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...™ Witness for the Prosecution -- in Blu-ray

Blu-ray Kino A Few Words About

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

#21 of 37 OFFLINE   Bob Furmanek

Bob Furmanek

    Producer



  • 3,588 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 10 2001

Posted July 09 2014 - 04:09 PM

Very interesting. Do you know when the specs were changed?


Bob Furmanek

www.3dfilmarchive.com


Bubbleweb_edited-1_zpsc986b444.jpg


#22 of 37 OFFLINE   EddieLarkin

EddieLarkin

    Supporting Actor



  • 804 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 16 2012
  • Real Name:Nick
  • LocationYorkshire

Posted July 09 2014 - 04:16 PM

Interesting piece of history.

 

The aspect ratio for Kwai is incorrect, as while it was discussed early on to be 2.55, it was only released in 2.35, with the left side of image cropped.

 

The publication is incorrect.

 

RAH

 

My understand is that it was composed 2.55:1, and when the mono optical track came in all prints went out at 2.35:1. Obviously it would be incorrect to project such a print at 2.55:1, but regardless the trades have correctly listed the intended compositional ratio. Which is something. Who knows how or why it turned out that way, but if we're relying on the trades to tell us how to watch our films today, then this is an example of them getting it right.



#23 of 37 OFFLINE   ThadK

ThadK

    Stunt Coordinator



  • 167 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 25 2003

Posted July 09 2014 - 04:19 PM

Uh-oh. One of the times out of a thousand that the trade is incorrect.


"It's the end of the age of innocence starting now."

 


#24 of 37 OFFLINE   Bob Furmanek

Bob Furmanek

    Producer



  • 3,588 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 10 2001

Posted July 09 2014 - 04:42 PM

The world premiere was held at the Plaza in London on October 2, 1957 and the U.S. premiere was at New York's RKO Palace on December 18.

 

The very first release with a mag/optical track was KISMET on December 23, 1955.


Bob Furmanek

www.3dfilmarchive.com


Bubbleweb_edited-1_zpsc986b444.jpg


#25 of 37 OFFLINE   Robert Harris

Robert Harris

    Archivist



  • 7,555 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 08 1999
  • Real Name:Robert Harris

Posted July 09 2014 - 06:52 PM

In original discussion, a stereo track was on the table, but then dropped -- possibly as the budget rose. The film was shot as 2.55, but no prints were ever struck, and in 2.35, the lab neglected to center the image, presuming it had been shot regular aperture.

No 2.55 printing matrices were ever produced, and all prints were 2.35 (off-center).

As far as tracks, no stereo was ever recorded, and all stems, inclusive of music are monaural.

As congecture, marketing may have released almost year old specs to the trades. 2.55 did not see the light of day until Mr. Crisp brought the film to its latest video incarnation.

RAH
  • Moe Dickstein likes this

"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


#26 of 37 OFFLINE   Bob Furmanek

Bob Furmanek

    Producer



  • 3,588 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 10 2001

Posted July 09 2014 - 07:08 PM

Fascinating, thank you for the information.


Bob Furmanek

www.3dfilmarchive.com


Bubbleweb_edited-1_zpsc986b444.jpg


#27 of 37 OFFLINE   rsmithjr

rsmithjr

    Supporting Actor



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

Posted July 09 2014 - 07:13 PM

For spherical wide-screen films of this era, I have always suspected that the published aspect ratios had little to do with the "intended" AR of the film makers.  Prints often had more vertical information on them than would be necessary for exhibition at the published AR.  Projectionists would show them at varying aspect ratios depending on the theatre's properties and the whim of management.

 

I have never examined a print of this film so I cannot say but I would not be shocked to learn that original prints were 166. 

 

The actual intent of the director and DP may be hard to discern. 



#28 of 37 OFFLINE   EddieLarkin

EddieLarkin

    Supporting Actor



  • 804 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 16 2012
  • Real Name:Nick
  • LocationYorkshire

Posted July 09 2014 - 07:25 PM

If the published aspect ratios had little to do with the intended aspect ratios, why publish them at all? What other purpose do they serve?


  • ThadK likes this

#29 of 37 OFFLINE   Robert Harris

Robert Harris

    Archivist



  • 7,555 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 08 1999
  • Real Name:Robert Harris

Posted July 09 2014 - 09:38 PM

If the published aspect ratios had little to do with the intended aspect ratios, why publish them at all? What other purpose do they serve?

 

The published aspect ratios were generally correct, thus the rationale to publish them.  On occasion they did not sync to facts, or changing facts.

 

Which is why Mr. Furmanek's ongoing research is an important database.  My point has always been that during the short era of aspect ratio change, that data should be accepted as a measured standard, subject to confirmation.

 

RAH


  • Yorkshire likes this

"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


#30 of 37 OFFLINE   Josh Steinberg

Josh Steinberg

    Screenwriter



  • 2,630 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 10 2003
  • Real Name:Josh Steinberg

Posted July 10 2014 - 04:22 PM

As congecture, marketing may have released almost year old specs to the trades. 2.55 did not see the light of day until Mr. Crisp brought the film to its latest video incarnation.

 

And boy did that look beautiful -- somehow I had never seen the film, so when Film Forum had a brand new print from that same source, I saw it and was blown away.  Fantastic film, beautifully photographed.



#31 of 37 OFFLINE   Thomas T

Thomas T

    Screenwriter



  • 2,290 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 30 2001

Posted July 11 2014 - 12:06 AM

 

 

The publication is incorrect.

 

RAH

 

Trade publications are not above making errors. I don't know how many times I've read an article in The Hollywood Reporter (especially obits) that had me scratching my head regarding "facts".



#32 of 37 OFFLINE   Will Krupp

Will Krupp

    Screenwriter



  • 1,098 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 02 2003

Posted July 11 2014 - 10:34 AM

The first presentations with a combo mag/optical track were BOY ON A DOLPHIN on April 10, 1957. Fox also had mag/optical prints available in April on THE TRUE STORY OF JESSE JAMES.

 

Oh, that's so interesting Mr. Furmanek, thank you!  I had always thought that BUS STOP initiated the mag/optical mandate in 1956 (I can't remember now WHY I thought so, though) so it's great to have it clarified.  Thanks, again!


  • Bob Furmanek and Jimbo64 like this

#33 of 37 OFFLINE   Bob Furmanek

Bob Furmanek

    Producer



  • 3,588 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 10 2001

Posted July 11 2014 - 10:39 AM

Thank you Will, it's my pleasure.

 

I was mistaken in my earlier post and have corrected the information. The very first release with a mag/optical track was KISMET on December 23, 1955.

 

The first mag/optical print from Fox was in April 1957 with BOY ON A DOLPHIN and THE TRUE STORY OF JESSE JAMES.

 

I'm sorry for the confusion.

 

Mag-optical-Kismet.gif

 

Magop2.gif


  • Will Krupp likes this

Bob Furmanek

www.3dfilmarchive.com


Bubbleweb_edited-1_zpsc986b444.jpg


#34 of 37 OFFLINE   Bob Furmanek

Bob Furmanek

    Producer



  • 3,588 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 10 2001

Posted July 11 2014 - 02:51 PM

I've added information on BUS STOP here: http://www.hometheat...tion/?p=4112066


Bob Furmanek

www.3dfilmarchive.com


Bubbleweb_edited-1_zpsc986b444.jpg


#35 of 37 OFFLINE   haineshisway

haineshisway

    Screenwriter



  • 2,339 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 26 2011
  • Real Name:Bruce
  • LocationLos Angeles

Posted July 22 2014 - 09:49 PM

Very nice transfer of this wonderful film.  But I think I must differ here and say it would look better at 1.85, but that's just me probably.


  • John Hodson and Will Krupp like this

#36 of 37 OFFLINE   Mark Booth

Mark Booth

    Supporting Actor



  • 871 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 25 1999

Posted Yesterday, 01:18 AM

*
POPULAR

What a marvelous film! Tonight was my first viewing and I am genuinely impressed and pleased! I think we'll show this in the Booth Bijou in the near future.

Mark
  • DavidJ, JohnMor and Matt Hough like this

#37 of 37 OFFLINE   DavidJ

DavidJ

    Screenwriter



  • 2,600 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 23 2001
  • Real Name:David

Posted Yesterday, 03:24 PM

Glad you liked it. It's one of my favorites.





Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: Blu-ray, Kino, A Few Words About

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users