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
- - - - -

Olive announced first titles from the Republic catalog: "High Noon" and the original "Invasion of the Body Snatchers"


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

#61 of 77 OFFLINE   Bob Furmanek

Bob Furmanek

    Producer



  • 3,667 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 10 2001

Posted April 28 2012 - 04:15 PM

This is going in circles but once again, Siegel would have composed for the Allied Artists house ratio of 1.85:1.

Bob Furmanek

www.3dfilmarchive.com


Bubbleweb_edited-1_zpsc986b444.jpg


#62 of 77 OFFLINE   Mark-P

Mark-P

    Screenwriter



  • 2,368 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 26 2005
  • Real Name:Mark Probst
  • LocationCamas, WA

Posted April 28 2012 - 04:46 PM

I think the point everyone is alluding to is that since the original negative is presumed to be lost, so may be the original composition unless someone can turn up a non-Superscope print (were any even struck?)

This is going in circles but once again, Siegel would have composed for the Allied Artists house ratio of 1.85:1.



#63 of 77 OFFLINE   Bob Furmanek

Bob Furmanek

    Producer



  • 3,667 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 10 2001

Posted April 28 2012 - 06:17 PM

I think the point everyone is alluding to is that since the original negative is presumed to be lost, so may be the original composition unless someone can turn up a non-Superscope print (were any even struck?)

See the last paragraph of post #52...

Bob Furmanek

www.3dfilmarchive.com


Bubbleweb_edited-1_zpsc986b444.jpg


#64 of 77 OFFLINE   Brandon Conway

Brandon Conway

    captveg



  • 7,305 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 30 2002
  • Real Name:Brandon Conway
  • LocationNorth Hollywood, CA

Posted June 19 2012 - 12:53 PM

Blu-ray.com review for Invasion of the Body Snatchers (1956). A great indicator of things to come!


"And now the reprimand, from an American critic. He reproaches me for using film as a sacred & lasting medium, like a painting or a book. He does not believe that filmmaking is an inferior art, but he believes, and quite rightly, that a reel goes quickly, that the public are looking above all for relaxation, that film is fragile and that it is pretentious to express the power of one's soul by such ephemeral and delicate means, that Charlie Chaplin's or Buster Keaton's first films can only be seen on very rare and badly spoiled prints. I add that the cinema is making daily progress and that eventually films that we consider marvelous today will soon be forgotten because of new dimensions & colour. This is true. But for 4 weeks this film [The Blood of a Poet] has been shown to audiences that have been so attentive, so eager & so warm, that I wonder after all there is not an anonymous public who are looking for more than relaxation in the cinema." - Jean Cocteau, 1932


#65 of 77 OFFLINE   dana martin

dana martin

    Screenwriter



  • 1,961 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 28 2003
  • Real Name:Dana Martin
  • LocationNorfolk, VA

Posted June 19 2012 - 02:11 PM

love those screen shots, looks like i will be keeping my old dvd just for the retrospect  and few extras,  but damn is olive on a classic roll,


Playing at the Drive In

Quote:Welles, Kubrick, Hitchcock, Spielberg, Jackson, Wood ?? a true Auteur should be one who follows his artistic vision

#66 of 77 OFFLINE   Robert Harris

Robert Harris

    Archivist



  • 7,603 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 08 1999
  • Real Name:Robert Harris

Posted June 20 2012 - 02:08 PM

Originally Posted by Mark-P 

I think the point everyone is alluding to is that since the original negative is presumed to be lost, so may be the original composition unless someone can turn up a non-Superscope print (were any even struck?)

Don't know where it went.  16mm (all were flat) non-theatrical prints were derived from a 35 fine grain struck from the OCN.


"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


#67 of 77 OFFLINE   Richard Stammer

Richard Stammer

    Stunt Coordinator



  • 116 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 24 1998
  • Real Name:Richard
  • LocationSarasota, Florida

Posted June 21 2012 - 11:02 AM

This has been an interesting thread, but if my memory serves me correctly, there is a much more major controversary that will forever exist over the release version of '56 IOTBD. I am trying to remember the particulars. Can somebody help me out? I believe it deals with the film being shot full frame, blown up even further and cropped for 1:85, then cropped even more for superscope, thus removing far to much vital information. With the original negative lost, the film can never be screeend properly. I just wish I had the source reference for this information.

#68 of 77 OFFLINE   Brandon Conway

Brandon Conway

    captveg



  • 7,305 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 30 2002
  • Real Name:Brandon Conway
  • LocationNorth Hollywood, CA

Posted June 21 2012 - 11:07 AM

Originally Posted by Richard Stammer 

This has been an interesting thread, but if my memory serves me correctly, there is a much more major controversary that will forever exist over the release version of '56 IOTBD. I am trying to remember the particulars. Can somebody help me out? I believe it deals with the film being shot full frame, blown up even further and cropped for 1:85, then cropped even more for superscope, thus removing far to much vital information. With the original negative lost, the film can never be screeend properly. I just wish I had the source reference for this information.


The film was shot on 35mm intended for 1.85:1 while in production. In post-production the studio decided to releases it 2.00:1 SuperScope instead of 1.85:1. So, of the intended area of the negative intended to be seen, the cropping was only the difference between 1.85:1 and 2.00:1. 2.00:1 is what everyone saw in theaters, and the Blu-ray preserves that. It would be great to have the original negative for obvious reasons, but at least we're not denied what was eventually the original theatrical AR, and it looks like the source for this release is in rather nice condition.


"And now the reprimand, from an American critic. He reproaches me for using film as a sacred & lasting medium, like a painting or a book. He does not believe that filmmaking is an inferior art, but he believes, and quite rightly, that a reel goes quickly, that the public are looking above all for relaxation, that film is fragile and that it is pretentious to express the power of one's soul by such ephemeral and delicate means, that Charlie Chaplin's or Buster Keaton's first films can only be seen on very rare and badly spoiled prints. I add that the cinema is making daily progress and that eventually films that we consider marvelous today will soon be forgotten because of new dimensions & colour. This is true. But for 4 weeks this film [The Blood of a Poet] has been shown to audiences that have been so attentive, so eager & so warm, that I wonder after all there is not an anonymous public who are looking for more than relaxation in the cinema." - Jean Cocteau, 1932


#69 of 77 OFFLINE   Bob Furmanek

Bob Furmanek

    Producer



  • 3,667 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 10 2001

Posted June 21 2012 - 12:06 PM

This has been an interesting thread, but if my memory serves me correctly, there is a much more major controversary that will forever exist over the release version of '56 IOTBD. I am trying to remember the particulars. Can somebody help me out? I believe it deals with the film being shot full frame, blown up even further and cropped for 1:85, then cropped even more for superscope, thus removing far to much vital information. With the original negative lost, the film can never be screeend properly. I just wish I had the source reference for this information.

Post #70 on this page will give you the details. http://www.hometheat...tio-research/60 Bob

Bob Furmanek

www.3dfilmarchive.com


Bubbleweb_edited-1_zpsc986b444.jpg


#70 of 77 OFFLINE   John Morgan

John Morgan

    Supporting Actor



  • 690 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 23 2001
  • Real Name:John
  • LocationLos Angeles

Posted June 21 2012 - 01:09 PM

Wasn't there two sets of credits for INVASION OF THE BODY SNATCHERS? The wide screen had a SUPERSCOPE credit and the flat version didn't have that credit, but as I remember, there was no jump or cut in the music, so I assumed they prepared two sets.

#71 of 77 OFFLINE   Brandon Conway

Brandon Conway

    captveg



  • 7,305 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 30 2002
  • Real Name:Brandon Conway
  • LocationNorth Hollywood, CA

Posted June 22 2012 - 06:52 AM

And there was MUCH rejoicing!


Blu-ray.com High Noon review


"And now the reprimand, from an American critic. He reproaches me for using film as a sacred & lasting medium, like a painting or a book. He does not believe that filmmaking is an inferior art, but he believes, and quite rightly, that a reel goes quickly, that the public are looking above all for relaxation, that film is fragile and that it is pretentious to express the power of one's soul by such ephemeral and delicate means, that Charlie Chaplin's or Buster Keaton's first films can only be seen on very rare and badly spoiled prints. I add that the cinema is making daily progress and that eventually films that we consider marvelous today will soon be forgotten because of new dimensions & colour. This is true. But for 4 weeks this film [The Blood of a Poet] has been shown to audiences that have been so attentive, so eager & so warm, that I wonder after all there is not an anonymous public who are looking for more than relaxation in the cinema." - Jean Cocteau, 1932


#72 of 77 OFFLINE   Nelson Au

Nelson Au

    Executive Producer



  • 11,550 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 16 1999

Posted June 22 2012 - 07:02 AM

Oooooooo! Looking forward to both titles finally! I missed this thread till seeing it today!

#73 of 77 OFFLINE   FrancisP

FrancisP

    Screenwriter



  • 1,115 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 15 2004

Posted June 24 2012 - 10:10 AM

I also see that Olive is releasing Orson Welles' MacBeth on blu-ray on Sept 18. I have to admit that Olive is turning out to be a good source for blu-rays that I want.

#74 of 77 OFFLINE   Lord Dalek

Lord Dalek

    Screenwriter



  • 2,168 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 04 2005

Posted June 24 2012 - 10:53 AM

Well so much for the rumors that Criterion was looking into the Welles Macbeth.


I guess this would be the original version with the scottish accents correct?



#75 of 77 OFFLINE   Nelson Au

Nelson Au

    Executive Producer



  • 11,550 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 16 1999

Posted June 24 2012 - 12:27 PM

Speaking of Criterion, it's too bad they are not doing the Body Snatchers release. I am assuming they no longer have rights to it. I'm glad I hung onto the laserdisc! It's audio commentary is a fun listen.

#76 of 77 OFFLINE   HDvision

HDvision

    Supporting Actor



  • 982 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 11 2007
  • Real Name:David
  • LocationPandora

Posted June 25 2012 - 06:58 AM

Sean: This is slightly off topic but I would like to make a suggestion to the good people at Olive. I just watched a terrific Allied Artists film (now owned by Paramount) called RIOT IN CELL BLOCK 11. It's directed by Don Siegel and composed for 1.85:1. So far as I know, it's never been on DVD and would be an excellent release.

There's a spanish Pal DVD Bob, thought It's not in widescreen. It may be open matte, here's a shot of the titles I found on the web http://static.hometh...um.com/imgrepo/ However, it looks like an old VHS master. There is thought a TV master showing up sometimes on cable, with a much better look, probably more recent, thought also open matte. http://static.hometh...um.com/imgrepo/

#77 of 77 OFFLINE   Bob Furmanek

Bob Furmanek

    Producer



  • 3,667 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 10 2001

Posted June 25 2012 - 07:23 AM

Thanks, David. It was planned for 3-D treatment but that was dropped at the eleventh hour. I had never seen the film before so I tracked down a copy and was really impressed with the film. It deserves to get more exposure. The transfer that I watched was open matte and it zoomed in nicely to the intended widescreen composition.

Bob Furmanek

www.3dfilmarchive.com


Bubbleweb_edited-1_zpsc986b444.jpg





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users