NEW BEN HUR - original sound? (1 Viewer)

[GerardoHP]

I don't mean to stand against transfers from 70mm elements here, but I'm still not persuaded that a transfer from 70mm is in itself better as some of the above posts would seem to indicate (besides, if I'm not mistaken, that was stated in previous posts by people who I thought knew a lot more than I do about these things)

David, you totally lost me here.

 

[Parker Clack]

One of the things that I took away from my conversation with Mr. Feltenstein a few weeks ago is his absolute dedication to the DVD market for WHV classic films. He is a firm believer in getting it done right the first time so I can only believe that this will be the best presentation available on DVD in both the video and audio department.

Parker

 

[ArthurMy]

Again, not to take anything away from Mr. Feltenstein, I don't believe he has anything to do with the great folks who do the actual transfers and make those decisions. I have no doubt he's as dedicated as all the people at WHV seem to be, but I really think it's time to give credit where credit is truly due - to the painstaking efforts of the tech department who are really in charge of this stuff.

I also must be looking at a different Criterion Spartacus than everyone else. That is taken from an older master if I'm not mistaken - but whatever it's taken from, while it's better than the Universal DVD, it is miles from looking as good as it could look. Spartacus should look as good as King of Kings, which someone above mentioned. It looks nowhere near as sharp or as good. We need a new Spartacus with the latest technology available. I have never forgotten what that film looked like on its initial release - it was staggering. The DVD is hardly staggering in any sense of the word, IMO.

 

[Robert Crawford]

Yesterday, I just watched a segment on Turner Classic Movies which showed George Feltenstein working with a sound engineer during their restoration efforts involving the audio track of "Seven Brides for Seven Brothers". The piece also stated that Mr. Feltenstein is the producer of Warner/Rhino soundtracks. Also, Richard May who is Warner's film preservation guy was part of that segment too.

In numerous HTF tours that I've been part of at the different studios and production facilities, it's clear that film preservation work is a team effort from a dedicated group of individuals who spend a lot of time working together in doing the best job they can on any project they're assigned.






Crawdaddy

 

[TedD]

The biggest issue with 70mm transfers is that most, if not all were taken with older, non state-of-the-art telecine systems.

The new Spirit 4K Datacine originally shipped without support for 70mm, and I can't find anything that says that 70mm is available today. However, I am certainly not part of the industry. I did read that Warners bought at least one of the new Spirit 4K Datacine systems at a cool $1,000,000.00 or so.

70mm is also much more prone to issues with film buckle, do to the increased width. Perhaps the worst example of this was Fox's DVD of Oklahoma!. The IMAX projectors use air jets to control this issue in projection, and I remember a modification kit for the Century 70mm projector that did a similar thing.

If the latest generation of 4K telecine systems are being used for 70mm today, that will go a long way to realizing the potential of the large format negatives.

Ted

 

[Vincent_P]

That's not the point you were making that I responded to. You specifically referenced the cropping, you said nothing about the image quality, and I answered you and explained why the 65mm source will show more picture information.

Vincent

 

[Vincent_P]

You are mistaken, all you need do is watch the supplements on the DVD to see what master it was taken from- a new HD transfer from the restored 65mm InterPositive. Perhaps you are mistaken and do not have the Criterion DVD? Because if you did have it, this would have been very easy for you to verify by watching the supplements.

As for it not looking as good as it did when first projected in 70mm in 1960, given how the film was restored- an optical compositing of the 3 seperate black-and-white seperation masters which had to be unsqueezed, then registered as perfectly as possible in an optical printer and printed in three passes in order to create a new 65mm master element- there really is no way that the restored SPARTACUS will ever look quite as good as a first-generation print made from the pristine then-brand-new Technirama original negative back in 1960s would. That's not the point- Robert Harris painstakingly restored SPARTACUS to look as good as it possibly could given the condition of the elements, and the elements he had to work with, and it does look as good as it possibly can given those conditions.

And I still maintain that the resultant DVD looks absolutely superb on my 8-foot wide projection system. Since Mr. Harris was heavily involved with the brilliant Criterion SPARTACUS transfer and he posts on this site, perhaps he can chime in and respond to your claim that, and I quote, "it is miles from looking as good as it could look". I'm sure he's as surprised as the rest of us that you apparently know more about the condition of the elements and what was done during the Criterion transfer than he does.

Vincent

 

[GregK]

The Warner Brothers 5.1 re-mix of BEN-HUR judged on it's own is not that bad.. Heck, often it's quite good. But... just as OAR is big on many HTF member's radar, Original Audio Mixes (OAM?) should not be shuffled to the wayside. This is the thread starter's primary concern and is mine as well.

Warner Brothers preservation group does sooo many things right. They care about the features, and on occasion have spent some major $$ to right some previous mastering wrongs (Kiss Me Kate and soon Ben Hur). With that in mind if WB decides to retain the recent 5.1 RE-MIX, remember it is NOT the multi-channel mix which won an Academy Award, and should never be considered a definitive replacement to that mix. ..Why not offer both? Given the relatively low bit-budget of a secondary DD 5.1 or DD 4.0 track, it's really not a stretch to ask for the original mix as well.

Some Fox classics on DVD even provide the original -mono- mix(!) right along with the original stereo tracks, while WB goes to the other extreme and offers one English mix per DVD. So if they opt to do an audio remix and it's not your cup of tea- then you're just out of luck. *This* is the policy I hope they re-examine. I implore them to do it for the love and preservation of the art they strive to preserve and share (..and market) to the public.

It's not a stretch to guess HTF members and film buffs alike would prefer the original mix as audio track #2 instead of French. And finally consider this- YOUR favorite WB classic could be remixed next.

 

[Joe Caps]

A couple of thoughts - I actually agree with Arthur My - I don't like the Criterion Spartacus at all - one of my biggest dvd dissapointments and I returned it the very day I got it.
I've eseen the original transfer Universal did and it was splendid this was then delivered to Criterion and Mr Robert Harris decided the color was wrong and had it color corrected - everything to me now has a greenish tinge to it. Remember, Universal still had their original 70mm anamorphic transfer and they could still release this WITHOUT the damaging color corrections.
Two - the Ben hur sound was remixed for 5.1 to put music constantly on the surrounds. The original mix of Ben hur has hardly any surrounds at all - the chorus shows up during Star of Bethlehem and thee is thunder and lightning during Christs death and thats about it and the film was always this way. Genereally studios did not use much surround in the fifties.
There are some mixing mistakes.
When the star of bethlehem is first seen (in the original mix) there are two notes by the orchestra and the chorus enters very strongly on the third beat. Not so in the remix the chorus doesn't enter unitil the fourth beat because the remixing people faded the chorus in too late!!
You can check this for yourself if you have the current dvd.
You can compare. listen to the french language track which is NOT the new mix but the original 1959 mix and you can hear the chorus enter correctly.
Who knows if we will get this original track?

 

[Vincent_P]

Whether or not the additional color corrections done on the Criterion SPARTACUS are "damaging" is purely a matter of personal taste. Robert Harris was using clips from a vintage IB Technicolor print that Stanley Kubrick had approved as his guide for the correct color. Since Mr. Harris is the man who literally saved SPARTACUS from extinction, I'll take his word for it re: what the film should look like over anybody else's (save Mr. Kubrick, who's no longer with us) any day of the week. Maybe you personally don't like the look, but that doesn't make it wrong.

Anyway, to get back on topic, I agree with the original jist of this thread- along with the corrected framing, any new BEN-HUR dvd should most definitely offer the original "RoadShow" mix from 1959 as a viewing option.

Vincent

 

[Joe Caps]

Concerning spartacus - one of my all time favorite films -When blue water and blue skies are turning into different colors is not a mater of taste.
When day for night is turning from dark blue into green, SOMETHING is wrong.
Whenever changes are done to anything, there is always references to a private print for somebody done way back when. I would love to see frame blowups of this private print, frankly. - i.,e. - I don't believe any of this for a minute. When Kubrik who was NOT a powerful director at the time, be allowed to have a different technicolor print with different color timing done just for him? From Universal !! I highly doubt it.

 

[Mark Anthony]

I have to say I agree with Vincent P, besides the Late Mr Kubrick (who lived round the corner from me!) I can't think of anyone else more qualified than Mr Harris and his restoration team to accurately supervise a transfer and/or colour-correction of Spartacus and I can't think of any reason why he would change the colour's of that film unless that was how they were meant to be seen...

...you may disagree Mr Caps, but what reason can you possibly give for this change in colour unless that was what was originally or subsequently intended by Mr Kubrick and hence why they presented it this way - neither Criterion nor Mr Harris are known for making unecessary changes to film classics, especially on this kind of scale...

But going back to Ben Hur and as a general rule for all WB dvd's of classic film's with remixed sound tracks - the original mix should be available too - as the film is now going to be on 2 disc's by itself, space will not be an issue!

M

 

[RolandL]

For a comparison of the two Spartacus DVD's -

http://www.dvdbeaver.com/film/dvdcompare/spartacus.htm

 

[Patrick McCart]

Well, it's likely that Kubrick's own dye-transfer print is the most accurate. Obviously, not one Eastmancolor print would be any help. And it's also likely no complete dye-transfer prints, other than Kubrick's still exist.

The color corrected version looks more like Technicolor and has that "golden" look to it.

 

[ArthurMy]

" You are mistaken, all you need do is watch the supplements on the DVD to see what master it was taken from- a new HD transfer from the restored 65mm InterPositive. Perhaps you are mistaken and do not have the Criterion DVD? Because if you did have it, this would have been very easy for you to verify by watching the supplements."

I have neither the time nor the inclination to revisit supplements most of which I know from the Criterion laserdisc. I do, in fact, have the Criterion DVD, and I do in fact have eyes, and to my eyes the transfer is wanting. When the film was first restored I trotted off to see it in 70mm. Looked pretty good to me - much better than what I see on the DVD. So, this is what is known as a difference of opinion, and no amount of you telling me how superb it is or that Mr. Harris posts here is going to change what my eyes perceive. To my eyes, King of Kings is superb. To my eyes, Spartacus is not. Not nearly as sharp as it should be (viewed on a 65 inch DLP). Whether it can look better or not is not something I can answer, but I'd like to think that whomever can answer will say yes.

I have the utmost respect for anyone who toils in film restoration (not just video restoration), so I am not being negative for the sake of being negative. I'm merely stating my opinion.

"I'm sure he's as surprised as the rest of us that you apparently know more about the condition of the elements and what was done during the Criterion transfer than he does."

Who is "the rest of us"? I did not say anywhere in my post that I know more about the condition of the elements and what was done during the Criterion transfer than he does. I said I thought the transfer could look better. I just put it on again. I still think the transfer could look better. If that's what an HD master from the 65mm elements looks like, well, I just don't know what to say. And I'm sorry to say that I also agree with joecaps about the greenish cast. Having seen this film twenty times during its initial roadshow release (I know, I know, what can I say), my memory is that it did not have this greenish cast. Again, simply my opinion, which I state, as always, respectfully.

 

[ArthurMy]

Also, Kubrick's dye transfer print was a 35mm print. There were many fluctuations between IB Tech 35mm prints (a friend of mine is a major film collector and has shown me some pretty astonishing differences between Tech prints of the same film). As stated in my earlier post, I have a pretty vivid memory of this film in its initial 70mm roadshow release and what is on view on the Criterion DVD is not what I remember.

I, too, love Spartacus - one of my all-time favorite films.

I'm very interested to see and hear the new Ben-Hur DVD. There were some who, when the last DVD came out, said it could never look better (along with some who thought it looked not so hot). Well, apparently it's going to look better - a LOT better. My hope is the same will hold true for Spartacus.

 

[frank manrique]

quote:

And it's also likely no complete dye-transfer prints, other than kubrick's still exist.

The color corrected version looks more like Technicolor and has that "golden" look to it.
__________________________________________________ _______

1.- I saw a complete road show Spartacus 35mm IB Tech, 4-track mag Stereo sound print at a private exhibition a few years ago...and it looked just like I remember 70mm presentations did.
I don't believe Kubrik's own IB Tech print looked much different, if at all.

I have also seen Ben-Hur in 35mm IB Tech fairly recently and the net effect was the same; colorimetry still looks just like original 70mm showings did.

2.- Is been my experience that original road show IB Tech prints have retained their original coloration, unlike Eastman prints which for the most part have faded or turned color...

-THTS

 

[ArthurMy]

If the roadshow was in 70mm the prints were Eastman. Therefore, I would say it's safe to assume that there are no surviving 70mm prints of Spartacus without severe color fading. On the other hand, there are plenty of IB Tech 35mm prints around. I've seen two of them in the last ten years (in the hands of private collector pals) and there were slight color differences between the two prints.

 

[Paul Penna]

FWIW, based on the dvdbeaver screenshots, neither version reproduces the exceptional warmth of the opening section (the first two sets of screenshots) that I recall from seeing the restoration when it was first released theatrically. Whether the print I saw (35mm) was accurate or not, I don't know, but my recollection of how vividly the color balance tended toward the red is er... itself vivid.

 

[Jeffrey Nelson]

Judging from those screencaps, the Criterion is cropped a smidge on the left, and quite a bit on the top and right, compared to the Universal. The Universal appears a tad sharper to me.