1.85.

 

That's about as wide as I would have gone.

 

As a curiosity some years ago I saw the Japanese production The Great Wall and it was shown in a standard 70mm using the full width of the frame, therefore taking cropping of the VistaVision frame to the extreme. I have to say that it looked quite good and better than standard 35mm BlowUps, still a strange choice.



#98 of 99 OFFLINE   marsnkc

marsnkc

    Supporting Actor



  • 510 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 22 2006
  • Real Name:Andrew

Posted July 28 2015 - 12:14 PM

One Eyed Jacks Best 1.JPG One Eyed Jacks Best 1.JPG

 

Brando's first aid kit for Rio, sitting on the hat that covered the pate on rides through iconic western locations Monument Valley and Lone Pine.



#99 of 99 OFFLINE   marsnkc

marsnkc

    Supporting Actor



  • 510 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 22 2006
  • Real Name:Andrew

Posted July 28 2015 - 12:19 PM

Sorry, hit the attachment button twice.







0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users