DVD Review HTF REVIEW: Bambi - Absolutely Recommended!!! (1 Viewer)

[Marvin Richardson]

I own a large number of the animated Disney DVDs, but there's no way in hell I'd pay money for Lion King II, Lion King 1.5, Aladdin II, ad nauseum.
It was bad enough I had to rent Lion King 1.5 because my son wanted to see it. That was a horrible experience...but oddly enough not as horrible as watching SharkTale.

 

[Mike Frezon]

Ernest: THAT is a classic story.

 

[Jonny_L]

God, I can't stand straight to video stuff from Disney. It just irks me to think they are nothing more then a big Dollar $ign to the execs.

This has been an excellent thread though. It's literally been like reading a good book on movie production. Good job everyone - especially Ernest

 

[DouglasBr]

Ahh, almost had nasal beverage discharge. Bravo, Mr. Rister.

And additional kudos to Mr. Boulet for another great review. I look forward to owning this one.

 

[Lars Vermundsberget]

You did?!

Nevertheless, some story.

They obviously started calling you because you represented a "big market" (with your above-average number of Disney titles on the shelf). Then they stopped calling you because you didn't turn out to represent the kind of market they wanted.

That's market research... :rolleyes

 

[Dennis Nicholls]

Pinocchio III - The Nose's Revenge.

 

[PeterTHX]

Theatrically, perhaps. Remember they saw the original cels right they created right there at Disney studios!
AND, it CAN look BETTER.

How? HDTV, Theatrical Digital Projection...even a new 35MM print struck directly from the restored elements.

 

[ScottR]

I'm kinda disappointed that the RKO logo isn't on the print...as it was on the last release.

 

[Colin Jacobson]

Not necessarily true. I did an interview with Andreas Deja two years ago - http://www.dvdmg.com/interviewandreasdeja.shtml - and here's what he said about the subject:

CJ: Lilo & Stitch was a nice moment for Disney because it was the first time since Tarzan that you’ve had a cel-animated film that’s done really well. What do you think the future is of cel animation versus CG?

AD: You know, Colin, I don’t know. I wish I could say there’d always be cel animation, because that’s where my heart is. That’s also aesthetically what I like to see on the screen. I’m learning computer animation right now just to see if I can plus it. I’m not too thrilled with a lot of the acting going on and the way things move – they still look a little bit like high-tech puppets to me. I need to find out if I can change that, if I can help make it better, so I’m taking classes right now. I wouldn’t mind doing a CG film at all, but giving up the pencil, I don’t think that’s possible.

 

[Casey Trowbridg]

Great story, but I can't imagine why someone wouldn't want to see Snow White and the 14 dwarfs 1 and 1/2: behind the poison

nope can't think of 1 good reason why someone would avoid that...I can think of many more than 1 but not 1 specifically.

Ok, as for Bambi if I've ever seen this film before I don't remember it so I'm just opporating under the assumption that I haven't, and before anyone asks why that's true I'm not really sure. Anyway from that standpoint and after reading David's brief review that contained very little in the way of information...only kidding obviously, I am very much looking forward to sitting down and getting to know this film. It won't be tonight since I'm extremely exhausted but sometime soon.

 

[Ray H]

I picked this up today at Best Buy and got a free Thumper guy with it. The keepcase blew so I swapped it with another in my collection. It's one of those ones with the little locks and the trays are just of a different quality. Anyway, I watched the movie for the first time in like 10-15 years. Good stuff.

 

[Ernest Rister]

In any case, is a lack of grain a bad thing?

Pete, for the 1997 55th anniversary release, Disney "froze" the image, which stopped grain scrawl but also created a physically dead image.

That is not the case here. Grain is gone for the most part, but the image is still very lively because you're not looking at a character moving about on an artificially frozen frame.

Do you think the CAPS Disney features transferred to DVD look "lifeless"?

a) The modern CAPS system has a range of techniques and digital effects to give density and atmosphere to an image (one, in particular, is called "Turbulence"). They don't need to rely on successive exposure techniques or film grain , they have an arsenal at the their disposal.

b) The DVDs for these films do not accurately represent what was seen in the theater, they look like what was captured on the CAPS hard drives. If the pre-negative, pre-IP, digital look is what the original team intended, more power to them.

c) Remember my story about the old school animators celebrating the completion of a movie by throwing their cels on the floor and sliding around the room on them? The film was the desired end result, the final product was the negative, the cels and the backgrounds were just production materials (some of which Disney wisely hung on to so that new animators could learn from the old). On the commentary for Bambi, you even hear the story men talking about photogrpahy techniques to soften the image up, to take away the hard-line egde of the cels. The look of the cels just by themselves is *not* the intended look for Bambi. You don't have to take my word for it, it is stated on commentary track for the DVD.

d) Lastly, the creative teams for Disney and Pixar's films are all around today and they can have a say as to how their films are treated on home video. We're talking about movies created 60 years ago, coming up on 70. Few people from the production team of Bambi are still with us, its not the same thing.

I know most people were disappointed that "Hunchback of Notre Dame" was transferred from a film element (grainy) and not the CAPS digital master.

The DVDs for The Rescuers Down Under and Pocahontas sport excessive film grain and a muddy noisy image, to the point that the scrawling grain becomes overtly obectionable. I don't blame the interpositives, I blame the way the films were mastered. Hunchback is not quite as bad, but in addition to the noise it has some other image problems, like hard-edged ringing and a curious tendency to be both too soft and too sharp all at the same time.

Remember they saw the original cels right they created right there at Disney studios!

Ones that survived, at any rate. They used to give cels away at Disneyland in the 50's. If they only knew what those things would go for today.

 

[Mike Frezon]

I watched the first half-hour of the film tonight. It was all I had time for.

But I did NOT have the same startled reaction the same way I did, say, with Snow White. With Snow White I thought the still backgrounds looked very static. I do not get that impression with this transfer. To me the whole thing seems rather "film-like", if you get my meaning.

Of course, this is only on a 26" screen...but it IS hi-def and WS.

The animation looks just beautiful. But, of course.

 

[Reagan]

The restoration documentary implies that a WB ultra-resolution style process was used for the transfer. Is this a first for Disney? I'd love to see it done for Snow White, as it has a certain video look to it - and Bambi has a completely different texture.

-Reagan

 

[Ernest Rister]

I'd love to see it done for Snow White, as it has a certain video look to it.

I want them to get their hands on Fantasia.

 

[Ken_McAlinden]

The DVD supplements of Snow White show one key reason why the animation cels are not the final word on how the film should look. There is a featurette where Scott MacQueen talks about the various optical techniques used when photographing the cels to get the intended look for the film. This indicates that for appropriate reference, one would need notes regarding how the cels were photographed (filters used, etc.), contemporaneous filmmaker-approved timed IB prints, or something like them in addition to the cels themselves.

Regards,

 

[Reagan]

Found some answers to my questions. If anyone knows more, please chime in...


From Animation World Magazine:

The black-and-white files were then combined and registered to create each final color frame with a proprietary program similar to Warner Bros.’ Ultra-Resolution software designed for three-strip Technicolor features (Gone with the Wind).

“We actually did some tests with the Warner Bros. process, but ultimately there were some issues that led us down a different path, so we developed our own technology,” Bossert explains. “It allows you to take 20-30 targets on each frame and line up the three frames exactly. The interesting thing is that because we have all three color records on one strip of negative, we are in a much more advantageous position than the three-strip process, where you have three negatives aging at different rates and multiple registration problems.”


From L.A. Times...

"This is the first of a major corporate initiative to do film restoration at the studio," says Disney animation director Dave Bossert, who served as artistic supervisor for the "Bambi" restoration.



-Reagan

 

[RAF]

Reason enough for me to purchase this title. It's like a personalized birthday card for this old timer.



Seriously, excellent job as usual DaViD! A well crafted and informative review.

 

[Brian Kidd]

Are the Lowry projects being sent back to film? They certainly aren't making the films look like they did upon their original release. These are not restorations, they're modernizations.

I'm not putting down the work that Lowry does. They have truly produced some of the most stunning versions of old films that I've ever seen. I just don't think that people should mistake them for restorations.

 

[DaViD Boulet]

Brain,

I think that the Lowry team adapt their "restoration" to the desires of their clients. If the content owners want a grain-free image, that's what they get. If they want to fix film scratches and dust, but leave grain, that's what they get. Color correction...etc.

What Lowry did on Bambi is an amalgum of their own expertise coupled with the desires that the Disney folks must have asked for. If you look at the wonderful restoration of Singing in the Rain...you'll see fine film grain they intentionally preserved...in part because WB responded to the criticism of the grain-free Citizen Kane DVD (that LDI also did).

I would assume that they give the digital files to the studio which can print back to film if they wish, but I'm unclear on the details. I think LDI's tasks generally fall under scanning existing film elements and digitally "restoring" them.

If anyone has the inside scoop from Lowry please let us all know! It would be fascinating...