-

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 and you won't get the popup ads that guests get. Click here to create your free account.

Photo
- - - - -

Rear Window converted to 3-D?


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
19 replies to this topic

#1 of 20 Peter Apruzzese

Peter Apruzzese

    Screenwriter

  • 2,592 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 20 1999
  • Real Name:Peter Apruzzese

Posted June 24 2012 - 03:12 PM

Somebody please tell me that this is some kind of elaborate Internet hoax: http://www.pr.com/press-release/412244
"What we're fighting for, in the end...we're fighting for each other." - Col. Joshua Chamberlain in "Gettysburg"

 


#2 of 20 Bob Furmanek

Bob Furmanek

    Producer

  • 3,359 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 10 2001

Posted June 24 2012 - 04:04 PM

If true, this does throw a monkey wrench into the theory that Hitchcock had no interest in 3-D. In going through the trades from that period as extensively as I have, I don't recall seeing any mention of this. I would like to see more correspondence (and an early continuity or script draft) to see how far they got with this idea. DIAL M was announced for 3-D production on April 5 but didn't begin shooting until August 5. The announcement that Hitchcock was going to film in 3-D made the front page of the trades. Hitchcock and Jimmy Stewart acquired rights to produce the film in July. Warner Bros. was announced as the possible distributor. By time he completed DIAL M on September 25, 3-D production was practically dead. The only films shooting at the end of September were PHANTOM OF THE RUE MORGUE and THE MADE MAGICIAN. Paramount had finished their last dimensional feature in July. The last two films shot in October were CREATURE FROM THE BLACK LAGOON and CAT WOMEN OF THE MOON. I can tell you that last September, WB was going through paperwork looking to document the aspect ratio for DIAL M...

Bob Furmanek

www.3dfilmarchive.com


Snipe_zpsa426c063.jpg


#3 of 20 haineshisway

haineshisway

    Screenwriter

  • 2,110 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 26 2011
  • Real Name:Bruce
  • LocationLos Angeles

Posted June 24 2012 - 05:57 PM

If true, this does throw a monkey wrench into the theory that Hitchcock had no interest in 3-D. In going through the trades from that period as extensively as I have, I don't recall seeing any mention of this. I would like to see more correspondence (and an early continuity or script draft) to see how far they got with this idea. DIAL M was announced for 3-D production on April 5 but didn't begin shooting until August 5. The announcement that Hitchcock was going to film in 3-D made the front page of the trades. Hitchcock and Jimmy Stewart acquired rights to produce the film in July. Warner Bros. was announced as the possible distributor. By time he completed DIAL M on September 25, 3-D production was practically dead. The only films shooting at the end of September were PHANTOM OF THE RUE MORGUE and THE MADE MAGICIAN. Paramount had finished their last dimensional feature in July. The last two films shot in October were CREATURE FROM THE BLACK LAGOON and CAT WOMEN OF THE MOON. I can tell you that last September, WB was going through paperwork looking to document the aspect ratio for DIAL M...

I have an original onion skin of Hayes' story treatment and an original script (which interestingly includes a couple of scenes NOT in Stewart's apartment). Obviously there is no mention of 3D anywhere to be found, not that there necessarily would be if they'd already given up the idea. The point is, by the time Rear Window went before the cameras, Hitchcock and company certainly knew it was not 3D and it was certainly at no point designed for 3D - so, I'm not interested in this thing at all.

#4 of 20 Bob Furmanek

Bob Furmanek

    Producer

  • 3,359 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 10 2001

Posted June 24 2012 - 06:38 PM

Burks would have been on location shooting HONDO when they acquired the rights. With all the trouble they were having with the camera, I doubt Burks would have made the suggestion. Can you tell me the dates on that treatment?

Bob Furmanek

www.3dfilmarchive.com


Snipe_zpsa426c063.jpg


#5 of 20 Bob Furmanek

Bob Furmanek

    Producer

  • 3,359 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 10 2001

Posted June 24 2012 - 07:32 PM

I found some more information in the files. On April 28, Daily Variety reported: "Paramount reported this week that James Stewart will star in a movie to by directed by Alfred Hitchcock and produced by Leland Hayward and Joshua Logan. Based on Cornell Woolrich's short story 'Rear Window,' the picture will be produced independently by Hayward and Logan in collaboration with Stewart and Hitchcock, with financing and distribution by Paramount. It is slated to go before the cameras in October as one of Paramount's most important productions of 1953." A similar announcement is made in Weekly Variety on August 5, once again mentioning Paramount as distributor. I found the mention of a possible Warner Bros. distribution deal on a website and can find no concrete documentation for that statement. It's ALWAYS risky not doing original research...

Bob Furmanek

www.3dfilmarchive.com


Snipe_zpsa426c063.jpg


#6 of 20 Vincent_P

Vincent_P

    Screenwriter

  • 1,710 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 13 2003

Posted June 24 2012 - 08:35 PM

The ONLY project "Triple Dee Labs" has mentioned in that vimeo link is this supposed conversion of REAR WINDOW. I can not even find an actual website for their company, nor any information for any of the folks mentioned in that "PR" release (i.e., "veteran CG artist Steve Maio"). Also, all these videos hail from April... Vincent

#7 of 20 HDvision

HDvision

    Supporting Actor

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

Posted June 24 2012 - 10:03 PM

It's not dated april first thought. I'm wondering, isn't Rear Window public domain? Anybody could reissue it in a changed form, if this was the case, providing they come up with their own transfert. Here's their blog, the post is from april 26 http://tripledeelabs.blogspot.fr/ I do find the video a bit strange, in that "it was the intent so please fans shut up" way. It looks borderly amateur, but not goofy enough to pass as a joke.

#8 of 20 Peter Apruzzese

Peter Apruzzese

    Screenwriter

  • 2,592 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 20 1999
  • Real Name:Peter Apruzzese

Posted June 24 2012 - 11:08 PM

It's not dated april first thought. I'm wondering, isn't Rear Window public domain? Anybody could reissue it in a changed form, if this was the case, providing they come up with their own transfert. Here's their blog, the post is from april 26 http://tripledeelabs.blogspot.fr/ I do find the video a bit strange, in that "it was the intent so please fans shut up" way. It looks borderly amateur, but not goofy enough to pass as a joke.

Rear Window is not a public domain film.
"What we're fighting for, in the end...we're fighting for each other." - Col. Joshua Chamberlain in "Gettysburg"

 


#9 of 20 haineshisway

haineshisway

    Screenwriter

  • 2,110 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 26 2011
  • Real Name:Bruce
  • LocationLos Angeles

Posted June 25 2012 - 01:44 AM

Burks would have been on location shooting HONDO when they acquired the rights. With all the trouble they were having with the camera, I doubt Burks would have made the suggestion. Can you tell me the dates on that treatment?

I'll dig it out and see if there's a date on it - the date on the script is December 9, 1953. I recently came into an incredible treasure trove of Hitchcock scripts, including Vertigo (still called From Among the Dead) and the very first attempt at a script to Vertigo by Maxwell Anderson, called Darkling, I Listen, as well as To Catch a Thief, Psycho (including the script for the trailer), an early draft of the 1956 version of The Man Who Knew Too Much, and an early version of North by Northwest, titled The Man in Lincoln's Nose.

#10 of 20 HDvision

HDvision

    Supporting Actor

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

Posted June 25 2012 - 02:14 AM

I'm now wondering if this 3D conversion is actual 3D, or the anaglyph kind.

#11 of 20 Peter Apruzzese

Peter Apruzzese

    Screenwriter

  • 2,592 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 20 1999
  • Real Name:Peter Apruzzese

Posted June 25 2012 - 02:58 AM

This must be an elaborate gag. I re-read that press release and watched the video since I posted this thread last night and nowhere is Universal - who distributes the film - mentioned. And "Triple Dee" has been around since only 2011, I can't imagine Universal and/or the Hitchcock estate giving a company with no track record this type of work.
"What we're fighting for, in the end...we're fighting for each other." - Col. Joshua Chamberlain in "Gettysburg"

 


#12 of 20 Bob Furmanek

Bob Furmanek

    Producer

  • 3,359 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 10 2001

Posted June 25 2012 - 05:24 AM

Who is Clarence Joseph, ASC? And if Triple Dee Labs is legit, I have to wonder why in the world they are pushing anaglyph?

Bob Furmanek

www.3dfilmarchive.com


Snipe_zpsa426c063.jpg


#13 of 20 Peter Apruzzese

Peter Apruzzese

    Screenwriter

  • 2,592 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 20 1999
  • Real Name:Peter Apruzzese

Posted June 25 2012 - 05:27 AM

Who is Clarence Joseph, ASC?

He's not on imdb. The only online reference to him is back to that PR and the vimeo page. I believe this is a hoax and I'm annoyed at myself for helping to spread it :(
"What we're fighting for, in the end...we're fighting for each other." - Col. Joshua Chamberlain in "Gettysburg"

 


#14 of 20 Bob Furmanek

Bob Furmanek

    Producer

  • 3,359 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 10 2001

Posted June 25 2012 - 05:52 AM

If it is, I'm annoyed that I spent time digging through the trades last night looking for REAR WINDOW data.:(

Bob Furmanek

www.3dfilmarchive.com


Snipe_zpsa426c063.jpg


#15 of 20 rsmithjr

rsmithjr

    Supporting Actor

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

Posted June 25 2012 - 06:44 AM

Whether or not this is genuine, there may be a good idea here. Rear Window is a film that could greatly benefit from 3D treatment. I can see many scenes being very effective. As to the argument that Universal would only use reputable labs for their work, I cannot say that I am overly enamored of the work they have been doing on Blu-ray, or in fact that they have any idea at all as to how it should be done. :)

#16 of 20 Peter Apruzzese

Peter Apruzzese

    Screenwriter

  • 2,592 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 20 1999
  • Real Name:Peter Apruzzese

Posted June 25 2012 - 06:49 AM

Whether or not this is genuine, there may be a good idea here.

No, bad idea all around if the film was not designed, photographed, and edited for 3-D.

Rear Window is a film that could greatly benefit from 3D treatment. I can see many scenes being very effective.

Yes, if it were supposed to be 3-D. But it doesn't appear to be that way.

As to the argument that Universal would only use reputable labs for their work, I cannot say that I am overly enamored of the work they have been doing on Blu-ray, or in fact that they have any idea at all as to how it should be done. :)

I don't disagree entirely, but I still think they *wouldn't* hand this off to a bunch of Charlie-nobodies even if they had the idea to do such a disservice to the film.
"What we're fighting for, in the end...we're fighting for each other." - Col. Joshua Chamberlain in "Gettysburg"

 


#17 of 20 Ejanss

Ejanss

    Screenwriter

  • 1,345 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 23 2012

Posted June 25 2012 - 07:02 AM

Somebody please tell me that this is some kind of elaborate Internet hoax: http://www.pr.com/press-release/412244

Okay: It's some kind of elaborate Internet hoax. :) More accurately, it sounds like a couple of journeyman guys from a conversion company that got the wrong end of the stick about the Dial M release, and thought they could go to town while the iron was hot. AFAIK, Rear Window ISN'T public domain (although most of the "independent" conversions are); Universal still very much owns the title, and to "almost" have the director's blessing means you don't. Estates included. If it was Universal, then it would officially be a Bad Idea, but good thing it isn't, and we can move on, nothing to see here.

#18 of 20 rsmithjr

rsmithjr

    Supporting Actor

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

Posted June 25 2012 - 07:07 AM

No, bad idea all around if the film was not designed, photographed, and edited for 3-D. Yes, if it were supposed to be 3-D. But it doesn't appear to be that way.

I would certainly take a look at it if done reasonably well in 3D. Obviously, I would still want the original version to be in circulation. Rear Window and Dial M for Murder both are quite claustrophobic in character. I have seen DMFM in 3D several times. WRT RW, I think the courtyard scenes could benefit greatly from a 3D treatment, as well as the scenes of Stewart's apartment. I know the film well and could actually believe that it was designed with 3D in mind (but I have no idea if this is true or not). The argument that it was not "designed, photographed, and edited for 3D" has some value but I personally think it can be overplayed. As to these posts, they look like a hoax to me at this point. So those opposed to the idea likely have nothing to fear.

#19 of 20 Mark-P

Mark-P

    Screenwriter

  • 2,201 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 26 2005
  • Real Name:Mark Probst
  • LocationCamas, WA

Posted June 25 2012 - 09:13 AM

Notice how the strip of film from "Dial M For Murder" that they show is a 16mm print? These guys don't have access to anything. I think they are just a couple of computer geeks who may (or may not) have actually converted the film to 3D and are hoping to catch Universal's attention. I guess time will tell if an actual genuine announcement is made.

#20 of 20 Bob Furmanek

Bob Furmanek

    Producer

  • 3,359 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 10 2001

Posted June 25 2012 - 09:23 AM

Geez, I didn't even catch that. Good eye!

Bob Furmanek

www.3dfilmarchive.com


Snipe_zpsa426c063.jpg