Phantom of the Opera: Ultimate Edition pre-book sheet! (1 Viewer)

[Bill Burns]

They might not be the ultimate in all cases, such as a European restoration converted for U.S. consumption, but we're lucky to have many of these films at all. It's ashame that some people are dismissing these releases without even actually watching them.

I can't buy everything! I should emphasize, Randy, that I'm only dismissing PAL conversions because I've seen other PAL conversions, such as The Iron Mask, WB's The Gold Rush, and the clips provided on the second disc of the latter for the remaining titles in the WB/MK2 Chaplin series -- and I find the problem very distracting (to say nothing of the extreme aperture matting of the MK2 City Lights, but that's another thread). Did I get rid of those films (The Iron Mask and The Gold Rush)? Nope -- they're two of the best pictures ever made, IMO, and the sheer quality of their content, married to lovely source prints/restoration work, overcomes the needless PAL conversion downside to make them worth owning (I also kept Image's NTSC native The Gold Rush, though! ). But for me, on a title I enjoy but do not consider to be one of the finest films ever made, the distraction of PAL conversion blur/ghosting is too great to justify the purchase price. With Phantom, I already own Shepard's lovely, NTSC native Image edition of the '29 -- it's rough to fork out $20 for a new, "improved" copy that introduces ghosting just, in essence, for the Vitaphone soundtrack, though I generally love period Vitaphones, as I did on Shepard's Tempest (it remains to be seen if Kino offers a better version of the '25, and the remaining supplements are of only passing interest to me). A company can and should create a native NTSC master for the DVD of any film; if they're unwilling or unable to manage this, it's like the old 4:3 letterbox vs. 16x9 formatted debate: great films in OAR in both cases, but one looks great and the other, not as great. If you love the film, you'll probably buy it regardless of whether or not it takes full advantage of the quality achievable on the format, but if there are a slew of films you enjoy but haven't bought that take full advantage, and a new release you also enjoy that doesn't take full advantage of the format ... well, I figure it makes more sense to favor the best product with my buying dollar.

If I could buy everything, believe me, I'd buy Phantom and The Man Who Laughs. But I just can't -- so I want to favor those titles that do not enter the race with an existing, and preventable, handicap, especially one that I've continually found to distance me from the illusion of watching film.

Thanks for the feedback on The Man Who Laughs, though -- I was afraid it would prove to be yet another PAL conversion (after Kino's The Holy Mountain, which Mark reviewed on Digitally Obsessed). :frowning: Happily, all present indications are that WB's Lon Chaney Collection should be NTSC native ... here's hoping. If anyone has a chance to view Milestone's upcoming It, also a Photoplay restoration, that's a title in which I'm very interested and very much hope proves to be NTSC native (and, if it is, one to which I'd like to upgrade from Kino's existing, fair DVD with its very melancholy documentary).

Incidentally, Randy, have you viewed The Chess Player (Milestone's first Photoplay DVD)? Roderick mentioned earlier that he noticed no blurring, but couldn't be 100% certain based on his first viewing -- if you've seen it, I'd love to know whether you found any signs of even mild ghosting in freeze frame. If Phantom is alone among these first three Milestone Photoplays in its blur (The Chess Player, The Phantom of the Opera, and It), that'll bode very well for the remaining three titles in the series* (La Terre, The Blot, and the one I'm sure we're all chomping at the bit to see, Nosferatu).

* Or at least the remaining three thusfar named for the series as issued by Milestone -- the silent Chaplin The Gold Rush and Kino's The Iron Mask are also Brownlow restorations, of course.

 

[Damin J Toell]

Ben-Hur isn't on DVD in Region 1.

It was released on LD (although I don't know if it featured a restoration by Photoplay), so perhaps Patrick is referring to that.

DJ

 

[Claes Ljunghorn]

I own 13 of the Photoplay Silent film restorations on PAL VHS.

"Phantom of the opera" is the only one were I noticed motion blur in a way that was slightly distracting in some of the scenes. My guess at the time (when I got it a few years ago) was that it was caused by primitive digital noise/grain reduction. It looks like that kind of ghosting to me, when pictures are blended to reduce grain. The ballerinas legs, at least in the early shots in the film, are fine - no "multi-legs-effect" as far as I can see on my PAL VHS tape.

This is still a VERY good version of the film!

The silent "Ben-Hur" was once relased on DVD in Japan, but it is not the Photoplay restoration.

 

[Randy A Salas]

Incidentally, Randy, have you viewed The Chess Player (Milestone's first Photoplay DVD)? Roderick mentioned earlier that he noticed no blurring, but couldn't be 100% certain based on his first viewing -- if you've seen it, I'd love to know whether you found any signs of even mild ghosting in freeze frame.

I loved The Chess Player and thought it looked fabulous. I didn't notice obvious blurring as I did in, say, Phantom, but I didn't do a frame-by-frame analysis. Again, though, I don't obsess over these things, especially on a film for which there is no other R1 DVD option.

I know the number of DVDs that a person wants typically exceeds his or her budget, but there's a fairly painless way to investigate a DVD you really want without relying on the opinions of others.

Take, for an example, the ultimate edition of Phantom. You can buy it online for just over $18 shipped. If you buy it and find that it's not up to your standards, you could easily list it on Half.com for around $16-17 based on the current lack of copies of it available there. Even after Half's commission, the end result is that it would have cost only a few bucks--about the same as a rental--to see if you liked the disc. This is better than simply renting the disc, because if you like the DVD, you've already bought it.

 

[Mark Zimmer]

Bill asked me:

Do I understand, though, that there's no "real" ghosting, Mark? When you freeze frame scenes with action, you don't see a frame in every few that appears double exposed

No, I said that most of the problematic bits are not the result of ghosting. There is a little ghosting on occasion if you step through frames, but it's not too bad, and I don't believe it to be the source of the visual issues when run at normal speed.

I haven't watched the Warner Gold Rush; after hearing about the problems with that disc I decided to go for the R2 native PAL version instead (which just shipped---I should have it shortly and hopefully report that it's clean). But the minor occasional ghosting on Phantom is very different from the PAL-NTSC ghosting I've seen on other discs (e.g. Prince Achmed)

 

[Patrick McCart]

I've seen both the TCM transfer (which is the laserdisc one) and also the VHS for Ben-Hur.

I found that the ghosting for Phantom is actually less "visible" on my laptop's DVD-ROM than a tube TV.

If this is "worse" than the MK2-Warner Chaplin discs, the Chaplin ought to look wonderful on DVD.

 

[Jim Tudor]

Ugh, all this talk of botched PAL conversions and ghosting images is enough to make my head spin. I don't yet own any version of PHANTOM, but was looking forward to picking up the Milestone version. I have been slow to pick up the WB Chaplins also, but was considering doing so. Then I started reading some of these threads - yikes!

To simplify this, if that's possible - it sounds like the Milestone PHANTOM is flawed but far from unwatchable, so for someone like me who just wants to own it for the first time, and study it & the extras, this version would still be the way to go, right?

As far as the Chaplins, I don't know what to buy. Sheesh, why can't they just get this stuff right already?!?

JiM T

 

[John Hodson]

Right

After fearing the very worst, I'm very pleased with it; the Technicolor ballroom scene is utterly charming, and the commentary is excellent.

---
So many films, so little time...

 

[DeeF]

The motion blurring is most annoying right in the beginning, during the ballet.

It was noticeable immediately (I hadn't read this thread).

But the rest of the movie is more watcheable.

I do think this is the best version, but like the recent Chaplin DVDs, one is vaguely aware that it isn't the best you ever saw.

Unlike The Adventures of Robin Hood, for instance, which is quite amazing on DVD.

 

[Bill Burns]

Jim, the two high quality Region 1 DVD editions of Phantom from which to choose are now the David Shepard/Image edition of the '29 version (with Technicolor Ball sequence intact) and the Kevin Brownlow/Photoplay/Milestone/Image/Justice League (okay, I fibbed on that last credit ) edition just released and discussed above.

Jokes aside, the Milestone edition has both the '29 and the original '25. Shepard's edition only has the '29. Rumors persist that Kino is working on a stand-alone edition of the '25, but no details are yet available. The version contained on Milestone's release appears, from above comments, to be a very good 16mm "show at home" copy. UCLA is apparently engaged in restoring this version (from 35mm?), but it's unknown whether that restoration or any part of it (i.e. the elements they are using) will be available to Kino.

Shepard's edition, again, features the restored Technicolor Masque Ball sequence (he reportedly provided his elements for this sequence to Brownlow/Photoplay for inclusion in their restoration); a later sequence in the Milestone version of the '29 apparently recreates another color process (some sort of hand stenciled process?), but Shepard's edition does not include this.

Both discs are tinted; I find the tints in Shepard's edition quite lovely (the box states they are true to the 1925 spec for tinting), if perhaps a touch oversaturated (it's been a few years since I last watched it, though, so I'd have to revisit it before saying that with any certainty). Both discs also play out at a speed-adjusted frame rate; Milestone's edition changes speed from time to time according to the wishes of the restoration team, while Shepard's disc plays out at a constant 20 fps (four frames slower than sound speed).

Shepard's disc displays no blur or image ghosting; Milestone's release, as detailed above, displays "some."

Milestone's disc features both a Carl Davis score (new) and the Vitaphone disc soundtrack (period) that accompanied the film during its '29 reissue. Shepard's disc offers a Gabriel Thibaudoux score (new, commissioned in 1992), with select vocals by Claudine Coté, and does not offer the Vitaphones.

Additionally, the Milestone release features a commentary (does it bad mouth Rupert Julian to the extent suggested in a few reviews? I'm not sure I want a record of every bad word his actors ever spoke about him! The poor man is dead, after all, and we're still talking about a couple of his films, and him, nearly eighty years later -- he must have done something right! ), a few deleted spoken dialogue sections from the '29 (audio only?), and other bonus materials.

My priority is the film, and to me, with a Kino of the '25 on the way (or at least likely), and Shepard's fine, blur-free edition of the '29, the bonus material just isn't worth the purchase price. But if you don't yet own a copy of the film, going my route will be about twice as expensive (a copy of Shepard's '29 and the eventual Kino '25, assuming it's blur free) as simply buying the Milestone DVD, which currently includes both films (a bit of blur in the '29, no blur in the '25) and the many bonuses, particularly that Vitaphone soundtrack, which I'd love to hear. Your most cost effective choice is the Milestone, Jim, and unless Kino includes a smorgasbord of extras on their edition of the '25 (something they rarely do), it's also the best/only way to obtain the extras. But if the pure image quality, and acceptable sound quality, of the feature itself is your aim ... then the issue is a bit more convoluted. For me, until Kino's edition of the '25 is out, with reviews, I'm going to wait -- Shepard's '29 is very good, and if Kino bests Milestone on the '25, then my purchasing decision is made. If, by some fluke, Kino issues the '25 and it's in worse shape than Milestone's copy, Milestone will get the nod, though I'll probably continue watching the '29 via Shepard's disc.

Head spinning indeed. I hope that helps. Here are DVDEmpire back cover scan links to both the Shepard/Image and Photoplay/Milestone/Image discs:

Shepard/Image:
The Phantom of the Opera (1929)

Photoplay/Milestone/Image:
The Phantom of the Opera (1925/1929)

 

[Jim Tudor]

Bill, thanks for the thoughtful and detailed response. I think I'll opt to put this purchase on the back-burner for now - I haven't been able to find one locally anyway - and wait for that eventual Kino '25 edition (and reviews) like you're doing, unless I happen upon a used cheap version of the Milestone edition (unlikely). Naturally I'd like to spend as little money as possible on this, but I also have that nagging itch insisting that I own the BEST version of the film itself. But darn it, those Milestone extras sound terrific! Sheesh. Oh well, at least now I know the whole story.

JiM T

 

[Jack Theakston]

I would take the Milestone route, and if the ghosting bugs you, purchase the Shepard edition (which in its own way has some really cool features not on the Milestone edition).

About Kino's edition... no talk yet over what it's going to be (not even if it's 1929 or 1925, but I can only speculate the latter unless they've uncovered some killer score). If they are using UCLA's restoration, it will be off of David Shepard's material that he has of the 1925 cut (a show-at-home print, and I think some Technicolor footage).

I myself have issues with the Brownlow framerates. In my opinion, the reshot sound scenes should be run at 24 and the silent scenes run at 18-24 respectively. I mentioned elsewhere that the film, to properly run with the disks at all (even edited), should be a constant 24 fps. Unfortunately, that can't work with Brownlow's cut, which uses different framerates, so there's some slowing down/editing of cues so that they match scenes fuller. If you know the cues well enough, you'll be able to spot where the edits were made, but if not, it flows seamlessly.

What Scott MacQueen has done is sort of remixed the surviving sound disks to fit the current picture. It's not 100% bonifide there, and there's a lot of stuff that's been expanded or filled in, but it gives a general overview what the disks are all about, and I don't think very many cues are lost.

However, I would certainly at least rent it or look into someone else's copy before buying it or at least get some good educated opinions. I myself jumped to the occasion of getting it, and I'm still glad I did- the bonuses and extra material make up for any sloppy framework on an already great looking print (mind you, I've seen that cut of the film probably over a hundred times already anyway).

 

[Bill Burns]

It took a while to locate this in a closet (covered in dust, actually), but intrepid soul that I am, I managed to dig out the 2003 print catalogue Kino sent out by mail at the beginning of the year. Some of the "coming on DVD" titles they mention have been pushed to 2004, but I thought they mentioned the Chaney Phantom in it, and sure enough, they do (page 37).

They don't have much to say, aside from the usual superlatives about its status as a "horror classic," but it does say "remastered with color tints, the original two strip Technicolor sequence and a lush orchestral score," and the info blurb says "U.S. 1925. 92 Min. B/W & Color. $24.95," followed by "Coming on DVD." I assume from this that plans are definitely in place for this to be the '25 version, and not the '29, and it seems I've read on-line mention of that as well (not just from you, Jack ), but all I'm certain of is what's in front of me, and of course that's just a blurb in a catalogue printed at least a year before the actual release, perhaps longer (we'll see) -- make of it what you will. Directly below the Phantom ad they also promise a DVD of Chaney's The Hunchback of Notre Dame, but they offer no details about content. The info blurb says "U.S. 1923. B/W. 68 Min. $24.95," and is again followed by "Coming on DVD."

I hope that was helpful -- now I can throw this dusty old thing away and await the arrival of 2004's.

P.S. If Randy's still around, or if anyone else has seen it, I was very curious about Assunta Spina, a 1915 feature released alongside The Holy Mountain from Germany. The latter, according to Mark Zimmer's review, displays PAL-NTSC ghosting and blur, but he hasn't reviewed the former; it's from Italy, of course, not Germany, and presumably has a very different restoration and/or preservation history. If it was issued overseas to home video, that PAL master may have been licensed by Kino, but if this is its first appearance on home video, they may have commissioned a new master, which would (again presumably) exist as native NTSC. They've issued overseas restorations as native NTSC in the past, so there is simply no predicting the matter -- the eye does not lie, as it were. If anyone has seen it, and particularly if they've viewed it with an eye toward appropriate transfer speed and any signs of PAL conversion, I'd love to hear more about its video quality.

 

[Mark Zimmer]

As promised back on page 3, I have received my UK Warner version of The Gold Rush and am pleased to report that (as expected) there is absolutely no ghosting, which confirms the speculation that that effect is the result of PAL-NTSC conversion. The 1942 version looks fine, if a bit dupey, while the 1925 restoration by Brownlow is absolutely superb looking. Anyone who was disappointed in the US version would be well-advised to try the British version of this film.

There is a bit of motion blur in the opening sequence on the Chilkoot Pass, but I don't know whether that's related to the Phantom blur or something that was on the original film. I don't see it anywhere else on the film.

 

[Jack Theakston]

I just spoke to Kino and they say that since the Milestone release was so definative, they've cancelled their own release of the film.

 

[Patrick McCart]

I just spoke to Kino and they say that since the Milestone release was so definative, they've cancelled their own release of the film.

Wow.

Well, it's good to keep out of redundancy. If they were going to go with UCLA's material... it seems that they hold mostly 16mm. The major bit of 35mm they hold, though, is that dye-transfer print of the Bal Masque segment. (and the myriad of preservation duplicates)

 

[oscar_merkx]

Thanks Jack for the update about the 1925 Gold Rush version

 

[Mark Zimmer]

Yes, of course UCLA's 1925 holdings are 16mm. That's all that exists of the 1925 Phantom AFAIK. The question is whether what they've got is superior to what's on the Milestone disc, and that may or may not be the case. Frankly, I'm a bit disappointed that this isn't going forward (assuming Kino was going to be using the UCLA restoration, which I've never seen confirmed, only speculated). But the silent market can only support so much, I suppose.

 

[Jack Theakston]

Perhaps if anyone gets around to investigating several European prints that have been reported, we may just see yet another release of this title down the road.

UCLA's restoration of PHANTOM is ongoing, and there's always rumors to what they have and what they don't. For example, about ten years ago, I was told by a good source that they had in their possession several scenes in Technicolor of the ballet and Faust sequences. Since then, none of this has come into light, so I don't think they do. However, I've heard that there is an incomplete 35mm print in Italy, and someone hinted at a print in France to me a month or two ago.

I guess time will have to tell.

 

[Bill Burns]

For some reason, I both want to cry and sing ... why is that? ... hmmmm ....

Oh, oh, I know what it is: my Warner Legends set arrived today, but then I opened this thread ....

Oh well. So much for Kino's 2003 Catalogue! I wonder if their Hunchback is still on tap? I noticed a copy of the Milestone Phantom at Best Buy (just one), and after tax the price would be $19.07, I think, just about the same (to within a few pennies) as the pre-book price I was quoted, with shipping, and later cancelled. So ... no harm, no foul. I may take the plunge so as to own the '25, at the very least.

But I hope you're right and someone takes up the UCLA and/or international materials for another edition down the road, if only to offer the '25 the same representative fervor on the format already afforded the '29.