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
- - - - -

A few words about...™ The Wizard of Oz 3D -- in Blu-ray

A Few Words About Warner

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

#41 of 60 OFFLINE   Chuck Pennington

Chuck Pennington

    Supporting Actor



  • 857 posts
  • Join Date: May 11 2001

Posted September 23 2013 - 07:55 PM

Sounds like a theatre-centric sync problem. The film is fine.
RAH


The sync was off in several moments at the theater I saw it at near Cleveland. I emailed cqo@imax.com and they confirmed the issue, but said that the sync was as Warner apparently wanted it. A friend of mine in NYC observed the same sync issues during the same scenes.

#42 of 60 OFFLINE   moviebuff75

moviebuff75

    Supporting Actor



  • 547 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 04 2009
  • Real Name:Eric Scott Richard
  • LocationIndianapolis, Indiana

Posted September 23 2013 - 07:57 PM

The IMAX presentation in Indianapolis was out of sync during the entire Oz portion of the movie. It was WAY off.


Proud HTF Member Since: April, 2001


#43 of 60 OFFLINE   ScottHM

ScottHM

    Second Unit



  • 322 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 18 2003
  • Real Name:Scott
  • LocationUSA

Posted September 23 2013 - 08:02 PM

I, too, have seen the IMAX 3-d of this wonderful film and it was a whole new and eye-opening experience for me.

 

I watched it at the local IMAX theater just tonight and was very pleased (once I stopped thinking about the ticket prices.)

 

I realized today as I was reading a review of the 3D presentation that I've never seen The Wizard of Oz in the theatre, and thought this week would be the perfect opportunity.  It truly was an eye-opening experience for me too.

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



#44 of 60 OFFLINE   Suzanne.S

Suzanne.S

    Stunt Coordinator



  • 55 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 22 2002

Posted September 24 2013 - 03:42 AM

I saw it Sunday morning and thought it was fantastic.  I didn't notice any sync issues and because I'd seen it mentioned I was looking.  I was so impressed by the depth of the backgrounds and all the little things I hadn't noticed in all the dozens of times I'd seen it before.

 

I'm not big on messing with a movie and I'm against colorization, pan & Scan, etc.  But I must say, this was definitely a treat!



#45 of 60 OFFLINE   RobertSiegel

RobertSiegel

    Supporting Actor



  • 984 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 10 2004

Posted September 28 2013 - 09:06 AM

I can't wait to see this on Tuesday evening on my JVC RS-50 3d projector, on my 159" screen. I wasn't born until 1962 in a small town, so I was not privy to the large city theaters....so watching all of these classics on Blu-ray at home is a dream come true, it is like watching all of these wonderful films for the first time.

 

I agree with you Mr. Harris, I do not agree with colorization or changing a film in any way, but I am very intrigued by the 3D version of The Wizard of Oz! Unfortunately I live 3 l/2 hours away from an Imax so I didn't see it there, which would have been a thrill on that big screen.

 

My favorite movie of all time is The Sound of Music. I am hoping that 20th Century Fox has taken note of what Warner did with The Wizard of Oz, and will release a 3D version of The Sound of Music for its 50th anniversary in 2015. Now as I said, I do not usually go for conversions, but when I think about the way The Sound of Music was filmed, with it's gorgeous scenery, I would say if any classic in the Fox library is worthy of a 3D conversion, and one that would probably get people to the theater to see it, it would be The Sound of Music. Imax would simply be a dream! No sing-a-long please!

 

I can see in my mind the 3D of the opening scene when the camera closes in on Julie for the first time, this would be a celebratory experience for me in 3D! I've seen the movie in 2D  258 times (and counting).

 

I Just hope Fox corrects the color and rids the transfer of the oversaturation of yellow and brown. In reading several books, including 2 JUlie Andrews biographies, and in several interviews over the years, she has stated that she was shocked to see her hair when it was dyed BLONDE for the film! That's the way it was on the previous 40th anniversary DVD.  Her hair was never red as it is on the new Blu-ray. The Blu-ray transfer is a complete gem (including the amazing transfer of the 6-track master for the first time) aside from the color errors. I've seen the film in 70mm and in theaters many times, and I never saw this strong brown tone before.


Classics on Blu-ray is what it is all about!


#46 of 60 OFFLINE   Ken Volok

Ken Volok

    Stunt Coordinator



  • 145 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 27 2012
  • Real Name:Ken Volok

Posted September 29 2013 - 02:33 AM

I long ago found that most if not all blurays with their high definition ALREADY provide that sense of depth long missing on VHS, LaserDisc etc. Same with many upscaled DVDs from good elements. Why waste money reformatting WoO when it needs no additional lure to audiences new or old. It stands well enough by itself. Bad use of resources when other films are rotting in the vaults.



#47 of 60 OFFLINE   lukejosephchung

lukejosephchung

    Screenwriter



  • 1,257 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 31 2007
  • Real Name:Luke J. Chung
  • LocationSan Francisco, CA., USA

Posted September 29 2013 - 11:55 AM

I long ago found that most if not all blurays with their high definition ALREADY provide that sense of depth long missing on VHS, LaserDisc etc. Same with many upscaled DVDs from good elements. Why waste money reformatting WoO when it needs no additional lure to audiences new or old. It stands well enough by itself. Bad use of resources when other films are rotting in the vaults.

It may have needed no additional lure to hardcore dyed-in-the-wool fans like ourselves, but it's being used to introduce the film to a NEW generation of film-goers who have heard plenty about this classic, but haven't been interested in seeing it before, simply because of its early 20th Century vintage...sprucing up an old chestnut technologically for reissue in the theaters has been going on for as long as movies have been shown on the big screen...we may or may not like the methods in which they choose to do so, but it's a reality of the commercial movie market that's been the elephant in the room for decades...


Edited by lukejosephchung, September 29 2013 - 11:56 AM.


#48 of 60 OFFLINE   Moe Dickstein

Moe Dickstein

    Filmmaker



  • 3,149 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 06 2001
  • Real Name:T R Wilkinson
  • LocationSherman Oaks, CA

Posted September 29 2013 - 12:12 PM

3D is the only thing that would get me to watch this film again.
Yes, these strange things happen all the time - PT Anderson, Magnolia

#49 of 60 OFFLINE   Dee Zee

Dee Zee

    Stunt Coordinator



  • 174 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 24 2012
  • Real Name:Tom
  • LocationFalls Church VA, USA

Posted September 29 2013 - 12:43 PM

Saw the 3D IMAX version this morning at an AMC multi-plex in Northern Virginia.  I thought it was absolutely stunning.  As someone else said and I agree, it felt like you were on the sound stage when this classic was filmed.  The new surround mix was perfect, not too loud at all, in perfect sync at this theater.  The depth added incredible intimacy with the actors.


Edited by Dee Zee, September 29 2013 - 12:59 PM.


#50 of 60 OFFLINE   Vincent_P

Vincent_P

    Screenwriter



  • 1,747 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 13 2003

Posted September 29 2013 - 09:34 PM

I didn't mind Titanic being changed to 1.78:1 for the 3D version only because the film was shot Super 35 so both have differences but had it been shot in Panavision etc I doubt the aspect ratio would have changed.

Does the BLU ray also contain the 3D conversion process for TWoO? I know there was one posted on the net, but hoping it is featured on the BLU also.

 

While TITANIC was indeed shot mostly in full-frame 4-perf Super-35, CGI shots were finished at a 2:1 aspect ratio, and some native 2-perf 35mm footage of the actual wreck at an approximate native 2.4:1 aspect ratio was also shot.

 

Vincent


Edited by Vincent_P, September 29 2013 - 09:39 PM.


#51 of 60 OFFLINE   Lockjaw

Lockjaw

    Agent



  • 25 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 04 2013
  • Real Name:Mike

Posted September 30 2013 - 06:18 AM

Saw the 3D IMAX version this morning at an AMC multi-plex in Northern Virginia.  I thought it was absolutely stunning.  As someone else said and I agree, it felt like you were on the sound stage when this classic was filmed.  The new surround mix was perfect, not too loud at all, in perfect sync at this theater.  The depth added incredible intimacy with the actors.

 

 

"....new surround mix...."------------so you are saying they redid the 5.1 sound and it is different than the one used in the 2009 release.

 

I know the codec is now DTS-MA, but I was under the impression it was the exact same sound mix.

 

Do you know this for sure or might it have just seemed new?

 

Thanks!



#52 of 60 OFFLINE   JoshZ

JoshZ

    Second Unit



  • 419 posts
  • Join Date: May 26 2012
  • LocationBoston

Posted September 30 2013 - 09:11 AM

RAH, can you clarify whether the 2D disc also utilizes the new 8k scan, or was that only used for the 3D?


Writer / Blogmaster

High-Def Digest


#53 of 60 OFFLINE   Lockjaw

Lockjaw

    Agent



  • 25 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 04 2013
  • Real Name:Mike

Posted September 30 2013 - 09:28 AM

RAH, can you clarify whether the 2D disc also utilizes the new 8k scan, or was that only used for the 3D?

 

And if you don't mind could you comment on whether the sound mix is exactly the same for the new 3D/2D Blu-ray as it was for the 2009 Blu-ray release. We've been hearing a lot of rumors.

 

Thank you!



#54 of 60 OFFLINE   Jon Lidolt

Jon Lidolt

    Stunt Coordinator



  • 178 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 08 2004

Posted October 01 2013 - 07:39 AM

I greeted this project with enormous skepticism - in part because I have next to zero desire for 3D at home, and only selective interest in its application theatrically - in part because I seriously doubted that a 3D retrofit would bring anything significant to this classic either technologically or more importantly artistically - and in part because this is a classic, which meant tinkering with something that already has an evergreen life in its native 2D form. The whole thing seemed unnecessary and uncomfortably revisionist...just a cynical gimmick and cash-grab.

 

But holy Mother of Baum...what a treat to see The Wizard of Oz presented like this in IMAX 3D...which is now on my short list of not only the most memorable movie experiences of this year, but also post-millennium. I mean, if I didn't know this movie was shot flat I would swear it was natively 3D. As exhibition stunts go, this was a corker!

 

 

Before we even get to that wonderful 'geek-gasm' moment, our first clue regarding the respectful treatment this movie will receive starts with the IMAX 3D intro re-rendered in sepia to tie-in seamlessly with the opening credits and Kansas. After that, well, it's just one loving detail after another enhancing yet still honouring this classic...none of which I dare spoil here. Let's just say that anyone who loves this movie will at some point raise both eyebrows over how shrewdly and sensitively the dimensional effects have been rendered. I thought I knew this picture pretty well, but lost count how many times something new surfaced as a result of that added third dimension. It's uncanny. And unforgettable.

 

So as far as this particular fan is concerned, although I'm unlikely to ever watch TWoO in 3D on home video, Warners is welcome to bring this baby back for limited IMAX 3D runs indefinitely. I'll be there in a snap. 

 

 

I greeted this project with enormous skepticism - in part because I have next to zero desire for 3D at home, and only selective interest in its application theatrically - in part because I seriously doubted that a 3D retrofit would bring anything significant to this classic either technologically or more importantly artistically - and in part because this is a classic, which meant tinkering with something that already has an evergreen life in its native 2D form. The whole thing seemed unnecessary and uncomfortably revisionist...just a cynical gimmick and cash-grab.

 

But holy Mother of Baum...what a treat to see The Wizard of Oz presented like this in IMAX 3D...which is now on my short list of not only the most memorable movie experiences of this year, but also post-millennium. I mean, if I didn't know this movie was shot flat I would swear it was natively 3D. As exhibition stunts go, this was a corker!

 

 

Before we even get to that wonderful 'geek-gasm' moment, our first clue regarding the respectful treatment this movie will receive starts with the IMAX 3D intro re-rendered in sepia to tie-in seamlessly with the opening credits and Kansas. After that, well, it's just one loving detail after another enhancing yet still honouring this classic...none of which I dare spoil here. Let's just say that anyone who loves this movie will at some point raise both eyebrows over how shrewdly and sensitively the dimensional effects have been rendered. I thought I knew this picture pretty well, but lost count how many times something new surfaced as a result of that added third dimension. It's uncanny. And unforgettable.

 

So as far as this particular fan is concerned, although I'm unlikely to ever watch TWoO in 3D on home video, Warners is welcome to bring this baby back for limited IMAX 3D runs indefinitely. I'll be there in a snap. 

I saw The Wizard of Oz in 3D IMAX last week and was amazed at how much I enjoyed it. In some sections I almost felt that I'd actually joined Dorothy on her journey through Oz. One man sitting near me commented that he could never watch this movie on TV ever again. His wife agreed. This conversion isn't a gimmick, it truly enhances the experience in a way I'd never imagined. I had not planed on purchasing the new 3D Blu-ray but after seeing the movie in the theatre I realized that I had to have it. And I will. Too bad, though, that I only have a 60 inch screen to watch it on.



#55 of 60 OFFLINE   Lockjaw

Lockjaw

    Agent



  • 25 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 04 2013
  • Real Name:Mike

Posted October 01 2013 - 10:32 AM

Warning the 2D release DOES NOT contain the deleted scenes section that the previous single disc edition did!

NOR does it contain the new upgraded/corrected restoration---it STILL contains the glitch when Glinda leaves munchkinland and it is in fact despite what some reviews say----the old VC-1 codec and not the AVC that the 3D has.

 

I got it this morning and I confirmed this.

 

The 2D IS the OLD transfer and is missing some features including the deleted scenes that the 70th anniversary single disc had.

 

Unless you want the 3D version----there is no upgrade to be had for this set. The rumors were TRUE!


  • FoxyMulder likes this

#56 of 60 OFFLINE   JoshZ

JoshZ

    Second Unit



  • 419 posts
  • Join Date: May 26 2012
  • LocationBoston

Posted October 02 2013 - 06:16 AM

NOR does it contain the new upgraded/corrected restoration---it STILL contains the glitch when Glinda leaves munchkinland and it is in fact despite what some reviews say----the old VC-1 codec and not the AVC that the 3D has.

 

Do you have a timecode for the glitch? I just picked up the disc last night and would like to check that out.

 

On the question of the codec, the 3D version is encoded with MVC, not AVC. AVC can only be used for 2D. MVC is a derivation created specifically for 3D. The two versions of the movie couldn't share the same encode, because... well, they're two completely different versions of the movie.

 

That's not to say that Warner couldn't have re-encoded the 2D version for the new release. However, it's also not to say that the VC-1 on this disc is definitively proven to be the same encode as the old Blu-ray. Are we sure that Warner didn't actually redo it with a new VC-1 encode? That's possible (albeit unlikely, knowing Warner's habit of recycling existing encodes whenever possible). I think someone would need to chart out the bit rate peaks to verify that the new disc is literally the same encode as the older Blu-ray.

 

Frankly, the encoding isn't the real concern here. Was there anything wrong with the digital compression on the old Blu-ray? Scratches or missing frames have nothing to do with the encoding. What we really want to know is whether the 2D disc is sourced from the new 8k film scan that the 3D version was, or if it's recycled from the master created for the older Blu-ray.


Writer / Blogmaster

High-Def Digest


#57 of 60 OFFLINE   Lockjaw

Lockjaw

    Agent



  • 25 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 04 2013
  • Real Name:Mike

Posted October 02 2013 - 07:00 AM

You're right.

 

But the new 2D disc does indeed have the same missing frames when Glinda leaves the Munchkin city. And people who have seen the 3D in theater and on Blu-ray say that was fixed for the new restoration.

 

So yeah, it contains the same flaws as the 2009 release---which is all  that matters. They didn't use the new upgraded/corrected transfer for the new 2D release.

 

And they leave out the deleted scenes which has been in every 'entry level' Oz set going back to Laserdisc.

 

Not an upgrade for the 2D buyer in any way.



#58 of 60 OFFLINE   CraigF

CraigF

    Screenwriter



  • 2,367 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 20 2002
  • Real Name:Craig
  • LocationToronto area, Canada

Posted October 02 2013 - 01:29 PM

^ Are any large studios still using VC-1 on current (2D) encodes? If so, who and why? So I doubt it's a new encode. It's an inferior disc with a new slip. Thus the deluge of info from WB when it was requested. But you knew that; marketing always talks a lot even when they have almost nothing to say, so when they say nothing...



#59 of 60 OFFLINE   JoshZ

JoshZ

    Second Unit



  • 419 posts
  • Join Date: May 26 2012
  • LocationBoston

Posted October 03 2013 - 07:03 AM

^ Are any large studios still using VC-1 on current (2D) encodes? If so, who and why?

 

I think Warner still uses it on occasion, though I don't have any specific recent examples. As to why, who can say? I gave up trying to figure out why Warner does many of the things it does a long time ago. (Still no lossless audio on the 20th Anniversary digibook reissue of Unforgiven, really? Go to hell, Warner!) :)

 

I think there may be a belief that VC-1 is more suitable for very low bit-rate encodes. So if the studio plans to really compress the hell out of an image (which Warner does sometimes), they may pick the codec for that reason.


Edited by JoshZ, October 03 2013 - 07:04 AM.

Writer / Blogmaster

High-Def Digest


#60 of 60 OFFLINE   zoetmb

zoetmb

    Stunt Coordinator



  • 152 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 26 2012
  • Real Name:Martin Brooks
  • LocationNYC

Posted October 15 2013 - 03:42 PM

Actually, this was the one false note (literally) during my IMAX 3D viewing too...a sound level riding w-a-y too high throughout. I thought this was just a choice unique to our venue, but your experience suggests a juiced sound spec throughout the chain.

 

Sometimes the side effect of the overall sound boost was very effective (e.g. the thunderous low end throughout the tornado sequence). I've survived a real tornado and that soundscape was eerily accurate...in fact, those scenes have never played with such visceral terror, as originally intended. But for the rest of this movie, those dialled-to-11 sound levels were really annoying...especially during the softer, sweeter moments. Evidently someone at IMAX thought this gentle musical fantasy should sound like Transformers.

 

FWIW, I didn't detect any serious audio sync problems during our showing, but I was so transfixed by the 3D visuals I could have easily missed something.  

 

I usually avoid IMAX, but I went to see Gravity in IMAX 3D after having read your post and was worried that the sound was also going to be too loud, but I have to admit that the sound was quite good and the levels were also fine.    I was very pleasantly surprised because over-loud soundtracks are a big bugaboo of mine.   I feel like modern directors and mixers have attended too many rock concerts (where the sound is also usually beyond the threshold of pain) and have no understanding of dynamic range - they think they're creating emotion by driving up the levels when they're actually just creating pain and tedium.    I saw Gravity at the Loews Lincoln Square in NYC, which has one of the original IMAX 70mm theatres, although Gravity was presented digitally, using 2 projectors.  

 

I think I saw the last James Bond movie in LieMax and I did have to use earplugs at that presentation.   







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

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users