Search results

The director owns their vision of the film....And it's their vision they pour into it, regardless of who holds the rights of the finished product. What I read several weeks ago is that the film needed quite a bit of work to look great on UHD. Now in fairness, perhaps the context indeed was...

I'm merely pointing out that the term "restoration" can mean different things depending on what the goal of the project is. Sometimes it's to restore a film to how it was originally released....sometimes it's only to adjust the color timing, clean things up or something else along those lines...

I think it depends on what the goal of the restoration was. The term itself can mean different things depending on the overall design of the project and the intent. For example, Alfred Hitchcock's "Marnie" was released this week on 4K. The restoration that was needed on this particular film...

Nobody forced Mr. Coppola to sign off. And nobody forced him to be so clear on what the intent of the project was. If he wasn’t happy, it would have been far easier for him to simply say it was just a general project to see the films released in 4K and leave it at that.

The director of a film does not “own“ the film (ie his vision) for it?? That’s a fascinating stance to take. I’m sure it comes as a huge surprise to directors everywhere.

The point is that Coppola said that the goal was to restore the film to how it looked at the moment of release...before it's look shifted in the following months and years with subsequent prints that were mishandled by the studio. Obviously, he believes he has achieved that. People may not...

The reason I'm calling it a "restoration" is because that is how it is referenced by Coppola. I'm simply using the language he is using. And the words of the director, after all, should matter most.

Thanks for that post...I agree.

Says who? He's the director of the film. It's very odd to me that people would insist that they know more than the director.

Coppola apparently disagrees. It really is as simple as that.

Everything I'm saying is grounded in what Coppola has literally said...and the reality of the hierarchy of who is in charge when films are made. So if people want to disagree with that - It's OK. But it doesn't make them right. I do not understand why some people are having such a hard time...

Coppola disagrees. And you are not the director - He is.

I think it's pretty clear that Coppola DOES believe that they achieved their goal. You and others may disagree...but he is the director and I think it's fair and right to respect his words over others. As I said before, Coppola didn't have to offer up the information...and likely wouldn't...

It's true that studios often get in the way of what a director wants to do. And that is why we get so many "director cuts" later on. But that being said, if a director is literally making statements about the intent of a project, I think that should be the defining factor.

What I'm seeing is a couple of people in this forum topic who are completely ignoring what the director of the film literally said....and suggesting that they know better than he does what his original vision for the film was. I'm not sure how it could be any clearer.

It's our responsibility to tell a director that their vision for what they wanted to make in THEIR FILM is wrong....and it should be dictated by others instead? LOL...Come on...

And this project was described by Coppola as a restoration back to that original source. I really don't understand why that concept is so threatening to some people in this forum topic. Why does it matter so much if this version is truly closer to the original source and original intent?

I'm "repeating the same thing" because other posters are "repeating the same thing" themselves. So you're saying they're trolling? I really don't think what I'm saying is all that radical - Why would we not believe the words of the actual director?

I'm basing my comments on what he actually said. It's quite simple. You're doing A LOT of speculating there. It's far more logical to just stick to what he actually said.

The final say in a film is the Director (or “directors” if it was directed by more than one person). It’s not the director of photography, not the casting director, not the lighting director, not anyone else. I think the point Coppola was trying to make with this project is that almost all...

Again…I’m just going by what the director of the film said. He and his team call it a “restoration“ and said that the intent was to restore it to how it first looked upon release. It seems very odd to me that we would not respect their viewpoint as being the final word on this.

They call it a "restoration." And there's no reason why we shouldn't respect that.

OK...But you're not the director of the film. And I don't think it's inappropriate to believe that he knows more than you about what the film originally looked like and what his intent was.

I'm very familiar with the terrific work that went into the 2007 project. But that doesn't change Coppola's stated intent with this project in 2022.

The audience does not own the director's vision - The director does. And obviously, not every audience member over the past 50 years would agree with your statement.

Interesting thought. But to me, the flaw in that logic is the fact that Coppola was not forced to explain that the goal was to restore the film to how it looked in 1972. If what you are saying is accurate, he could have easily sidestepped the goal and simply said that they wanted to create a...

Honestly, it's a pretty simple concept: It is a known fact that Paramount did not handle the original source material well and as a result, as time passed, people were watching prints of the films that were not an accurate representation of the original source. Coppola's aim, as he stated, was...

Actually, your words suggest you are. LOL. The director disagrees. And he has stated that was the entire point of this particular restoration project.

He's the director of the film. He would know best what his vision is. It's fascinating to me that so many people are insisting that they know better than Coppola himself what his intention and vision is/was. It's quite hilarious.

The director of the film disagrees.