DVD Review HTF REVIEW: The War of the Worlds (1953) - Special Collector's Edition (Recommended) (1 Viewer)

[Mark Leiter]

DaViD- I tried to see if you were ever able to do an A/B comparison between the 2 DVD releases of this movie. I couldn't find it among all the "wires" discussion. Could you post back your opinion on how the 2 dvd discs compare to one another. I have the old one. Is it worth the investment get the new one?

Thanks
Mark

 

[Michael Elliott]

I'm sure this will be one of the first titles that hit HD.

It's still rather amazing that people refuse to buy a TV box set because 2 seconds of dialogue are removed yet they want to go back to films and alter them to remove wires or whatever else. Perhaps Warner should have released KING KONG colorized so it wouldn't be as easy to tell the ape wasn't real. In fact, I think in the Harris interview with them they talked about the new spider scene and how it was created with CGI but they refused to put the scene back in the film. That was the correct thing to do as was leaving the wires here. There's a lot of other things that could have been fixed in this film from the fake looking fires to the bad matte paintings.

Fixing and removing things is just as ugly as colorization and P&S.

 

[DaViD Boulet]

Mark,

thanks for the reminder. busy at work so just a quicky:

The two discs are about even in terms of image detail...which is odd given that the wires look more visible in the new version (slightly so). but I think the real reason the wires are more visible is that the new version has a very different contrast balance...it seems "brighter" with less black-level crushing and a much smoother grayscale. I preferred this, but at the same time I think it makes some things (like the wires) appear more vividly that might have been obscured in the film to a greater degree previosly (bad some some things, good for others).

The new image is also markedly cleaner with lack of film grain. And while it doesn't look artifact-ridden like I would have expected with DNR, it looks perhaps slightly less film-like than the previous version...with less "bloom". However, the colors and contrast are very satisfying and I think that overall the new version is clearly the winner in objective image presentation. The new disc also lacks some of the MPEG (i'm assuming) "noise" seen on the first DVD. It's stunning...much like the 1960's version of Time Machine with Rod Taylor (another outstanding DVD presentation folks should add to their collection ASAP if they don't already own it).

Where the new disc *really* wins, however, is in the stereo audio presentation, which has nice bass response and lacks the irritatingly bright edginess of the previous DVD's audio track. Of course, the original mono track is also on the new DVD for those who prefer it.

 

[Scott Kimball]

I agree 100%, Michael.

I'm rather amazed at the perspective so many have on this issue, given that the HTF mission is rather purist. Yet, so many people seem to have no problem altering a classic.

There is a very big difference between "restoration" and "revision". Monkeying with the image captured on film is revisionist, plain and simple. The fact that current technologies are more revealing is irrelevant. The wires were captured on the camera negative, or you wouldn't see them on today's prints. Digitally erasing the wires is applying a modern technique to a 50 year old film. I still believe that is disrespectful to the artisans and the processes of the time.

I guess I'll have to agree to disagree with those who would seek to alter the film - but the revisionist attitude is surprising for this forum - at least to me.

-Scott

 

[DaViD Boulet]

This could be argued.

But isn't digitally transfering a pristine negative/print to DVD using new technology to bypass intermediary layers of noise/grain that would have obscured 1950's theatrical prints equally "applying a modern technique" that could be "disrespectful" is it produced unintended (undesired) results like highly visible wires?

Isn't *that* revisionist by definition already? We've revised the film in a manner to which it was never expected to be seen producing results incompatible with the intensions of the creative artists by the "clean" image we are enjoying on this DVD...given the visibility of the suspension wires.

Don't you think that the creators of this film would cringe if the image projected on screens in the 1955 revealed the obvious and laughable-suspension wires that totally negate the impact of the special effect of the hovering alien ships?

If so, then what we have on DVD is clearly not serving the art.

If the wires weren't meant to be seen so clearly, then digitally obscuring them is no less "disrespectful" to the art than digitally cleaning the rest of the film making them so visible in the first place.


p.s. the visibility of the wires in the original 1955 prints is the "reference" point we should be maintaining...anything that deviates from this...making the wires more or less visible...is "revisionist"...preserving that same level of obscurity for this special effect technique is PRESERVATION.

 

[Scott Kimball]

Obviously, a modern technique must be applied just to get the transfer done and in digital form.

The line that I draw is the intentional manipulation of individual frames in order to alter the latent image.

In fact, the wires have always been visible... just not to the extent we see with the new transfer. So... would we rather have a softer transfer? Or a darker transfer? Is there supposed to be a higher black point? Is it supposed to have more grain? Any of these things would affect the visibility of the wires.

Having never seen an original Technicolor print of this film, I can't say precisely what qualities it may have had that would have helped to obscure the wires. I would support an effort to replicate the look of the original prints more than I would the digitial cloning of portions of the latent image.

-Scott

 

[Michael Elliott]

Those interested might want to read this THREAD where Bill Warren (who's on the WAR commentary track) tells what Dante said about the wires and how they were seen when the film was originally released. There's some more interesting stories from Tom Weaver as well.

It seems what some want done to "erase the wires" is the exact thing George wanted with STAR WARS. I'm not familiar with those films and their alternate versions but it just seems the same to me.

 

[Johnny Angell]

Yeah, what David said.

 

[Mark Leiter]

DaViD- Thanks for your input. Sounds like this is one i'm gonna have to pick up. Especially at its price point.

 

[DaViD Boulet]

Yeah...and not to mention the nice bonus items.

 

[Scott Kimball]

Thanks for the link, Michael.

Bill Warren summed up my thoughts more eloquently than I have been able to, myself:


For me, it's more important to preserve the art as closely as possible in the home format than it is to appease those who are bothered by the effects capabilities of the time.

You are, of course, free to disagree...
...only you'll be wrong...

-s

 

[John Sparks]

Well, if some want to tweak the pic, why not put the disappearing stack of toast back on the table where it belongs in the farm house scene or make the telephone pole break while the ship is crashing into it, not before, at the end of the movie...!

 

[Paul McElligott]

One thing to consider. It was not the filmmakers' intent that we should see those wires. Therefore, digitally removing them would make the film more true to what its creators wanted us to see.

 

[DaViD Boulet]

The DVD deviates from the original look of the projected film already.

Obscuring the wires would cause it to MORE CLOSELY RESEMBLE the look of the original projected prints. I don't see how this can be so dismissively classified as sacrilage.

I'm not suggesting that things be altered that would have been seen in original prints viewed by the director. I'm suggesting that such prints ought to be the reference for the look and feel of the final DVD.

One thing to consider...this DVD appears somewhat brighter than the previous...NOT necessarily more detailed. I'm wondering if the wires are being made more visible because of this opened-up contrast and not so much because of the miracle of our high-resolution 480P DVD format (sarcasm).

In any case, just rephrase the issue from "digitally erasing wires" to "ensuring that the DVD image resemble the original projected film print" and everything should be fine. What means one uses to accomplish this...digital or otherwise, is not the real concern IMO.

 

[Scott Kimball]

... but it would not be true to what they actually achieved - since the wires have been visible in every incarnation of the film. They are apparently just more noticeable in the latest DVD.

... tinkering with history...

But I'll shut up, now... I've said all I can really say. This is a divisive issue, obviously.

-Scott

 

[Dave Mack]

I remember the first time I saw SW The Empire Strikes back on videotape WAY back in like, 83 or whenever and I could see all of the matte safety boxes around Tie Fighters and I was thinking, "What the hell..?" They were not visible in the theater! And I saw TESB in the theater about 20 times. So would removing them or adjusting the greyscale/brightness to see them less or not at all be bad?
I rememeber (as a rather smart-ass kid who ran around with a super 8 camera and did stop-motion animation and read Cinefantastique etc...) watching WOTW on Tv in the 80's and thinking,"wow. For the time that was made, those are pretty good FX." I don't recall seeing the wires. If I had back then, I would've said, "Fake! Look at the wires! That's so BAD!" I was a little smart-ass, I admit...(Some argue that I still am!) But I didn't see them back then. So watching this the other nite seeing the wires SO prevalently in almost every shot, (even after the ships have crashed and they are just sitting there, the wires are just laying on them) I was surprised. It looked very Ed wood to me. Which is odd because the heat rays and other FX still look so good. Anyways just my 2 cents...
When I saw it as a teenager back in the 80's, (yeah, I'm old) I didn't really see the wires, now I unfortunately can't avoid seeing them. So if they honestly weren't meant to be seen I don't have a problem with them being gone. But that's just me...


d

 

[DaViD Boulet]

Then digitally obscure them so that they reflect this "less visible" state of the historic film rather then remove them altogether.

 

[Scott Kimball]

So I lied... here I am again...


There seems to be a number of possible influences on the visibility of the wires. Bill Warren indicates that the wires were, in fact, visible in the Technicolor prints - just less...

First, the original 3-strip technicolor prints may have been softer due to the slight mis-registration of the strips - apparently common to the format.

Second, there is some variance in color balance in the Eastmancolor prints. Since the wires were painted to closely match the background, it's possible that any variance they had with the background is enhanced by the altered balance.

Third, the print used for the latest transfer has less grain than other prints I've seen.

Fourth, there is obviously some pushed contrast compared to other recent home video releases. I'm sure that affects visibility.

All of these issues are global issues - they affect the entire film. The issues are a byproduct of issuing the film in different formats, not an intentional act to change a frame of the film.

It is the intention that bothers me. If it is the intention to "remove the wires," then that act is unfaithful to the original film, since the wires were visible from day one. So, should they just be "subdued"? If so... how much? Who has a proper frame of reference for this?

We all know the wires are there. We all know the wires were a product of the state of the art effects of the time. To simply remove them also removes the historical context. As a lover of classic film, the thought is disturbing to me.

I would much rather there be an attempt to restore the color, contrast and grain structure - if that is even possible (again, what references are there...). That would likely reduce the visibility on a properly calibrated display without taking a digital brush to the image.

The fact that I can see the wires really had little effect on me while watching the film. There would have been greater effect on me had they been erased from history...

-Scott

 

[DaViD Boulet]

Scott,

Excellent post.


Your first-choice of fixes of course appeals to me as the best solution to try first: make sure that all the parameters like contrast and color balance affect the original intent as much as possible. But once having done so, if the wires are still more visible (distractingly so) than the original projected prints would have revealed, then the "new problem" of home-video...however it got there... should be corrected.

Just how much correction should be done? Just what print ought to be the point of reference? These questions are no more difficult (nor any easier) to answer than the usual litany of questions for any film restoration/home-video presentation. Their subjectivity is not a justification to avoid trying to do a good job dealing with them appropriatly, it merely points to the complexity and challenge of restoring, preserving, and presenting films in a digital-distribution-age many years after their original theatrical debut.

Hopefully, with each film, more understanding, experience, and sensitivity to these questions are gained by the studios working hard to do the best job possible.

 

[Scott Kimball]

One last comment...

There's just something I don't like about applying a selective digital solution to a classic film. I can't put my finger on it...

Global grading to restore the entire film to its intended look should, as a byproduct, lessen the visibility of the wires.

One thing I hope is that all the debate about the wires doesn't discourage people from buying this DVD. It is impressive, and at a bargain price.


Well said...

-Scott