A Few Words About A few words about...™ The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes' Smarter Brother -- in Blu-ray (1 Viewer)

[Robert Harris]

The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes' Smarter Brother was the first of four feature films written and directed by Mr. Wilder, and it's a sweet visit to a sort of old-fashioned slapstick concept.

Kino Lorber's new Blu-ray via Fox is presumably derived from an older video master, that was probably created for use toward the manufacture of DVDs.

Take it up to a Blu-ray presentation, and it falls apart, and this is quite un-Fox-like.

While the original concept of Blu-ray was the look and sound of cinema on disc, that has changes somewhat over the years, and the reality now is that Blu-ray is merely a bucket that holds whatever is placed within.

This particular bucket holds what appears to be a transfer from a well-used IP, with both negative and positive dirt, inclusive of detritus that was not removed (by either a simple hand or ultrasonic cleaning) prior to transfer. Blacks can get a bit milky, possibly the fault of the element, and shadow detail is occasionally iffy.

The image isn't particularly stable. It's a bit soft, and an uprez to 4k makes the situation even worse.

There are times when a sub really needs to take a close look at the master being offered before setting forth.

This is one of them.

I continue to applaud the films that Kino Lorber is offering on Blu-ray, and see this as an anomaly that somehow slipped through the cracks.

A fun film, and a nice remembrance of a fine gentleman, but a new transfer, even in HD is warranted.

Image - 3

Audio - 4

4k Up-rez - 2

Pass / Fail - Pass


RAH

 

[J. Casey]

Glad to know that it wasn't just me....it didn't look right to my untrained eye, and I'm generally pretty forgiving. Very disappointed in this transfer but like the film.

 

[haineshisway]

There is no law that says a company HAS to accept a transfer like this, but Kino seems to do so on a regular basis, I'm afraid. And this is nowhere near the disaster known as Modesty Blaise, which is a complete embarrassment. I just don't get how any company would accept junk like that and they shouldn't is the reality.

 

[Malcolm R]

There is no law that says a company HAS to accept a transfer like this, but Kino seems to do so on a regular basis, I'm afraid. And this is nowhere near the disaster known as Modesty Blaise, which is a complete embarrassment. I just don't get how any company would accept junk like that and they shouldn't is the reality.

I don't own a ton of Kino discs, but I have heard this about them and it makes me hesitate to buy any of their titles without researching reviews beforehand.

 

[Robert Harris]

I don't own a ton of Kino discs, but I have heard this about them and it makes me hesitate to buy any of their titles without researching reviews beforehand.

As with any sub, it's a title by title basis.

Kino has had some nice releases.

 

[Randy Korstick]

I'm glad I have no bias toward Kino or I would be missing out on a ton of great looking transfers and a ton of great films. Yes its unfortunate that they have released a few lemons but they are by far the exception and not the norm. It seems I buy far more blu rays from Kino than any other catalog company because of their volume and I am very rarely disappointed. . Volume means a few lemons are bound to appear.

 

[J. Casey]

Yes, I agree. Of the many (as in 100s!) Kino blu rays in my collection, this is just about the only one so far that has a questionable transfer. At the same time, I must say that I wanted the film in my collection and this disc is better than NOT having it. Obviously, Fox is sublicensing some films now without new scans or any sort of restoration. Ultimately, I blame Fox for this.

 

[Robert Harris]

Yes, I agree. Of the many (as in 100s!) Kino blu rays in my collection, this is just about the only one so far that has a questionable transfer. At the same time, I must say that I wanted the film in my collection and this disc is better than NOT having it. Obviously, Fox is sublicensing some films now without new scans or any sort of restoration. Ultimately, I blame Fox for this.

I'd not place blame anywhere.

So many films, limited market, little funding, with funding going where it will do the most good.

 

[Nick*Z]

Kino has had some 'nice' releases, but even their 'nice' ones are not really perfect or up to snuff for a technology celebrating its 10th anniversary. It really is all about the original masters and attention paid by the copyright owner, before simply farming out dreck to a third party distributor. This absolves the copyright holder of any direct responsibility, I suppose. But Fox continues to disappoint on a consistent basis and Kino, the recipients of their deep catalog, in whatever condition it currently exists, really needs to put their foot down and simply say, "no thanks, it's not for us" the way Criterion is picky and choosy about what they peddle.

It really breaks my heart to see that executive logic - or lack thereof - really has not progressed at all since the 'bad ole' VHS era when virtually anything was permissible because home video was in its infancy and audiences, unknowing of quality control issues, simply went along with the understanding "oh, it's an old movie." That philosophy DOES NOT FLY anymore. It hasn't for some time. And while studios like Warner Bros. and Sony, and Universal (to a degree) have gravitated to a more proactive stance where marketing their classics are concerned, Fox continues to find satisfaction in simply exploiting its third party distributorships to dump any old excrement on the marketplace while pretending they have had little or nothing to do with it. For shame!

Personally, I prefer to spread my coin on product that has been given the utmost consideration for my dollar. That means Warner Archive, Sony product in general, Criterion releases, and, lately, Olive (their Signature Editions are exceptionally well thought out!). Kino's reputation has dipped and, in my not terribly humble opinion, it will continue to go down with the ship so long as it settles for whatever junk Fox is comfortable farming out. Ugh! I wanna throw up!

 

[haineshisway]

I certainly don't blame Fox, just as I don't blame MGM/UA - they have what they have, with Fox being pretty proactive about upgrading stuff, but can only do so much so fast. Every company to whom they license has the option of passing on a transfer. And if it's really substandard, they should. Olive, too, pretty much just puts out anything they're handed.

 

[Nick*Z]

Well, I do blame Fox. In point of fact, there's no one else to blame. They own the rights. They have the means. And they've proven when they want to, to do great work. Remember TT's original Blu of Journey to the Center of the Earth - a total disaster. But Fox insisted this was the best it could and would ever look "owing to available elements". Then, low and behold, what happened. A year and a half later, a complete restoration of the movie and a reissue from Twilight Time with 'Journey' looking positively immaculate and spectacular.

So, CLEARLY, Fox had better elements and the time and money to work a little magic after fans grumbled, complained and expressed their outrage! And outrage is what is required on this release! Another classic pointlessly exported to 1080p with zero investment of time and money is not saying much for Fox's brain trust, except that they continue to lag and lapse and rest on their laurels while other studios have taken the high road. Bottom line: this release is Fox's fault first - Kino Lorber's second, for accepting such substandard archival elements from which to market a miserable 'new to Blu' release. Plenty of blame to go around, folks. And it's about time someone had the courage to point the finger and say, NO MORE!

 

[Randy Korstick]

The disc market is dying and the most of the studio majors have long since given up on catalog titles. Their resources are going to big A list titles like Journey to the Center of the Earth. Many of the lesser titles being released by Kino, Olive, etc. are likely to never get another disc release especially if all the sub licensing companies decline it. The message will not be if we spent a fortune on a new master for this title that will sell 2,000-3,000 copies then licensors will want it the message will be there is no market for this film so its time to bury it in the vaults. So while some Olive and Kino titles may not look as good as we want they still look better than DVD and I will take that over nothing at all.

 

[Will Krupp]

It has weird framing issues as well. Madeline Kahn's chin keeps disappearing from the bottom of the frame during her introduction scene and it doesn't on the widescreen DVD.

Kino has released two less than stellar SHERLOCK HOLMES discs now, one from Fox and one from MGM.

 

[Nick*Z]

Will Krupp: I assume you are referring to Billy Wilder's Private Life of Sherlock Holmes; an absolute favorite of mine that did not get its just desserts on Blu. Love the performances by both Robert Stephens and Colin Blakely, whom I consider the best bro-mantic partnership in the franchise since Basil Rathbone and Nigel Bruce shared the spotlight in the 30's and 40's. If only this movie had been a box office dynamo it might have really kicked off another Holmes franchise. Alas, no.

RE: Randy's comments about the disc market dying. Well, all evidence to the contrary. 2016 has yielded more deep catalog Blu-rays than 2015, and certainly more than 2014 and 2013 combined. So, no. disc is not dead. It's very much alive. It needs to be paid more attention to, however. Quality over quantity, not the other way around!

Also, while Fox continues to drag its heels, the Warner Archive has managed to create a highly lucrative business model that also has miraculously found a way to do right by the studio's vast back catalog of artistic achievements. We're getting 'art' and 'commerce' from them and in a quality no one can argue with. If it's feasible for Warner, it sure as hell is feasible for Fox. They need a new approach to the way they're handling their studio heritage; more proactive and less the wounded/whiny puppy dog mentality that continues to push the agenda "it's just too expensive to do right by the classics."

There's always a way to balance profitability and pull off a class A treatment that will satisfy fans, who, after all, are really only interesting in collecting their favorites. Somewhere in the middle is that happy medium. Warner found it. They even showed the good sense to begin farming out their deeper catalog to Criterion - a real winning combo that, so far, has yielded a positively spectacular Cat People and McCabe and Mrs. Miller with The Asphalt Jungle well on its way. The point is, there's no 'dumping ground' mentality creeping in at Warner Bros., nor at Sony, still under the illustrious super management of Grover Crisp. They have both crunched the numbers and seen the way to make everything old, not merely new again, but utterly gorgeous while adding considerably to their coffers. No one here is naive.

MGM's old motto of 'art for art's sake' sounds good on paper. But at the end of the day, it also has to look good on the balance sheet. At least at WB and Sony, it does and we should all be grateful. So, permit me to worship. It does, however, make the situation at Fox, full of clumsy misfires and false starts, look all the more amateurish by direct comparison; even badly bungled and embarrassingly second rate; and this from a multi-million dollar conglomerate that really ought to have learned from the purge of the late 70's by now and be - NOT less - but MORE aggressive at resurrecting, preserving and restoring the past for future generations. In some ways, they have the most to lose. They've already lost so much. What a terribly flawed business acumen to have in 2016. The other studios have all stepped up their game.

But Fox Home Video doesn't know its head from a tea kettle. Do we sit back and say, 'oh well - at least their pumping out the junk. Or do we say, 'Hey wait a minute. You need to rethink this - starting today!' I know where I stand on this issue. And I am not the only face in the crowd that can see the day when no such salvation will be possible for ANY of these decomposing film elements. Art, as life, requires a nurturing spirit, an attentiveness to detail, and above all else, love of the past to make the present generations recall it with warm-heartedness. It's about time Fox got 'touchy-feely' with its classics, instead of neglecting them further, hoping we will all look the other way too!

 

[Randy Korstick]

Yes there are lots of deep catalog titles the past 2 years because in 2013 and 2014 the big studios gave up on them and start farming them out almost exclusively. But struggling to sell 2-3,000 discs for a catalog title is not evidence that the disc market is not dying. 6-7 years ago when the studios were distributing catalog titles retail they would easily sell 20,000 + copies of a catalog tile.
Most in these forums would not agree with your non-quantity statement. Everyday is filled with posts here about why doesn't this studio release this or that studio release this and why are they sitting on this, why is this being held hostage. What remains of the disc buying market wants quantity but there are not enough buyers left for the studios to spend a fortune re-mastering small volume titles like adventures of Sherlock Holmes smarter brother, The Earth Dies Screaming and Robbers Roost as examples. But fans of those films are happy to get them in HD even if they might not be pristine as its highly unlikely they will be released on disc again in a better version. Fox would not have released Smarter Brother on Blu on their own. Not supporting these releases just sends a further message for the studios and sub licensors to not bother releasing certain types of titles since they don't sell well enough. See Mr. Limes comment on "The Magnetic Monster" which does have a good transfer. The Disc market is alive only if we continue to support the releases. Your Quality over Quantity statement has merit but is about 4-5 years too late. Its now support titles that you like or similar unreleased titles will be buried in the vaults. The big studios other than Warner Archive and Universal don't care about catalog titles anymore. There are just not enough sales to make them worth it to them anymore. They may release an A title here and there but that's it.

 

[haineshisway]

Will Krupp: I assume you are referring to Billy Wilder's Private Life of Sherlock Holmes; an absolute favorite of mine that did not get its just desserts on Blu. Love the performances by both Robert Stephens and Colin Blakely, whom I consider the best bro-mantic partnership in the franchise since Basil Rathbone and Nigel Bruce shared the spotlight in the 30's and 40's. If only this movie had been a box office dynamo it might have really kicked off another Holmes franchise. Alas, no.

RE: Randy's comments about the disc market dying. Well, all evidence to the contrary. 2016 has yielded more deep catalog Blu-rays than 2015, and certainly more than 2014 and 2013 combined. So, no. disc is not dead. It's very much alive. It needs to be paid more attention to, however. Quality over quantity, not the other way around!

Also, while Fox continues to drag its heels, the Warner Archive has managed to create a highly lucrative business model that also has miraculously found a way to do right by the studio's vast back catalog of artistic achievements. We're getting 'art' and 'commerce' from them and in a quality no one can argue with. If it's feasible for Warner, it sure as hell is feasible for Fox. They need a new approach to the way they're handling their studio heritage; more proactive and less the wounded/whiny puppy dog mentality that continues to push the agenda "it's just too expensive to do right by the classics."

There's always a way to balance profitability and pull off a class A treatment that will satisfy fans, who, after all, are really only interesting in collecting their favorites. Somewhere in the middle is that happy medium. Warner found it. They even showed the good sense to begin farming out their deeper catalog to Criterion - a real winning combo that, so far, has yielded a positively spectacular Cat People and McCabe and Mrs. Miller with The Asphalt Jungle well on its way. The point is, there's no 'dumping ground' mentality creeping in at Warner Bros., nor at Sony, still under the illustrious super management of Grover Crisp. They have both crunched the numbers and seen the way to make everything old, not merely new again, but utterly gorgeous while adding considerably to their coffers. No one here is naive.

MGM's old motto of 'art for art's sake' sounds good on paper. But at the end of the day, it also has to look good on the balance sheet. At least at WB and Sony, it does and we should all be grateful. So, permit me to worship. It does, however, make the situation at Fox, full of clumsy misfires and false starts, look all the more amateurish by direct comparison; even badly bungled and embarrassingly second rate; and this from a multi-million dollar conglomerate that really ought to have learned from the purge of the late 70's by now and be - NOT less - but MORE aggressive at resurrecting, preserving and restoring the past for future generations. In some ways, they have the most to lose. They've already lost so much. What a terribly flawed business acumen to have in 2016. The other studios have all stepped up their game.

But Fox Home Video doesn't know its head from a tea kettle. Do we sit back and say, 'oh well - at least their pumping out the junk. Or do we say, 'Hey wait a minute. You need to rethink this - starting today!' I know where I stand on this issue. And I am not the only face in the crowd that can see the day when no such salvation will be possible for ANY of these decomposing film elements. Art, as life, requires a nurturing spirit, an attentiveness to detail, and above all else, love of the past to make the present generations recall it with warm-heartedness. It's about time Fox got 'touchy-feely' with its classics, instead of neglecting them further, hoping we will all look the other way too!

Really at a loss here. If you're saying that Sherlock Holmes' Smarter Brother is a classic, I think Fox and certainly myself would have to disagree. It was not a hit, and is no classic, IMO. They pick and choose what they do and the fact that they do as much as they do is pretty amazing. Every studio moves at their own pace. MGM/UA rarely does new transfers of ANYTHING, Warners, which you rave about, well, do tell me how many Archive Blu-ray releases they've done this year because it's not many. Grover Crisp thankfully moves at a faster pace, but not everything at Sony gets done which is why you see older masters going to companies like Mill Creek, etc. But you seem to want to place the blame at Fox but they simply don't think this title is as important as the other titles they're working on and they're working on a lot. For me, there is not a whit of blame there - they merely told Kino what they had and that seems to have been fine for Kino but as you can see from this thread it's not fine, just as The Private Life of Sherlock Holmes wasn't fine and Modesty Blaise wasn't fine. All three should have been passed on because there is simply not much difference between the Blu-rays and their DVD counterparts.

 

[Nick*Z]

Randy: You've completely overlooked the success Warner has reaped by NOT giving up on their classics, concentrating all - or most - of their efforts on aggressively upgrading their masters, then making them available as 'archive' titles; cutting the overhead of housing tens of thousands of copies at a time, while still offering the public freshly invigorated HD transfers that are head and shoulders over ANYTHING Fox has offered us in a very long while. In a diminishing market, WB has proven you can still get the green and do a good job besides. It's not a 'one' or 'the other' scenario. Period!

 

[Randy Korstick]

I have not overlooked warner archive. Most here know I am a huge supporter. I think mod is the future for all disc's. Warner archives blu rays are a success because they only make them in limited quantities so they are not selling huge amounts either but are making all the money so the system works for them. If all the other studios had a system like this then what you suggest could work but most of the studios don't care about catalog titles on disc anyone. So we get what we get from the licensors. Most of the time they are good to great transfers and sometimes they are not. But it's basic economics if we support the licensors releases they will continue to release them if we don't they won't bother anymore.

 

[haineshisway]

And may I just say, that the snail's pace that Warners releases Blu-ray Archive discs would lead me to believe they simply sell what they sell - and I'm sure they're not selling all that many given today's market. But they have no overhead on these titles and they're not doing the new transfers for Blu-ray anyway, they need them for all the hi-def stations and streaming services and all that malarky of today.

 

[Robert Harris]

And may I just say, that the snail's pace that Warners releases Blu-ray Archive discs would lead me to believe they simply sell what they sell - and I'm sure they're not selling all that many given today's market. But they have no overhead on these titles and they're not doing the new transfers for Blu-ray anyway, they need them for all the hi-def stations and streaming services and all that malarky of today.

Actually, they make a huge investment toward Blu.