A Few Words About A few words about...™ King Creole - in Blu-ray (1 Viewer)

[Robert Harris]

Never was a Presley fan, but I can understand and respect those who were.

He was a pop singer in the '50s, and '60s, before hitting Vegas in the '70s.

Between 1956 and 1969, he appeared in over twenty feature films Fox, M-G-M, Paramount and indies.

King Creole, a 1958 Paramount production, is a decent film, probably because of Michael Curtiz in the director's chair. But was it Vista. Loving You in 1957, certainly was.

King Creole is spine number 2 in Paramount's new commemorative series, and overall it looks very nice, as long you don't sit up close.

Start looking at grain structure, and bits and pieces seem to go astray, so don't.

But sit at a nominal distance, like a human, and all will be well. Shot in black and white by Russell Harlen, the new release is generally very pleasing. It's clean, steady and works as promised. Nice gray scale, nice blacks. All's well.

Tracks include 5.1 as well as a restored mono.

As to Vista, I'm wondering that if it is not, if the production might have been affected by all cameras being in use on other projects?

Image - 4

Audio - 5

Pass / Fail - Pass

Upgrade from previous DVD - yes

Recommended

RAH

 

[bujaki]

Fail? You probably mean Pass, no?

 

[Robert Harris]

Fail? You probably mean Pass, no?

Thx. Thought I‘d fixed that.

 

[John Hermes]

Are you sure this is VistaVision? There is no VV logo or mention in credits. Seems to me I've seen behind-the-scenes photos with a standard Mitchell camera on the set.

 

[ToEhrIsHuman]

It is listed on the Wikipedia VistaVision page:

List of VistaVision films - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Here's hoping for an eventual proper 4K (or greater resolution) scan of the O-neg (assuming it is usable) for release on UHD.

 

[John Hermes]

It is listed on the Wikipedia VistaVision page:

List of VistaVision films - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Here's hoping for an eventual proper 4K (or greater resolution) scan of the O-neg (assuming it is usable) for release on UHD.

If so, it's the only VV film I've seen with no mention in credits or advertising.

Look at the picture I added in post #4. That is a standard 35mm camera.

 

[OliverK]

Start looking at grain structure, and bits and pieces seem to go astray, so don't.

But sit at a nominal distance, like a human, and all will be well. Shot in black and white by Russell Harlen, the new release is generally very pleasing. It's clean, steady and works as promised. Nice gray scale, nice blacks. All's well.

Qualifications noted, order cancelled. Several Paramount presents titles seem to have issues with grain management and I would strongly suggest to leave grain alone in these enthusiast products and at least save that kind of tampering for their streaming offerings where some grain management will be used by the streaming services anyway.

As for seating distances 1.5 screen widths away especially from a VistaVision title should not be excessively close and from what you write I doubt that King Creole or the new version To Catch a Thief will make that cut. The old release of To Catch a Thief does and so do the "old" releases of The Ten Commandments and White Christmas - can we please get back to that level of quality?

 

[Robert Crawford]

The one thing that really matters to me is that the iTunes "4K/Dolby Vision" digital looks beautiful on my OLED displays.

 

[Robert Harris]

Are you sure this is VistaVision? There is no VV logo or mention in credits. Seems to me I've seen behind-the-scenes photos with a standard Mitchell camera on the set.

View attachment 71906

You may be correct. The camera is not either of the VVLA variants. No Vista screen credit, nor in ad art. Most entities list the film as Vista, as that would make sense, and make the film a rare avis.

That noted, and if it isn't, the look of the disc certainly had me fooled. I'm wondering if this could be one of John Lowry's upscale jobs? It looks like Vista.

 

[Dick]

You may be correct. The camera is not either of the VVLA variants. No Vista screen credit, nor in ad art. Most entities list the film as Vista, as that would make sense, and make the film a rare avis.

That noted, and if it isn't, the look of the disc certainly had me fooled. I'm wondering if this could be one of John Lowry's upscale jobs? It looks like Vista.

Maltin's guide lists it as VV. Surely his writers have made errors in a volume so huge, but they generally have their facts straight after much research.

 

[battlebeast]

Do these paramount titles have a spin number?

 

[Robert Harris]

Maltin's guide lists it as VV. Surely his writers have made errors in a volume so huge, but they generally have their facts straight after much research.

It's possible that both Vista and 4-perf were used for certain scenes. The one imaged does not appear to be VVLA, which were either converted three-strip or butterfly. Whatever the situation, the new Blu-ray, even with minor grain problems, is quite extraordinary.

 

[Keith Cobby]

The Widescreen Museum list it as VV.

 

[john a hunter]

A rare mistake on their part I think.

 

[Rodney]

Do these paramount titles have a spin number?

Yes.

 

[battlebeast]

Yes.

View attachment 72065

Interesting!

 

[ABritch]

You may be correct. The camera is not either of the VVLA variants. No Vista screen credit, nor in ad art. Most entities list the film as Vista, as that would make sense, and make the film a rare avis.

That noted, and if it isn't, the look of the disc certainly had me fooled. I'm wondering if this could be one of John Lowry's upscale jobs? It looks like Vista.

According to Bob Furmanek and Jack Theakston King Creole was not VistaVision but shot flat 1.37:1, protected at 1.66:1 and cropped for theatrical presentation at 1.85:1.

Please see posts 6,858 thru 6,860 on the Aspect Ratio Documentation thread. this also contains some revealing info on Jailhouse Rock earlier in this same thread, link below.

Aspect Ratio Documentation

No, the colorization was done from the non-anamorphic element. That's why it has more visual information vertically than the extraction.

www.hometheaterforum.com

 

[Into The Archives]

In the fantastic FTB book, King Creole-Frame To Frame, any photo shown behind the scenes, on location, and on the Paramount backlot are a normal 4-perf set-up---however, the negative had the VistaVision "F" cue mark at the start of each reel--it can be seen in the old SD DVD and many 16mm prints of this title.

https://www.elvisinfonet.com/book_King_Creole.html

 

[ABritch]

In the fantastic FTB book, King Creole-Frame To Frame, any photo shown behind the scenes, on location, and on the Paramount backlot are a normal 4-perf set-up---however, the negative had the VistaVision "F" cue mark at the start of each reel--it can be seen in the old SD DVD and many 16mm prints of this title.

https://www.elvisinfonet.com/book_King_Creole.html

if it were VistaVision, hypothetically as I don't think it is, why would it not be advertised as such and carry the VistaVision trademark at the start of the film? In the 1950's widescreen period, for the studios, it was all about drawing the audience away from the TV and back to the Cinemas. any opportunity to market a film as something special that couldn't be seen on TV the PR departments jumped on.

Loving You - VistaVision, Paramount opening logo


King Creole - Paramount opening and closing logos

 

[Into The Archives]

It wasn't shot in Vistavision and pictures in the FTD book proves it. Regardless, this has always been a wonderfully shot film and if you're a fan of the film, try and find a copy of the book---it's fantastic!!