What's new

Could 'Gigi' be restored for Blu ray? (1 Viewer)

AnthonyClarke

Senior HTF Member
Deceased Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2010
Messages
2,767
Location
Woodend Victoria Australia
Real Name
Anthony
This has always been one of my favourite musicals ...
I'm grateful to have the present Region One Blu ray of it, as a faded memory of a wonderful movie .. but I'm wondering if there is any chance at all that a halfway decent restoration could be undertaken, to at least possibly give it a reasonable semblance of its original colour.
Perhaps cost would be prohibitive .. perhaps decent film elements no longer exist .. but I can wish, can't I?
And perhaps too the automatic spell-check underlining as I type of perfectly proper words as if I can't spell them could stop too .. so annoying!
 

haineshisway

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Oct 26, 2011
Messages
5,561
Location
Los Angeles
Real Name
Bruce
But when it came out, everyone was thinking that WAS the original color. I'm glad that people have finally caught on - the current Blu-ray, for me, is unwatchable.
 

Robert Harris

Archivist
Reviewer
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Feb 8, 1999
Messages
18,312
Real Name
Robert Harris
This has always been one of my favourite musicals ...
I'm grateful to have the present Region One Blu ray of it, as a faded memory of a wonderful movie .. but I'm wondering if there is any chance at all that a halfway decent restoration could be undertaken, to at least possibly give it a reasonable semblance of its original colour.
Perhaps cost would be prohibitive .. perhaps decent film elements no longer exist .. but I can wish, can't I?
And perhaps too the automatic spell-check underlining as I type of perfectly proper words as if I can't spell them could stop too .. so annoying!

The proper question is can Gigi be restored and preserved?

Blu-ray is irrelevant.

The answer is easily.

It's just a matter of going...
 
Last edited:

Rob_Ray

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Apr 12, 2004
Messages
2,141
Location
Southern California
Real Name
Rob Ray
But when it came out, everyone was thinking that WAS the original color. I'm glad that people have finally caught on - the current Blu-ray, for me, is unwatchable.
And I thought I was the only one who found the blu ray unwatchable. Even though it's has much better resolution than the DVD, it's not what I saw in theatres countless times and enjoyed for over fifty years. The DVD is closer to the GIGI I've always known.
 

Will Krupp

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Oct 2, 2003
Messages
4,014
Location
PA
Real Name
Will
I mentioned it in the review thread when the blu-ray first came out, but I would love to know the whereabouts of the foreign dye transfer print of GIGI that American Cinematheque screened for the Egyptian Theatre's Dye-Transfer Technicolor festival back in 2000. Since there were no Metrocolor facilities in the UK or throughout Europe, it's one of those cases where Technicolor handled all foreign release prints. At the time of the festival, they claimed it was the first time American audiences had seen a Technicolor print of it, though I can't attest to how true that is.


(It screened on February 11th of that year)
http://www.americancinematheque.com/archive1999/2000/technicolor2000.htm
 

Cineman

Second Unit
Joined
May 30, 2011
Messages
482
Real Name
David B.
I mentioned it in the review thread when the blu-ray first came out, but I would love to know the whereabouts of the foreign dye transfer print of GIGI that American Cinematheque screened for the Egyptian Theatre's Dye-Transfer Technicolor festival back in 2000. Since there were no Metrocolor facilities in the UK or throughout Europe, it's one of those cases where Technicolor handled all foreign release prints. At the time of the festival, they claimed it was the first time American audiences had seen a Technicolor print of it, though I can't attest to how true that is.


(It screened on February 11th of that year)
http://www.americancinematheque.com/archive1999/2000/technicolor2000.htm

I was there for that screening. It did look lovely as I recall. Unfortunately, the part of the evening that stands out most in my memory is they skipped a reel sometime in the middle of the movie. oops. I noticed immediately, of course, as did many others in the theater. Somebody shot to his feet before I did and went hustling up the aisle to the lobby. When it was over, the theater management apologized and played the reel they'd skipped. Can't say Gigi won any new devotees that night. Turns out missing an entire reel of Gigi does make for something quite a bit less impressive overall. Can't remember exactly which reel or part of the story was skipped after all these years though.
 

Dick

Senior HTF Member
Joined
May 22, 1999
Messages
9,913
Real Name
Rick
The Blu-ray looks pretty snarly to me, but I keep it as a place holder. The red wallpaper that I recall from my Bedford Playhouse theatrical experience was much deeper red (the most impressive thing about the film for this restless 8-year-old) and never leaning toward orange as it does in some shots here. The disc in general just seems dull and has artifacts.

I've never really warmed up to the film in general. I didn't enjoy it in 1958, and though I keep trying to, I don't much like it now. I have always found Maurice Chevalier sort of insufferable, and Louis Jourdan doesn't fire me up, either. The music score by Lerner & Lowe is so inferior to that of MY FAIR LADY that I hardly remember a song in it, other than the Chevalier-performed "Thank Heaven For Little Girls." I realize I am in the minority, but this is how I view the film even now.

So why do I hang on to a copy of the rather crumby extant Blu-ray, and why will I re-purchase it if it is remastered? Just something about MGM musicals in general that compels me to scoop up every one out there on Blu. And, like any good masochist, I will return to GIGI on a semi-regular basis, hoping that someday I will give in to its hidden (from me, so far) charms.
 
Last edited:

classicmovieguy

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Aug 18, 2011
Messages
3,353
Location
Australia
Real Name
Byron
"Gigi" was amongst my first Blu-ray purchases in 2009. I loved the transfer at the time, but now, with a lot of great musicals on Blu-ray ("My Fair Lady" - what a wow), I can sadly see it's shortcomings.
 

Noel Aguirre

Supporter
Joined
Nov 28, 2011
Messages
1,591
Location
New York City
Real Name
noel
Speaking of technicolor restorations there is a new 4K restoration of An American in Paris playing at Film Forum this weekend in NY that I'm tempted to attend. Hopefully Gigi will be next.
And still waiting for A Matter of Life or Death to be released on Blu- the recent TCM showing was gorgeous. Finally I can only dream of Cobra Woman and her cobra jewels to one day see the light of day.
 

Noel Aguirre

Supporter
Joined
Nov 28, 2011
Messages
1,591
Location
New York City
Real Name
noel
I mentioned it in the review thread when the blu-ray first came out, but I would love to know the whereabouts of the foreign dye transfer print of GIGI that American Cinematheque screened for the Egyptian Theatre's Dye-Transfer Technicolor festival back in 2000. Since there were no Metrocolor facilities in the UK or throughout Europe, it's one of those cases where Technicolor handled all foreign release prints. At the time of the festival, they claimed it was the first time American audiences had seen a Technicolor print of it, though I can't attest to how true that is.


(It screened on February 11th of that year)
http://www.americancinematheque.com/archive1999/2000/technicolor2000.htm

It's odd at the end of that list they claim The King and I is listed as a technicolor musical spectacular? Did I miss something?
 

Will Krupp

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Oct 2, 2003
Messages
4,014
Location
PA
Real Name
Will
It's odd at the end of that list they claim The King and I is listed as a technicolor musical spectacular? Did I miss something?

They don't specifically say what they mean but, according to Marty Hart over at the American Widescreen Museum:

"It is interesting to note that many of the first release prints of The King and I were made by Technicolor in their dye transfer process even though no screen credit is given. It is quite possible that the Technicolor process preserved the image quality of the large format negative much better than the Eastmancolor prints produced by Fox's own DeLuxe Labs. Similarly, M-G-M had Technicolor make the 35mm anamorphic prints for their first large format production, Raintree County, filmed in Ultra Panavision 70 in 1957."
 

PMF

Premium
Senior HTF Member
Joined
May 6, 2015
Messages
6,003
Real Name
Philip
I would cast my vote for a "Gigi" restoration; but more for technical reasons over content.
Yup, the chance to see with greater clarity and color depths the Costume Designs of Cecil Beaton; along with the Art & Set Decorations; as captured by Joseph Ruttenberg's cinematography would truly be a treat.
Throw in a restored soundtrack for good measure and presto, you've got all the more of Andre Previn to hear, as well.
 
Last edited:

battlebeast

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Aug 10, 2010
Messages
4,445
Location
Edmonton, Alberta
Real Name
Warren
I just watched this film. The picture looks great to me... the colors pop, there are no spots, specks, dirt, detritus, etc. The sound is great. No HIss, no hum, crackle, etc.

BUT... EVERY FREAKING TIME there is a fade, there is a NOTICEABLE color change. In one instance, a woman's dress goes from a nice blue to GREY!

Another time, the trees go from a decent natural green to an UGLY blue-green.

AND STILL, in two separate instances, the picture actually becomes BLURRED. I wish I had screen shot comparisons.

While most of the film looks good to me (I can't vouch for original colors, as the film came out 25 years before I was born), I must say the consistent jarring color changes are inexcusable. I understand if this was You Can't Take it With You from 1938, and they had to use multiple sources to get the best possible picture, resulting in a greyscale change once or twice. NO, this is a film that looks GREAT, mostly. There is NO REASON they couldn't color correct the film to be in sync.

NO EXCUSE. This is Warners, and they are supposed to do better work than this.

And new master of this film, a BEST PICTURE WINNER NO LESS, is ESSIENTIAL.
 

John Hermes

Screenwriter
Joined
Jan 1, 2007
Messages
1,833
Location
La Mesa (San Diego) CA
Real Name
John Hermes
I just watched this film. The picture looks great to me... the colors pop, there are no spots, specks, dirt, detritus, etc. The sound is great. No HIss, no hum, crackle, etc.

BUT... EVERY FREAKING TIME there is a fade, there is a NOTICEABLE color change. In one instance, a woman's dress goes from a nice blue to GREY!

Another time, the trees go from a decent natural green to an UGLY blue-green.

AND STILL, in two separate instances, the picture actually becomes BLURRED. I wish I had screen shot comparisons.

While most of the film looks good to me (I can't vouch for original colors, as the film came out 25 years before I was born), I must say the consistent jarring color changes are inexcusable. I understand if this was You Can't Take it With You from 1938, and they had to use multiple sources to get the best possible picture, resulting in a greyscale change once or twice. NO, this is a film that looks GREAT, mostly. There is NO REASON they couldn't color correct the film to be in sync.

NO EXCUSE. This is Warners, and they are supposed to do better work than this.

And new master of this film, a BEST PICTURE WINNER NO LESS, is ESSIENTIAL.
Too bad the fades and dissolves weren't A/B-rolled when originally edited. They would be seemless. Instead, they have to deal with the terrible dupe stock of the era.
 
Last edited:

Douglas R

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2000
Messages
2,947
Location
London, United Kingdom
Real Name
Doug
Too bad the fades and dissolves weren't A/B-rolled when originally edited. They would be seemless. Instead, they have to deal with the terrible dupe stock of the era.
The process shots of fades and dissolves In discs never bothers me because that’s what the films looked like originally.

Come to think of it, I miss seeing reel change markers as well!
 
Last edited:

Robin9

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2006
Messages
7,649
Real Name
Robin
NO EXCUSE. This is Warners, and they are supposed to do better work than this.

And new master of this film, a BEST PICTURE WINNER NO LESS, is ESSENTIAL.
The average quality of Blu-ray discs from Warners in the early days was not very good. Some discs were appalling - Rio Bravo for example - and many, while better, were nothing special. Only since Warner Archive took charge of the Warner Blu-ray project has the standard been consistently high. Gigi - alas! - came out before Warner Archive assumed control.
 
Last edited:

Robert Harris

Archivist
Reviewer
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Feb 8, 1999
Messages
18,312
Real Name
Robert Harris
I just watched this film. The picture looks great to me... the colors pop, there are no spots, specks, dirt, detritus, etc. The sound is great. No HIss, no hum, crackle, etc.

BUT... EVERY FREAKING TIME there is a fade, there is a NOTICEABLE color change. In one instance, a woman's dress goes from a nice blue to GREY!

Another time, the trees go from a decent natural green to an UGLY blue-green.

AND STILL, in two separate instances, the picture actually becomes BLURRED. I wish I had screen shot comparisons.

While most of the film looks good to me (I can't vouch for original colors, as the film came out 25 years before I was born), I must say the consistent jarring color changes are inexcusable. I understand if this was You Can't Take it With You from 1938, and they had to use multiple sources to get the best possible picture, resulting in a greyscale change once or twice. NO, this is a film that looks GREAT, mostly. There is NO REASON they couldn't color correct the film to be in sync.

NO EXCUSE. This is Warners, and they are supposed to do better work than this.

And new master of this film, a BEST PICTURE WINNER NO LESS, is ESSIENTIAL.

Needs work. OCN faded. Dupes faded more.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Latest Articles

Forum statistics

Threads
356,815
Messages
5,123,806
Members
144,184
Latest member
H-508
Recent bookmarks
0
Top