A Few Words About A few words about...™ On the Beach -- in Blu-ray (1 Viewer)

[Robert Harris]

As it rightly should when a pattern emerges for releases under a particular label.It's clear that not all MGM/UA titles are in dire straights, as those released by Twilight Time look quite good. I can't speak for anybody else, but my actual concern is that lower-tier distributors like Kino and Olive are acting as enablers for studios to offload their rough-looking catalog titles without lifting a finger to restore, clean up, or even address basic issues (e.g. audio alignment). If more film fans were able to say no to dross on Blu, maybe, just maybe, MGM would inject a few dollars into cleaning up these titles and creating new HD transfers, given these same improved transfers could then be used for digital-only sales.But as it stands, by lapping up whatever MGM throws our way via Kino, we're basically saying "We'll take your trash, and we'll like it too!"

Why can these transfers not facilitate digital sales? I would presume that many will not stand up to television QC reports.RAH

 

[Persianimmortal]

The existing transfers can of course be sold digitally. I just meant that MGM might have greater incentive to do better transfers - for use in both physical and digital releases - if we who are supposed to be the biggest fans of these classics weren't so eager to simply accept (indeed reward) the status quo.

 

[FoxyMulder]

My heart sinks whenever I hear that a film I like is going to be released by Olive or Kino...

The problem i see is that it's basically over for those titles on blu ray, they won't get a second chance to look better as no work will go into any future release when one is already on the market, i'm sure there will be some acceptable and good looking titles to come from Kino but a lot of rubbish too, i'm less tolerant of lower quality on blu ray because the higher quality stuff is so good.

I could go back years and say i was also less tolerant of poor VHS releases, once widescreen on VHS hit the marketplace i started writing letters to the studio asking for more and became a lot less accepting of pan and scan and avoided it.

I was probably more tolerant of poor dvd releases but that was down to ignorance on my part, education is so annoying, it starts costing you more money as you seek out the best version of your favourite films on disc from around the world.

I'm just thankful for the internet and sites like HTF where i can learn in advance of the quality of the release.

 

[David Weicker]

As it rightly should when a pattern emerges for releases under a particular label.It's clear that not all MGM/UA titles are in dire straights, as those released by Twilight Time look quite good. I can't speak for anybody else, but my actual concern is that lower-tier distributors like Kino and Olive are acting as enablers for studios to offload their rough-looking catalog titles without lifting a finger to restore, clean up, or even address basic issues (e.g. audio alignment). If more film fans were able to say no to dross on Blu, maybe, just maybe, MGM would inject a few dollars into cleaning up these titles and creating new HD transfers, given these same improved transfers could then be used for digital-only sales.But as it stands, by lapping up whatever MGM throws our way via Kino, we're basically saying "We'll take your trash, and we'll like it too!"

- deleted -

 

[Robert Crawford]

The existing transfers can of course be sold digitally. I just meant that MGM might have greater incentive to do better transfers - for use in both physical and digital releases - if we who are supposed to be the biggest fans of these classics weren't so eager to simply accept (indeed reward) the status quo.

Then again, it might not give them greater incentive.

 

[FoxyMulder]

Then again, it might not give them greater incentive.

They certainly have no incentive to work on them now.

 

[Alan Tully]

I'm just thankful for the internet and sites like HTF where i can learn in advance of the quality of the release.

Yeah, totally that. I know I can pre-order a Warner Archive, they've earned that privilege, but everything else it's wait & see (& read), some labels more than others. But no Kino's anyway, as I'm region B.

 

[Robert Crawford]

They certainly have no incentive to work on them now.

Yet, Cast a Giant Shadow looks and sounds very good as an example.

 

[David Weicker]

I have removed my post.I apologize if I offended anyone

 

[FoxyMulder]

Yet, Cast a Giant Shadow looks and sounds very good as an example.

As said above, there is going to be some good looking titles but i agree with what persianimmortal says about the majority of them which is that MGM is using the smaller labels to offload their catalog titles with very little work applied to a lot of them, that's with regards to using older masters rather than creating newer ones, simple 2K scans with very minimal cleanup would do me, i think Kino is getting that with some of those titles but as a film fan i would like to see every title treated equally.*


*I know it will never happen but, it's a forum, it's good to vent and let off steam, especially if you are a locomotive.

 

[atfree]

Not sure I can add much to what's already been written (but that's never stopped me yet).

I written on this forum many times that my goal is to own the movies I love, and some classic titles I merely like, in the BD format in the best possible quality. I understand that "possible" is in the eye of the beholder, but realistically in today's environment what are the chances that many of the films Kino, TT, and others are releasing will get "better" transfers, clean-up, etc? Arguably, most of these films, like On the Beach, are below the radar of the average viewer and are valued more by those of us with a greater and deeper love and understanding of "classic" film.

I've purchased 3 KLSC titles so far (Breakheart Pass, Mr. Majestyk, and The Unforgiven) with 7 more "blind buys" pre-ordered for release over the next couple of months. For the most part, I'd give the three I've seen 3 out of 5 stars for transfer quality, which I would equate with being average. Just as with Olive Films, I never expect the quality of a WHV, WAC or even Universal release as I understand these are older transfers that are sold to Kino, Olive, etc "as is". It's kind of like buying a used car.....buyer beware. Sometimes you'll get a great deal and the car is has been taken care of and will run for years, but sometimes you'll get a lemon that falls apart 2 days after you drive it off the lot. The reason I still buy these releases is simple....I doubt we'll ever see a better transfer, at least not in the foreseeable future.

My biggest qualm with Kino now is pricing. When they first started releasing them, initial pricing on Amazon was around $25 but dropped as release dates got closer to the $17 range, which I feel is reasonable based on the overall quality we're seeing. However, now the pricing of these releases is staying above the $20 level (well above in most cases). I'm getting the BD of "The Great Race" next week for under $20 (even if paid full retail), a film (based on RAH's review) that has received a lot of TLC from WAC. So, it's becoming harder to justify my purchases of KLSC releases at $20+ based on the quality we're seeing overall. But they do have us over a barrel if we want these films on BD.....cause I doubt the market is so large for these titles that a boycott would have any effect on MGM or any other studio to create a better transfer.

 

[Robert Crawford]

As said above, there is going to be some good looking titles but i agree with what persianimmortal says about the majority of them.

There is enough agreement and disagreement to go around for all of us.

 

[Robert Crawford]

I have removed my post.I apologize if I offended anyone

Thank you as I've removed the posts that quoted your post.

 

[JohnMor]

My biggest qualm with Kino now is pricing. When they first started releasing them, initial pricing on Amazon was around $25 but dropped as release dates got closer to the $17 range, which I feel is reasonable based on the overall quality we're seeing. However, now the pricing of these releases is staying above the $20 level (well above in most cases). I'm getting the BD of "The Great Race" next week for under $20 (even if paid full retail), a film (based on RAH's review) that has received a lot of TLC from WAC. So, it's becoming harder to justify my purchases of KLSC releases at $20+ based on the quality we're seeing overall.

Agreed. I will only buy these on sale.

 

[ROclockCK]

Agreed. I will only buy these on sale.

Well John, that's the bottom line isn't it. So far, I'm 1 for 2 with this label...which is quickly becoming too much of a crapshoot for the kind of day one blind pre-ordering I do with the WAC...or TT...or Shout...or Criterion...all dependable in terms of baseline Blu-ray quality. I simply trust their standards.

But even after this bummy response to On the Beach, I still haven't cancelled my pre-order for Run Silent, Run Deep because it was like $17 bucks, and hey...it's a submarine movie...I mean, how damaging can some extra murkiness be? Nor have I cancelled my pre-order for Planet of the Vampires because it seems like Kino has put some extra effort into that one, especially its features, plus technically it's not from the 'Studio Classics' line. And I might also pick up Separate Tables - again, it's a black and white title with an appealing all-star cast, and the word on it so far has been pretty decent overall.

So as a classic film fan and collector, of course I'm disappointed...I really did want my initially wary impression of what Tarzi was up to proven dead wrong. However, as a consumer, if it becomes clear that they're just merrily shovelling away here, then I'll just be that much more cautious about which KLSC titles I buy, when, and at what price point. Just as I ended up having to do with Olive...

 

[AnthonyClarke]

Returning to The Beach:

In case there's anyone who doesn't know the story about Ava Gardner arriving in Australia -

'I'm here to make a film about the end of the world and this sure is the place'

That story is a bit more complicated than that ... truth is that a really excellent Australian journalist for The Age newspaper, Neiil Jillett, interviewed Ava about filming in Australia. She wasn't exactly forthcoming, and Neil said that 'if asked, Ava would most likely have said that Melbourne was the perfect place to make a movie about the end of the world'.
He is still very twitchy when people credit Ava for coming up with that line!

 

[Malcolm Bmoor]

Very sorry to get the story wrong as it's all too common an occurrence so many thanks for the true version.

The mistaken one has been current, I believe for the entire life of the film as research isn't the strongest preoccupation when story telling.

Print the legend ......

I've felt, since February 1975, that I've owed Ava Gardner a return helping of rudery as she was present at the US Embassy in Vienna for the first night party of an American play performed at the Vienna English Theatre and refused to take any interest in any of us.

The reason she was in Vienna was for the filming of KICKBACK, an ignominiously forgotten film whose production was chaotic to the extent of people not being paid expenses and having to leave their hotels. I should be understanding about what may have been on her mind.

 

[bruceames]

It does appear that labels like Twilight Time are more selective about which masters are acceptable for release and which aren't, as compared to Kino or Olive (and some others). But Twilight Time's "street price" is about $10 to $15 higher, on average. TT is likely paying higher license fees in order to be more selective. But at the end it appears MGM and a few other studios like Paramount are not interested in doing remasters at the present time.

So it's simply an issue of whether it's best not to see it released on Blu-ray at all, or to have a distributor like Kino release it in 1080p in its present state. People who have higher standards that the average quality Kino puts out always have the option to read reviews first. Many people are happy that these are even available. I would prefer that Mr. Majestyk looked cleaner and more pristine, but I'm not going to blame Kino for the condition of MGM's masters, and I'm especially not going to blame them for having released it in the first place.

BTW, I have noticed that the biggest TT aficionados seem to be among most vocal and persistent critics of the Kino Classics line less-than-stellar transfers. Probably just a coincidence.

 

[Persianimmortal]

BTW, I have noticed that the biggest TT aficionados seem to be among most vocal and persistent critics of the Kino Classics line less-than-stellar transfers. Probably just a coincidence.

No coincidence. I prefer quality to quantity, and I also prefer a company that demonstrates some care and pride in their work, than one devoted solely to commercial gain over all else. Therefore my preferences have always openly been towards companies like Twilight Time and Criterion, and against those like Olive and Kino.

 

[bruceames]

No coincidence. I prefer quality to quantity, and I also prefer a company that demonstrates some care and pride in their work, than one devoted solely to commercial gain over all else. Therefore my preferences have always openly been towards companies like Twilight Time and Criterion, and against those like Olive and Kino.

Since both Kino and Twilight Time are simply working with the masters they are given, your stance would seem to be "they never should have released this at all". I would have to disagree with that.