A Few Words About A few words about... The Searchers -- in SD (Some potential bad news See Post #139) (1 Viewer)

[John Hodson]

One of the great central pillars, many moons ago, in declaring oneself a 'hi-fi enthusiast' was refusing to (a) twiddle with the tone control knobs from their declared neutral position, then (b) actually buying an amp that simply didn't have tone controls. It meant you were a true Hi-Fi Buff. Tone controls - pshaw!

Since entering the field of Home Cinema, it's been one of my great sources of dismay that I've had to mess around with my display's colo(u)r, brightness and contrast controls in order to achieve a pleasing picture - I mean where are the one size fits all neutral positions. At least the makers of my chosen DVD also include said controls but, quite rightly, recommend they stay in the default position. So, some semblance of satisfaction there.

However, my display does also include a button that will also change the colour tones from neutral, to 'warm' and 'cool' - I watched the scene in the grab on the previous page with the setting on 'cool' tonight and can report a much bluer sky, and much less evidence of yellow with an overall picture that looked alot like 'normal' Technicolor. However, somehow, messing with buttons, it didn't seem right.

And the question still hangs heavy; what did Mr Ford want?

 

[ScottR]

RAH, I was going to say that about true Technicolor whites, but thought I may be mistaken and called on it..lol.

 

[Robert Harris]

If there ever was a "true Tech white," it would have been projected via the illumination of a blue-white carbon arc.

RAH

 

[ScottR]

David, my set is properly calibrated.

 

[DaViD Boulet]

Just watched the illusionist at the theater tonight.

Noticed the same thing that I did when I watched the two 35mm prints of Water:

Most of the movie was very yellow/warm in tone. Clearly not anything that looked like a true-to-life balance of color. Then during one of the reel changes suddenly the print had a cool blue-cast... like they changed film stock or had a different technician in the lab that day. It was almost jarring. Then the next scene things were back to the yellow/warm look again.

Interesting. I'm not on the prowl to see how many films tend towards yellow and how many fall closer to a realistic color balance...

 

[ScottR]

David, try not to...because you might start noticing the sky outside has a look that doesn't equate to Technicolor blue!

 

[Ruz-El]

I'm not sure if we should be comparing the digital colour timing of todays movies with that of what is produced from the original elements from 50 years ago.

 

[DaViD Boulet]

Was Water digitally color timed? I assumed that one was an all-analog film production (but I could be wrong).

 

[WadeM]

I only wish I had the money for HD. Anyway, I finally got my SD copy and I think it's great! And the day/night issue was just as annoying on the original DVD (yes, I think both versions have the same issue), so I'm very glad I upgraded--it's a vast improvement.

 

[Micah Cohen]

One thing that has always bothered me -- something that always leaps up and slaps down my "suspension of disbelief" -- is "the breathing indian" in THE SEARCHERS. You know what I'm talking about:

The searchers find the "dead" indian under the rock, and when they remove the rock you can plainly see the actor who plays the "dead" indian breath in deeply.

The camera seems to linger on this "mistake."

My question, for someone like Robert Harris or some other film expert, is, why would a great director, a perfectionist like John Ford, leave this in the film? Why not have another take and get it correct? Why not redo it?

I have always wondered this. Any opinions?

MC

 

[Robert Crawford]

Ford believed in doing one take and that's it. After viewing the daily that day, he probably thought the indian breathing was no different then numerous times a person has died in films over the years, but you can see the body breathing on screen. In other words, no big deal, at least not enough to shoot the scene again because he thought audiences would just overlooked that mistake like they've done countless times beforehand. All of this is just my opinion about what Ford thought so take if for what's it worth which isn't very much.

By the way, I noticed that stunt person breathing long before any dvd release so I find it funny that so many people are just noticing that mistake.



Crawdaddy

 

[Micah Cohen]

Seeing it on the big screen (Senator Theater, Baltimore!), it always jolted me. I want to avert my eyes every time.

It's especially troublesome when watching the film with someone who has never seen it before.

MC

 

[David_B_K]

What's even funnier: I never noticed it before, and I've seen the move many times. Maybe seeing it on a large HDTV display made it more apparent, but I guess I was always so caught up in the scene in the past and never caught it. That's probably what Ford thought would happen. I doubt he worried about a time when people would be able to see it over and over in their home, and could notice every mistake.

Usually, I catch things like that. I am more bothered by bad stuntman work. The scene in Hondo, for example, in which Hondo breaks the horse is quite spoiled by using a stuntman that does not resemble Wayne in build whatsoever.

 

[Micah Cohen]

The problem I've had is that watching it with someone who has never seen it before inevitably results in that person talking during the film -- ARG! -- and saying, "Hey, I saw that guy breath. Was he supposed to be dead?"

Sometimes, I have even WARNED people about it before: "This is something I am bothered by in this film," and I describe the thing and ask them to just not say anything if they see it. But warning people always pre-empts the chance that they will not notice it.

MC

 

[Robert Crawford]

Or screen fistfights when stuntmen are obviously being used and they have little resemblance to the actual actors.




Crawdaddy

 

[Micah Cohen]

:frowning:

I liked this thing about "the breathing indian" as a separate thread. Now I feel that it's lost in here, in this long thread... Ah well.

It got me thinking about other tiny flaws in what are otherwise great films, and about tiny "mistakes" directors may leave in for whatever reason.

Ah well.

MC

 

[Robert Crawford]

Micah,
Actually, this discussion should be taking place in movies to begin with, so if you want me to split this discussion off and place it there just let me know.




Crawdaddy

 

[jim_falconer]

Ha...I notice that everytime I watch Hondo too. And not to highjack this thread, but I love Hondo almost as much as I love The Searchers. It's film that just gets better and better upon repeated viewings. At the time of it's release, it was considered a poor man's Shane...but time has been much kinder to Hondo than to Shane (imho, of course)....

 

[Micah Cohen]

No. Thanks... I was just being complainy. Sometimes I'm complainy. We've said all we need to say on this "sub-topic," I think anyway. I got my answer.

Ignore me when I get "complainy."



MC

 

[MichaelBA]

But that's the only time you're cool, man....