A Few Words About A few words about...™ Moby Dick (1956) -- in Blu-ray (1 Viewer)

[jacobacci]

Hi all
I watched the Twilight Time Moby Dick BluRay last night and I was very impressed with the restoration effort. I find the movie looks very beautiful. THANK YOU, Twilight.
However it struck me that around 1:22:50 and 1:23:50 the color balance shifts dramatically, as if not the whole restoration process had been applied to this part. I was wondering if this is due to the source material or if it could a mishap in the mastering process?
Thanks and Regards
Rudi

 

[Robert Harris]

Hi all
I watched the Twilight Time Moby Dick BluRay last night and I was very impressed with the restoration effort. I find the movie looks very beautiful. THANK YOU, Twilight.
However it struck me that around 1:22:50 and 1:23:50 the color balance shifts dramatically, as if not the whole restoration process had been applied to this part. I was wondering if this is due to the source material or if it could a mishap in the mastering process?
Thanks and Regards
Rudi

Source.

 

[TJPC]

I remember watching this on Bill Kennedy At The Movies(WKBD ch. 50 Detroit) on a Sunday afternoon in the early 80s. I was very young but I remember really enjoying this movie.

I didn't watch it again until this past Thanksgiving. The nostalgia factor, a welcomed rest from work, and a fantastic movie made for a grand experience.

Off topic here! But ha! I grew up in Windsor and was a constant viewer of Bill Kennedy. He is why I am still addicted to classic films today!

 

[Charles Smith]

Watched this excellent Blu-ray a few weeks ago, my first time seeing the whole film in years. I have no memory of when or where I watched it last, let alone what the colors looked like, but I loved this. In spite of the occasional criticisms, I'm rather blown away at what a fine movie and beautiful telling of the story it is.

Some time later, a few days ago, I pulled out the "color-corrected" laserdisc, popped that in, and -- wow -- never mind the sorry image in general -- at a glance it just looks like regular old color.

 

[t1g3r5fan]

Got this as a Christmas present and it's amazing; like the reconstructed roadshow version of It's a Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World, this is the case of making a silk purse from a sow's ear. It's beautiful, warts and all and kudos to the team at Twilight Time for making this a reality.

 

[dana martin]

wonderful presentation, and today going through the special features, happened across a hint, at a title that many on the forum would like to see. Exact words, sit back while we control all you see and hear.

 

[zoetmb]

Assuming that somehow TT could even gain access to the elements needed for a restoration (MGM might prefer them to stay in their vaults), looking at the math, it's just not possible (or reasonable in my view) to expect TT to restore the film.

......
Isn't this what we want studios and distributors to do? To give us a home video version that approximates as best as possible the original theatrical release? This new disc will be closer to what the movie originally looked like than any previous home video version, or even any prints made in decades. I for one am applauding this effort and am eagerly awaiting my copy.

I don't blame TT. They're limited by only being able to sell 3000 copies. One question is why do they have that limitation? If this is a royalty based agreement (which licensing deals usually are, with a guarantee), wouldn't it have been to MGM's benefit to have them sell more copies? And if TT's upfront research showed that they would sell more than 3000 copies, they could have spent more to restore the film (if MGM would have let them). Of course, MGM, in whatever formulation it's in these days (is it MGM or Warner who would now have the rights?) should have spent the money to restore the film. It's an important film and Gregory Peck isn't exactly unknown. The film cost about $4.5 million to make in 1956, which translates to $40.18 million in 2017 dollars, fairly low budget compared to today's productions.

In the pre-TV days, after a theatrical run, films had little financial value. 16mm prints were sold or rented to schools and film clubs and there was the occasional revival. But once TV came in, it became obvious that films could have a long economic life, once cable and home video evolved, that was compounded and now with the streaming services, it's been compounded again. The studios were really irresponsible when it came to preserving their assets. You'd think they would have learned their lesson by now, except I guess it shouldn't be a surprise because they're always only fixated on the revenues of the newest movies.

Perhaps I'm misunderstanding what RAH stated and/or I don't fully understand all the ins and outs of restoring a film, but I don't understand why it wouldn't have been better to scan the Library of Congress print, especially if it hadn't faded.

And if it's the case that Moby Dick only has a market of 3000 Blu-ray copies (in the U.S.), that certainly demonstrates a severe lack of cultural interest in this country of great films of the past.

 

[Robert Harris]

I don't blame TT. They're limited by only being able to sell 3000 copies. One question is why do they have that limitation? If this is a royalty based agreement (which licensing deals usually are, with a guarantee), wouldn't it have been to MGM's benefit to have them sell more copies? And if TT's upfront research showed that they would sell more than 3000 copies, they could have spent more to restore the film (if MGM would have let them). Of course, MGM, in whatever formulation it's in these days (is it MGM or Warner who would now have the rights?) should have spent the money to restore the film. It's an important film and Gregory Peck isn't exactly unknown. The film cost about $4.5 million to make in 1956, which translates to $40.18 million in 2017 dollars, fairly low budget compared to today's productions.

In the pre-TV days, after a theatrical run, films had little financial value. 16mm prints were sold or rented to schools and film clubs and there was the occasional revival. But once TV came in, it became obvious that films could have a long economic life, once cable and home video evolved, that was compounded and now with the streaming services, it's been compounded again. The studios were really irresponsible when it came to preserving their assets. You'd think they would have learned their lesson by now, except I guess it shouldn't be a surprise because they're always only fixated on the revenues of the newest movies.

Perhaps I'm misunderstanding what RAH stated and/or I don't fully understand all the ins and outs of restoring a film, but I don't understand why it wouldn't have been better to scan the Library of Congress print, especially if it hadn't faded.

And if it's the case that Moby Dick only has a market of 3000 Blu-ray copies (in the U.S.), that certainly demonstrates a severe lack of cultural interest in this country of great films of the past.

A print is last resort.

 

[Josh Steinberg]

TT's business model is to produce 3000 copies of a title, so that's what their licensing arrangements are for. They've gone into details as to why they settled on that number in prior interviews, and I don't want to put words in their mouth, but the short version is that when they got started, studios were a little reluctant to license titles that could be runaway hits for other distributors, and TT couldn't take on huge financial responsibilities to pay giant licensing fees. 3000 copies over a 3 year period was good good for both parties - the studio gets a licensing fee up front, and the knowledge that they can re-release the title on their own in 3 years if it's a big seller (like Sony did with "Christine"), and TT's market research has shown them that 3000 or less is generally enough to cover demand for the licensing period they do have them for.

I don't know what state the Library Of Congress print is in, but it's a little besides the point. TT doesn't do transfers; it's not in their budget. MGM wasn't willing to do any work at all on this title, period. A new scan was more than MGM would pay for, and would have exceeded TT's budget for the release. TT normally doesn't do any kind of video restoration work but they felt this title was too important to not do something with. In the end, the cost of the work they did will probably eat into a significant portion of any potential profits.

This disc was a labor of love by people who care about film, done this way as a last resort because the people who own the film and have the responsibility to care for it were unwilling to do so.

The market for classic titles continues to shrink; in the near future, TT will be reducing the number of copies they make because many titles have had difficulty reaching the 3000 copies sold mark.

 

[Mike Frezon]

Please.

There is no need to make political references when discussing film restoration. Recent posts have been edited for removal of political references.

 

[PMF]

Congratulations to both TT and Greg Kimble, as "Moby Dick" has officially sold out.
8 months of efforts followed by a brisk 4 months of selling 3,000 copies.
Of course, I have no reference experience to the original theatrical showing;
but between my reading of RAH's fascinating review and my watching of Mr. Kimble's enviably taken journey in "A Bleached Whale", I can take heart that I have been brought as close to the John Huston/Oswald Morris vision that was originally intended.

Initially, I was never a "Moby Dick" fan; as my only impressions were tainted by a VHS copy I had viewed, from so many years ago. But that's all changed; and thanks to TT and Mr. Kimble's labors, I am now all the richer for it.

As my eye gets further and further trained, within these past few years, I have gained a deeper understanding of what Martin Scorsese had meant when speaking about the loss of information, when dealing with a decaying film that's awaiting its Lazarus moment. "Moby Dick" is a marvelous example of how reparative efforts; be they officially a restoration or not; can bring us all - the audience - that much closer to fully grasping and experiencing his articulations.

It is now doubtful that I will ever be able to afford an older dream of entering into the schools of restoration; but there's still time to shift my energies within the idea of becoming a Fund-Raiser for future preservation projects. Would this not still achieve the same end result? With that said; and with a bit of research on that front; the newer goal will hopefully hasten such processes, while also cultivating a further support for Mr. Scorsese, Mr. Harris and Mr. Kimble to continue within their efforts as only they, so superbly, know how.

 

[PMF]

And then there's the MGM situation. [...]

The film is important. There is no way, outside of an expensive full-on six-figure restoration, to make it look as it did in 1956. [...]

Would I be correct in surmising that the original negative to "Moby Dick" is in the vault's of MGM?
Also, in an ideal world;
If the Negative did became accessible and the 6 figures for restoration were handily in place, would it then become a cake-walk situation for nailing the definitive color palate that John Huston and Oswald Morris had originally intended?
And what is known about the "modified black and white print"?
Does that Negative still exist, as well?
In short, without the obstacles of Money, Barber and Board would "Moby Dick" still be able to swim, or is it feared that Vinegar Syndrome could be too far advanced?

 

[Robert Harris]

Would I be correct in surmising that the original negative to "Moby Dick" is in the vault's of MGM?
Also, in an ideal world;
If the Negative did became accessible and the 6 figures for restoration were handily in place, would it then become a cake-walk situation for nailing the definitive color palate that John Huston and Oswald Morris had originally intended?
And what is known about the "modified black and white print"?
Does that Negative still exist, as well?
In short, without the obstacles of Money, Barber and Board would "Moby Dick" still be able to swim, or is it feared that Vinegar Syndrome could be too far advanced?

Without the obstacles, BD could be gorgeous. Not aware of a b/w variant, although there would have been TV prints, normally derived from the green record.

 

[Jimbo64]

But wasn't the color palette created by printing the color matrices (derived by making separations) with an extra pass of black and white during printing? I didn't think a negative existed in the form of the darkened semi desaturated look that the first run of prints produced.

 

[Robert Harris]

But wasn't the color palette created by printing the color matrices (derived by making separations) with an extra pass of black and white during printing? I didn't think a negative existed in the form of the darkened semi desaturated look that the first run of prints produced.

Before that can be done, one needs a fully functional original negative, and none exists.

 

[PMF]

Before that can be done, one needs a fully functional original negative, and none exists.

Learning of this is sad news. I misunderstood.
I thought that the estimated 6 figures needed towards a full-out restoration had been inclusive of an existing original negative.

Nonetheless, this only serves to deepen my gratitude and admirations towards the work of Greg Kimble;
a gentleman, no less, who in turn gave his thanks to TT, Robert Harris and Mr. Harry Smith of The National Film Preservation Foundation;
as cited in the end credits of "Moby Dick".

One must take pause and reflect upon all that we've been given within this experience

Proud to have been one of the 3,000.

This "Moby Dick" has been an altogether inspiring event, throughout.

 

[PMF]

Are there any background stories as to why John Huston dubbed his own voice over Joseph Tomelty's portrayal of Mr. Coffin?

 

[Nelson Au]

I thought I saw a post here last night that the blu Ray is sold-out. I managed to grab a copy from Amazon after reading that. $43 I guess is the going rate, wasn't sure what the retail price was but seems worth it. I totally forgot about this release, so I might have caught it in time.

 

[Josh Steinberg]

The retail price for the vast majority of TT titles is $29.99. They are available exclusively through the Twilight Time website and the Screen Archives website. If you purchase from Amazon, you're buying from a third party seller who is buying from TT and reselling for profit.

It's sold out so there probably wasn't a better option than that for this title, but for titles still in print, always check TT and SAE first. It's frustrating to see people attempting to sell TT titles on Amazon for $50 or more when you can buy those same titles for less directly from TT.

 

[Allansfirebird]

I'm rather glad I grabbed one of the last copies off of TT's website. I'd seen the film once before from one of the disappointing earlier releases, but the new restoration was a beauty to behold!