Jump to content



Sign up for a free account!

Signing up for an account is fast and free. As a member you can join in the conversation, enter contests to win things like this Logitech Harmony Ultimate Remote and you won't get the popup ads that guests get. Click here to create your free account.

Photo
- - - - -

A few words about...™ The Color of Money -- in Blu-ray

A Few Words About

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

#1 of 57 Robert Harris

Robert Harris

    Archivist

  • 7,308 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 08 1999
  • Real Name:Robert Harris

Posted June 09 2012 - 05:34 AM

Martin Scorsese's The Color of Money is not an antique film.  It is not in dire need of restorative efforts.  Which means that the new Blu-ray from Disney should be a veritable slam dunk.


My first exposure to the film was via a 70mm blow-up, with 6-track stereo.


Every grain as captured by cinematographer Michael Ballhaus' camera was there on the screen.  Color, densities, shadow detail, all gorgeous.


It was, in every way possible, not only a beautifully produced film, but a masterwork, and one of Paul Newman's most enduring performances.


I've mentioned here before that when something goes wrong, it affects everything to do with a film, and allows even major works to take on an unfortunate visage.


Disney's new Blu-ray of The Color of Money, is one of those unfortunate releases.


The Color of Money, which is a film that I love, is no longer quality entertainment.


Simple as that.


What appears to be original grain is there, but it's out of focus.  There is neither sharpness, resolution, nor any detail whatever.  There are definite digital problems.  The image tends to meander around the screen, never quite certain if or where it wishes to light.


It appears that someone was given an old transfer, told to "fix it," and just kept turning knobs until the all the old problems went away.


And new ones appeared.


I'd run a budget for a proper image harvest for the film -- forget about the audio -- it's good enough for Blu-ray, and we'll not worry about it.  But if I ran that budget, it might be overly embarrassing to the wonderful folks at Disney, as it wouldn't be high enough to even bring the concept of releasing what is on this Blu-ray disc into conversation.


I don't understand what's going on here.  They're spending far too much money on their animated library, and then allow one of the live action jewels in their crown to go public in an manner in which it should never be seen.


It's almost as if they have something against the filmmaker, and this is one way of showing their corporate displeasure.


The new Blu-ray of Martin Scorsese's The Color of Money, which strangely won Mr. Newman an Academy Award for Best Actor in a Leading Role, is garbage, plain and simple.  What is unfortunate is that if this were to be one's only exposure to the film, viewers might find it difficult to understand why anyone was even nominated for anything.


It makes the film look like low-budget product, filmed by a hack.


Image - 0


Audio - 4


Recall!


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


#2 of 57 David Norman

David Norman

    Screenwriter

  • 1,964 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 12 2001
  • LocationCharlotte, NC

Posted June 09 2012 - 07:39 AM

This is just sad. Has anyone inside Scorsese's circle had a chance to give an opinion on this release? What about the Disney people -- hopefully somebody will acknowledge that this can't possibly be the intended disc and maybe institute a recall or replacement like they have with other mistakes.
 

 


#3 of 57 Robert Harris

Robert Harris

    Archivist

  • 7,308 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 08 1999
  • Real Name:Robert Harris

Posted June 09 2012 - 08:26 AM

This is just sad. Has anyone inside Scorsese's circle had a chance to give an opinion on this release? What about the Disney people -- hopefully somebody will acknowledge that this can't possibly be the intended disc and maybe institute a recall or replacement like they have with other mistakes.

Would love to hear that someone punched in the wrong numbers and delivered an outdated master. But what does that then say about QC?

"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


#4 of 57 Powell&Pressburger

Powell&Pressburger

    Screenwriter

  • 1,090 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 26 2007
  • LocationMPLS, MN

Posted June 09 2012 - 08:30 AM

The powers that be at Disney need to re think their live action catalog titles! Esp if the releases are going to be this poorly done. They need to recall this title it really is sad a highly regarded title would get poor treatment. Then again ... MY FAIR LADY!


 Evita is due out this month and I hate to think the transfer will be bad on that title also. Not to mention my guilty pleasures of Romy and Michelle's HS reunion, Adventures in Babystitting.. as well as the Cusack films High Fidelity and Gross Pointe Blank


Stop the Replacing of original Studio Opening / Closing logos! They are part of film history.

Marantz SR7007
MartinLogan: ESL, Grotto i, Motif, FX2, Motion 15
Oppo BDP-103 LG BD550 Region Free 
Pioneer LD CLD-D505
Panasonic 65" TC-P65ZT60

 


#5 of 57 Brandon Conway

Brandon Conway

    captveg

  • 7,034 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 30 2002
  • Real Name:Brandon Conway
  • LocationNorth Hollywood, CA

Posted June 09 2012 - 08:41 AM

What's all the more puzzling is that we know Thelma Schoonmaker was working on the remaster of this title 3 years ago. What in the world compelled Disney to spend the money on that and then completely ignore it for the blu-ray? That's just... moronic. When I get back home after this weekend I'll see it on my projector. Doesnt seem like I'll wanna watch it for long.

"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


#6 of 57 JoHud

JoHud

    Screenwriter

  • 2,439 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 11 2007
  • Real Name:Joe Hudak

Posted June 09 2012 - 08:47 AM

That bad, is it? This is one title I'm just going to pass on entirely. I wouldn't mind too much if it was just a somewhat lower-res, older HD transfer since I watch my blu-rays on a relatively modest-sized screen, but it seems like there is far more wrong with this than that.

#7 of 57 Charles Smith

Charles Smith

    Extremely Talented Member

  • 4,045 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 27 2007
  • LocationNor'east

Posted June 09 2012 - 08:52 AM

"Image - 0"


Something you don't see every day.


Not 1 or 2.  Zero.


So, now what?



#8 of 57 Robert Harris

Robert Harris

    Archivist

  • 7,308 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 08 1999
  • Real Name:Robert Harris

Posted June 09 2012 - 09:23 AM

Originally Posted by JoHud 

That bad, is it? This is one title I'm just going to pass on entirely.
I wouldn't mind too much if it was just a somewhat lower-res, older HD transfer since I watch my blu-rays on a relatively modest-sized screen, but it seems like there is far more wrong with this than that.


This will certainly look better on smaller screens, but from this point on, if product fails in projection, it fails.


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


#9 of 57 Mark-P

Mark-P

    Screenwriter

  • 2,077 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 26 2005
  • Real Name:Mark Probst
  • LocationCamas, WA

Posted June 09 2012 - 10:19 AM

When I saw the diffused-looking screencaps, I was hoping they were misleading and it would actually look better projected in motion. How disappointing. I think the economy has just got the suits at the studios in a penny-pinching mode and they are passing off junk and hoping nobody will notice.

#10 of 57 FanboyZ

FanboyZ

    Stunt Coordinator

  • 212 posts
  • Join Date: May 19 2009

Posted June 09 2012 - 01:00 PM

It's moment like theses that have me thinking that the dream that was Blu Ray, has failed...

#11 of 57 Timothy E

Timothy E

    Supporting Actor

  • 850 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 20 2007

Posted June 09 2012 - 02:33 PM

Do the studios have something against Scorsese's films when releasing them in high definition?



#12 of 57 TravisR

TravisR

    Studio Mogul

  • 21,362 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 15 2004
  • LocationThe basement of the FBI building

Posted June 09 2012 - 02:36 PM

Do the studios have something against Scorsese's films when releasing them in high definition?

You'd think that Disney would have learned from Gangs Of New York that a) he cares how his movies are presented on video and b) apparently he has the juice to get things fixed when they screw up.

#13 of 57 Brian Husar

Brian Husar

    Stunt Coordinator

  • 97 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 23 2006

Posted June 09 2012 - 02:58 PM

I bought it because I thought good things would come of it...I mean it's Scorsese, how can they mess this up? Now I don't have a lot of hi tech equipment, I watch on a Toshiba 45 inch, so I know they say "smaller screen looks better", but I do notice details, and if it's bad it's bad and it can be seen. I popped this in when I got it along with Yellow Submarine on Tuesday when it came out (which is a high quality release...hopefully reviews will come soon), and something did not look right...I saw grain, not a lot, but the colors, where were they? Glad you confirmed the things I was thinking. I guess the only positive with this is that, unlike the DVD it's a 16x9 transfer, which the DVD was not, but if the DVD was, I would be returning this ASAP. And an anniversary edition with no special features? RAH, there was a sticker on the front claiming "restoration", I know how you feel about that.

#14 of 57 FanboyZ

FanboyZ

    Stunt Coordinator

  • 212 posts
  • Join Date: May 19 2009

Posted June 09 2012 - 02:59 PM

I think this has to do with Disney promising to China that they would dick with Scorsese's work as penance for the whole "Kundun" situation. Remember they erased Billy Ray Cyrus after he was critical of Hannah Montana: THEY WILL VAULT YOU BECAUSE THEY ARE DISNEY.

#15 of 57 Brian Husar

Brian Husar

    Stunt Coordinator

  • 97 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 23 2006

Posted June 09 2012 - 03:19 PM

It's moment like theses that have me thinking that the dream that was Blu Ray, has failed...

But it's moments like watching Yellow Submarine right after this so-called "restoration" per sticker, and seeing the care Paul Rutan and Triage labs put into Yellow Submarine that immediately restored my faith back in Blu Ray. Critereon, Warners, and Columbia I will usually buy anything they do. Warner's has some occasional hiccups. But MGM/UA, Disney (non animated), and especially Universal I usually wait. Except here, I thought they would do right by Scorsese. This is a Blu Ray budget release.

#16 of 57 David Weicker

David Weicker

    Screenwriter

  • 1,452 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 26 2005
  • Real Name:David

Posted June 10 2012 - 06:05 AM

This will certainly look better on smaller screens, but from this point on, if product fails in projection, it fails. RAH

If this is the new criteria, it makes these 'reviews' utterly worthless for those of us who don't project. As someone who watches on a 55 inch screen, I can gather no information, whatsoever, about this title. David

#17 of 57 TravisR

TravisR

    Studio Mogul

  • 21,362 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 15 2004
  • LocationThe basement of the FBI building

Posted June 10 2012 - 06:14 AM

If this is the new criteria, it makes these 'reviews' utterly worthless for those of us who don't project. As someone who watches on a 55 inch screen, I can gather no information, whatsoever, about this title.

Given the very negative reactions that this disc is getting, it sounds like it's pretty lousy on any larger screen. This doesn't seem like other times when RAH has said that a disc could be better and other people over react and want to storm Castle Universal with pitchforks and torches. And he can chime in but when he says "smaller screens", I take that to mean monitors much smaller than 55 inches.

#18 of 57 Bryan^H

Bryan^H

    Screenwriter

  • 2,566 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 03 2005

Posted June 10 2012 - 06:22 AM

This will certainly look better on smaller screens, but from this point on, if product fails in projection, it fails. RAH

Better than projection, but still very, very poor on a 40" screen. No real detail, and lacks any kind of filmic look that Blu-Ray is capable of. I would give it better marks for at least having better sound than the dvd, and finally anamorphic widescreen but for such a great film(and one of Paul Newman's best performances) this is a slap in the face. "Who is minding the store?"

housekeeping 2.jpg

"She always does that, she just wanders away"

 

 

 


#19 of 57 JoHud

JoHud

    Screenwriter

  • 2,439 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 11 2007
  • Real Name:Joe Hudak

Posted June 10 2012 - 06:32 AM

I wouldn't mind a bit more detail on this blu-ray's faults in regards to image quality. It doesn't seem like a transfer problem, at least not entirely. The suggestion of someone knob-turning in an attempt to fix the video leads me to believe that a mediocre transfer was made worse by an inept home video staff. Heck, it practically sounds like an upconversion. I'm just clutching straws that it might not be "that bad" on my 50" TV since this is likely one of those instances where the DVD isn't a recommended alternative under any circumstances and hoping the blu-ray could be a borderline acceptable...er..."upgrade." However, I'm getting the impression its just no good period.

#20 of 57 FoxyMulder

FoxyMulder

    映画ファン

  • 3,823 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 14 2009
  • Real Name:Malcolm
  • LocationScotland

Posted June 10 2012 - 07:20 AM

Originally Posted by Robert Harris 


The new Blu-ray of Martin Scorsese's The Color of Money, which strangely won Mr. Newman an Academy Award for Best Actor in a Leading Role, is garbage, plain and simple.

Image - 0


Audio - 4


Recall!


RAH


So Bluray.com called it right and DVDBeaver called it wrong, shame that another great film has been ruined on what should have been the ultimate movie format.


These studio's are saving me a fortune, not buying this.


So why did they not use the Thelma Schoonmaker approved version that was worked on last year. ?


     :Fun Movie Quotes:

"A good body with a dull brain is as cheap as life itself"   

"Maybe it's a sheep dog... let's keep going" 

"Please doctor, I've got to ask this. It sounds like, well, just as though you're describing some form of super carrot"

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 






Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: A Few Words About

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users