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

[john a hunter]

I can't say I have much technical know how about how these tracks were stored but judging my what you hear, often 5 or 5.1 mixes tend to loose the DD . Whether this is a deliberate policy(Warners used to ) or not I'm not sure.
To me the 4 track is usually the best option if available.
WSS -the mix down (or up if you prefer to 7 )was a total mess compared to the 4 track, but you can say the whole disc was a bit of a stuff up.
I have always had a problem with the Fox surround (audience participation ) tracks from 4 track originals as they are hardly ever there.
Journey to the .... is good but others have nowhere the use of surround that would have been used .
A contemporary review of The Egyptian referred to a chariot driving down the centre of the theatre.
It is easy to work where it is in the film but on TT's transfer -nothing.
Battle Cry from Warners had guns firing over the heads of the audience much to Zanuck's delight and he urged his sound mixers to follow suit. But on the DVD-MIA.
This happens time and time again.
I understood these tracks were stored separately but that is contrary to your knowledge Stephen.
If they were stored separately that would explain their absence.
If not some one in the transfer dept at Fox and others,needs their heads examined.

 

[Stephen PI]

I can't say I have much technical know how about how these tracks were stored but judging my what you hear, often 5 or 5.1 mixes tend to loose the DD . Whether this is a deliberate policy(Warners used to ) or not I'm not sure.
To me the 4 track is usually the best option if available.
WSS -the mix down (or up if you prefer to 7 )was a total mess compared to the 4 track, but you can say the whole disc was a bit of a stuff up.
I have always had a problem with the Fox surround (audience participation ) tracks from 4 track originals as they are hardly ever there.
Journey to the .... is good but others have nowhere the use of surround that would have been used .
A contemporary review of The Egyptian referred to a chariot driving down the centre of the theatre.
It is easy to work where it is in the film but on TT's transfer -nothing.
Battle Cry from Warners had guns firing over the heads of the audience much to Zanuck's delight and he urged his sound mixers to follow suit. But on the DVD-MIA.
This happens time and time again.
I understood these tracks were stored separately but that is contrary to your knowledge Stephen.
If they were stored separately that would explain their absence.
If not some one in the transfer dept at Fox and others,needs their heads examined.

A lot of statements there that need to be commented on!
I believe WB followed the same method as MGM with their stereo mixes in the fifties.
The situation back then was the studios had their own rules and standards regarding final sound mixes, as these were the years prior to standards set down for all studios by SMPTE years later in the '70's. MGM for example had their own reference level tones and I believe their masters had no reference tones at the head of their reels as they remained on the lot and were not interchangeable with other studios.
The common thread that appears to run through most of your comments is how the audio masters are interpreted to home video. Many things can happen with this step.
If masters have reference tones, they need to be set to be compatible with the modern SMPTE standards and that requires alteration of overall consistent level between channels and often equalization changes of the low frequencies. (When I worked at Disney in sound transfer we often handled old fifties masters that were recorded with what was known as the RCA curve. Now we are going by SMPTE standards, we had to lower the 70hz frequency by 6db. so it would sound correct when transferred).
The scene that you describe from "THE EGYPTIAN". I think the reviewer was somewhat exaggerating, as levels should be transferred
and monitored carefully by the mixers at the home video mastering stage to ensure no channel is misaligned. TT have no control over this area, same as the video masters.
The only time that the surround channel was not on Fox home video mixes was because the 4-channel was not compatible with the Dolby Surround matrix technology. As a result the LCR was mixed to a standard non-matrix 2-channel format (lowering the center by 3 or 4db) minus the surround channel. On discrete 4-channel mixes for home video I have heard situations where the 12 khz frequency in the surround channel could not be removed successfully and so the surround channel was possibly omitted partially or altogether.
I can't comment on "WEST SIDE STORY" as I have not heard the dvd and blu ray mixes. I did a Dolby Digital (not the DTS) transfer some years ago for laserdisc and it turned out successfully.
Regarding "BATTLE CRY" and the overhead sound effects, this requires the accurate balance of the surround channel relative to the front channels in the final theatrical mix. If, by the time it gets to home video years later, the surround channel is lost and is either re-created from the front channels or omitted altogether, the original effect is lost. If it is laid down correctly on the dvd it is up to the consumer to ensure that his levels are set correctly.
There are examples of where the original mono surround channel is enhanced or even replaced by stereo information in a 5.1 mix. A friend of mine, now passed away, claimed that there was a surround musical sweetener added to the beginning of the main title to "CLEOPATRA" which he claims was missing on the home video dvd.
I hope somewhere here is an answer that can be found to what you are seeking.

 

[rsmithjr]

This is a film that grows on me every time I see it, as it did again last night. I see it as a nostalgic look at America on the brink of war, as well as a late-50's view of telling a controversial story.

Superbly written, acted, and directed.

The production elements (including scenery, sets, costumes, and Franz Waxman's sensitive score) are beautifully arranged and work to tone-down the story's scandals. Jerry Wald did a great job getting this through the censors, and the production is a good part of that.

As to the sound, this is the original soundtrack as I remember it. On my system, the dialogue is quite directional, just as we would expect from Fox CinemaScope with 4-track magnetic. Reminds me how much I miss magnetic sound!

The color is quite good and I am not complaining about the blues, I think it matches the original experience very well.

The extras are great, especially the new piece that updates the scenery and buildings. No CGI!

 

[john a hunter]

Thanks Stephen for taking the time and effort for a detailed and very interesting reply. Greatly appreciated.

Perhaps we are only getting stereo or what is basically a 3 channel mix saying it is 4 channel, from Fox and TT, is that the surround mixes from DVD days that you referred to, where the 4th track was jettisoned ,are being used.

I would have thought that in the 50's there would be standard set up volume requirements vis a vi the surround to front channels.
It wouldn't be left to individual theatres.
I was not around then but the reports about The Egyptian and Battle Cry, I would think are accurate.
Certainly Zanuck would know what he was talking about.

The only 4 track mag print that I saw ,when I was aware of the technical aspects,was about 1970 at London's NFT.
Appropriately -The Robe.
And what I recall vividly was the use of the surround. Market place noises, and thunderstorms,etc around the auditorium.
None of which I recall from the otherwise wonderful Fox BD restoration.
From memory, there was hardly much surround at all and given this film was to demonstrate the "wonders of 4 track magnetic stereophonic sound" to the world, a surprising absence.

It would seem that we have lost these mixes from,for me,a fascinating period of film history

 

[Stephen PI]

Perhaps we are only getting stereo or what is basically a 3 channel mix saying it is 4 channel, from Fox and TT, is that the surround mixes from DVD days that you referred to, where the 4th track was jettisoned ,are being used.

The 4.0 mixes used in home video today should in theory have their surround information intact. Only the two channel mixes, made for the limitations of two channel technology in the early days of home video. Many of the Fox titles omitted the surround channel as a result of incompatibility with the 2-channel matrix technology.

I would have thought that in the 50's there would be standard set up volume requirements vis a vi the surround to front channels.
It wouldn't be left to individual theatres.

There was a booklet supplied by Fox for theaters equipped with CinemaScope and 4-channel stereophonic sound. See the example below from the booklet detailing the set-up of the available test films for accurate alignment, levels etc. of the 4-channel magnetic playback 'penthouse' head-stack:

The only 4 track mag print that I saw ,when I was aware of the technical aspects,was about 1970 at London's NFT.
Appropriately -The Robe.
And what I recall vividly was the use of the surround. Market place noises, and thunderstorms,etc around the auditorium.
None of which I recall from the otherwise wonderful Fox BD restoration.
From memory, there was hardly much surround at all and given this film was to demonstrate the "wonders of 4 track magnetic stereophonic sound" to the world, a surprising absence.

It would seem that we have lost these mixes from,for me,a fascinating period of film history

With regard to your statement on the audio on "THE ROBE", without having had the experience you had with this film it is difficult for me to comment other than to say the audio track you heard should not logically be different to the 4.0 master on the blu ray. I can only suggest that you give the blu ray another listen, carefully observing the surround information.

 

[Joe Caps]

there is one shot from Carousel used in Peyton Place - the boats going into the hearbor are shown when Allyson is talking about summer in Peyton Place.

 

[Joe Caps]

also disappointed on Fox scope release of Soldier of Fortune.
The film ran widescreen and stereo for years on AMC but badly needed picture restoration
It got it with an announced 5. 1 stereo track. No it is 5.1 with sound only one channel and that is mono !!
How about issuing this film on blu and looping thae stereo track drom the AMC master?

 

[RolandL]

I was watching the 1960 The Alamo broadcast from the MGM HD channel. MGM HD sound only comes through the left and right front speakers even though the receiver shows 5.1 DD. It sounds great with highly directional dialog but, it some scenes the dialog is at a very low volume. I'm guessing that those vocals should be coming through the center channel which is silent. No problem with the TCM HD broadcast (the longer version), as all five channels are coming through the five speakers.

 

[PMF]

Superbly written, acted, and directed.

The production elements (including scenery, sets, costumes, and Franz Waxman's sensitive score) are beautifully arranged and work to tone-down the story's scandals. Jerry Wald did a great job getting this through the censors, and the production is a good part of that.

As to the sound, this is the original soundtrack as I remember it. On my system, the dialogue is quite directional, just as we would expect from Fox CinemaScope with 4-track magnetic. Reminds me how much I miss magnetic sound!

Without the benefit of having yet seen "Peyton Place" itself, or my future TT copy of it, I was wondering if anyone out there would like to comment on why a 9-time Oscar nominated film was not considered within any of the categories concerning Scenery, Sets, Costumes, Score, Editing and, perhaps, even Sound?

 

[Paul Rossen]

Without the benefit of having yet seen "Peyton Place" itself, or my future TT copy of it, I was wondering if anyone out there would like to comment on why a 9-time Oscar nominated film was not considered within any of the categories concerning Scenery, Sets, Costumes, Score, Editing and, perhaps, even Sound?

If I understand your question correctly Peyton Place was up against Bridge On the River Kwai. IMO the Academy got their awards right that year.

 

[Thomas T]

Without the benefit of having yet seen "Peyton Place" itself, or my future TT copy of it, I was wondering if anyone out there would like to comment on why a 9-time Oscar nominated film was not considered within any of the categories concerning Scenery, Sets, Costumes, Score, Editing and, perhaps, even Sound?

Good question and one for which I have no answer other than perhaps Fox didn't push the film much outside the acting categories. The omission of Waxman's gorgeous score is a stunner however. I don't think even Hugo Friedhofer's biggest fans would call An Affair to Remember his finest hour yet it received a score nomination over Waxman's PP. Go figure!

 

[PMF]

If I understand your question correctly Peyton Place was up against Bridge On the River Kwai. IMO the Academy got their awards right that year.

Slam-Dunk they did. NO film that year could beat out Bridge On the River Kwai.
But, do NOTE, I was speaking only in terms of Nominations.

 

[Paul Rossen]

While I stated above I agree with the Academy on Bridge on the River Kwai' many awards I personally take with a grain of salt most winners. Especially in the music score category.

Perhaps Fox didn't push for Waxman glorious score. That said I'm sure Fox pushed for Newman's The Robe. Not nominated. Psycho and Vertigo's scores did not get nominated. I'm sure being nominated and better yet winning is most meaningful to the composers but in retrospect it really doesn't matter. Great work will ultimately be noticed and rewarded.

 

[PMF]

Good question and one for which I have no answer other than perhaps Fox didn't push the film much outside the acting categories. The omission of Waxman's gorgeous score is a stunner however. I don't think even Hugo Friedhofer's biggest fans would call An Affair to Remember his finest hour yet it received a score nomination over Waxman's PP. Go figure!

From all accounts and folklore, and without yet having my First-Time viewing, it's the omission of the Franz Waxman score that's got me curious. Thankfully, Oscar oversights or losses never lead to any film's erasure or extinction.

 

[Paul Rossen]

And of course do not feel too bad for Franz Waxman as the 2 time Award Winning composer was nominated for his score to Sunrise at Campobello over Bernard Herrmann's Pyscho. Win some, lose some. Goldsmith won one Academy Award in his illustrious career. Thomas Newman been nominated numerous times and has been shut out. Alex North never won for an individual score.


The list goes on. Enjoy what you are viewing and listening to and be not concerned about the awards...

 

[Thomas T]

Of course, the true judge of a film's worth will be posterity, not the Oscars. Ask any film scholar or film buff what the best American film of 1956 is and most likely you'll get John Ford's The Searchers which didn't receive a single Oscar nomination! I know that Around The World In 80 Days (which won the best pic Oscar) has its fanboys but in the cold light of day, it's anything but the best film of 1956. The best film of 1944 isn't the Oscar winning Going My Way but Double Indemnity. The best film of 1952 isn't Greatest Show On Earth but Singin' In The Rain or High Noon. Of course, I could go on and on but you get my drift. Too often we're caught in the current popularity of a film that won't stand the test of time or a topical film that is relevant to today but won't mean a hill of beans 50 years from now. Guess Who's Coming To Dinner? may have been a hot topic in 1967 but in 2017 it's rather "quaint" and incredibly naive.

 

[Robert Crawford]

Of course, the true judge of a film's worth will be posterity, not the Oscars. Ask any film scholar or film buff what the best American film of 1956 is and most likely you'll get John Ford's The Searchers which didn't receive a single Oscar nomination! I know that Around The World In 80 Days (which won the best pic Oscar) has its fanboys but in the cold light of day, it's anything but the best film of 1956. The best film of 1944 isn't the Oscar winning Going My Way but Double Indemnity. The best film of 1952 isn't Greatest Show On Earth but Singin' In The Rain or High Noon. Of course, I could go on and on but you get my drift. Too often we're caught in the current popularity of a film that won't stand the test of time or a topical film that is relevant to today but won't mean a hill of beans 50 years from now. Guess Who's Coming To Dinner? may have been a hot topic in 1967 but in 2017 it's rather "quaint" and incredibly naive.

True, some of the best films or acting performances weren't even nominated. You look at Robert Mitchum's performance in The Night of the Hunter for example.

 

[PMF]

Neither man nor film lives by Oscar, alone.
Agreed with all Posters, as I simply have fun with knowing the historical context and stats from which a film derives.
Some Oscar do have meaning; and some do not.
Of course, I already know that I'll thoroughly enjoy "Peyton Place"; but being that it did receive 9 very solid nominations, I found it odd that - short of DP Mellor - the technical aspects were overlooked. Nothing more, nothing less; just a curiosity.

 

[rsmithjr]

@PMF,

The lack of technical/trade nominations for Peyton Place certainly is surprising, especially these aspects of the film give it its nostalgic character and human face. You can't help but like Peyton Place (the place itself) even if it has its hypocrisies and cruelties.

I also think they helped keep the censors at bay.

 

[rsmithjr]

@Thomas T,

You must be living someplace where the light of day is very cold indeed. I really love "80 Days" and have often defended its many awards (not just Oscars BTW).