Poll: What to do with your Colorized IAWL Blu-ray disc (1 Viewer)

[Josh Steinberg]

Sorry Josh, but that argument doesn't fly with me. Old literature is still in print and is being consumed by millions, and as for music, practically every song ever recorded is available through streaming services, and the demand for old music is such that there are even SiriusXm channels devoted to it. Are you telling me I'm the only person who enjoys listening to Siriusly Sinatra or 40s on 4? If old literature is no longer relevant, why the hell do they keep remaking Little Women and A Christmas Carol?

I think you’re missing my point.

A few select works endure from every generation, I don’t think that’s ever been in question. But while you can hear Sinatra music in tons of places today, how many of his contemporaries are household names? How many teenagers or 20 or 30 year olds spend more time listening to Sinatra’s peers than music of their own time and place? It shows how special Sinatra was (and probably reflects a little luck too). Little Women was first published in 1868; how many other books from 1868 are still read today by the larger culture for recreation?

There’s a space in our culture for Its A Wonderful Life. NBC wouldn’t have paid top dollar to another studio for TV rights if that weren’t the case. But I’m not convinced that colorizing it would vastly expand its reach further than it already is. And I’m definitely not convinced that colorizing other films from the era that don’t hold that place in our culture will suddenly increase their appeal at an exponential rate. We can maybe nudge the needle a little bit to looking backwards but we can’t freeze culture. Colorizing May attract a few more eyes, and I’m never against that, but I think Colin’s general point is valid.

I’ve never argued that we forget all things or that all older things are irrelevant. It’s simply that for each thing we do keep, we leave far more behind, and that’s it’s always been that way. And that’s probably as it should be otherwise there wouldn’t be a space for people today to create the art of the moment.

 

[Mark-P]

I think you’re missing my point.

A few select works endure from every generation, I don’t think that’s ever been in question. But while you can hear Sinatra music in tons of places today, how many of his contemporaries are household names? How many teenagers or 20 or 30 year olds spend more time listening to Sinatra’s peers than music of their own time and place? It shows how special Sinatra was (and probably reflects a little luck too). Little Women was first published in 1868; how many other books from 1868 are still read today by the larger culture for recreation?

There’s a space in our culture for Its A Wonderful Life. NBC wouldn’t have paid top dollar to another studio for TV rights if that weren’t the case. But I’m not convinced that colorizing it would vastly expand its reach further than it already is. And I’m definitely not convinced that colorizing other films from the era that don’t hold that place in our culture will suddenly increase their appeal at an exponential rate. We can maybe nudge the needle a little bit to looking backwards but we can’t freeze culture. Colorizing May attract a few more eyes, and I’m never against that, but I think Colin’s general point is valid.

I’ve never argued that we forget all things or that all older things are irrelevant. It’s simply that for each thing we do keep, we leave far more behind, and that’s it’s always been that way. And that’s probably as it should be otherwise there wouldn’t be a space for people today to create the art of the moment.

But my point is not that all music, literature, and movies are relevant. Because most of today's movies will be forgotten and dismissed by future generations as well. I just disagree with the notion that young people automatically dismiss anything old. I think they do enjoy older material that has stood the test of time. Star Wars is 42 years old but youngsters today love it as though it were a contemporary film.

 

[Colin Jacobson]

My point was that trying to define what a movie SHOULD definitely look like is a slippery slope. I recall quite a debate about the OZ wire removal, and there are those that swear they know exactly what the film should look like simply because they saw it in a theatre or owned a print.

I get the slippery slope argument but I don't think the correction of technical errors takes us down that path.

Altering visual effects to make them "modern"? Bad. Removing wires or matte lines? Not a problem...

Mark-P's post above reminded me of the brilliance of Peter Jackson's THEY SHALL NOT GROW OLD. Yes, the colorization and 3D conversion was not what the original filmmakers had in mind, but the results were stunning, and artistically justifiable in my opinion.

I'll never understand all the praise for the colorization of "Old". It still looks "colorized" and fake.

The technical work done on that film actively took me away from the stories being told. I was so distracted by the bad color and the useless 3D and the overcranked sound effects and the awkward background voice acting that the movie lost most of its impact.

A version with the veterans' interviews and maybe a gentle score paired with the amazing B&W restoration and no other frills would've been great!

 

[Brent Reid]

I'll never understand all the praise for the colorization of "Old". It still looks "colorized" and fake.

The technical work done on that film actively took me away from the stories being told. I was so distracted by the bad color and the useless 3D and the overcranked sound effects and the awkward background voice acting that the movie lost most of its impact.

A version with the veterans' interviews and maybe a gentle score paired with the amazing B&W restoration and no other frills would've been great!

Agreed.

Agreed.

Agreed.

 

[Josh Steinberg]

Fortunately, the entirety of the restored Black & White material now resides in the same New Zealand that commissioned the Peter Jackson film. Anyone wishing to make suitable licensing arrangements should have access to it for their own project. Indeed, the final restored archive includes far more than what’s in the film. The idea was never for Jackson’s film to be the sole representation of the collection.

 

[TJPC]

Agreed.

Agreed.

Agreed.

I only went to see this movie for the astonishing restoration/colonization/“3dization” It made the experience of the WW1 soldiers suddenly seem real in a way I have never seen before. I am a History specialist but It has always been just jerky skipping footage to me. Now I almost seemed like I was there. I got flack from my wife. She had not realized how young they were and this is now very visible. She was very touched.

This also is just one movie. If you want to experience the speeded up, damaged, jerky, monochrome footage as usual, there are hundreds of other sources.

 

[Dick]

First, I don't think any technology in the foreseeable future would ever come close to replicating 3-Strip Technicolor. What we currently see on these horrible attempts to rewrite film history are pasty, muddy, brownish things that have no relation to accurate flesh tones whatsoever. I own a copy of MARCH OF THE WOODEN SOLIDERS (aka BABES IN TOYLAND) with its included colorized version that has been touted as being one of the best such conversions, but I just find the whole idea silly as shit, created for people who simply cannot accept an artist's original intent. Hey, why not go to the Louvre and paint a big toothy, grinning smile on the Mona Lisa? Second, unless Frank Capra returned from the dead and approved such an effort, the film was made for black and white and his set/costume/camera lighting designs were all based upon that. Period.

I realize how self-righteous this sounds, and I do understand that there are multitudes of people, especially those why grew up outside of the peak period of black and white film production, who simply prefer color while watching movies. But if young children today can accept black and white (and they can, I assure you), I would ask...when does that change (at puberty?), and why? Beyond my interest in knowing a sociological answer to that question, I would just say: watch IT'S A WONDERFUL LIFE in glorious black and white, with its deep contrast and black levels and endless variations of gray scale, and soak in its very singular atmosphere.

What if Legend Films decided to take another whack at a new colorized version of IAWL derived from the new 4K remaster and with a decade of new technological advances in the Colorization process at their disposal. Could Legend produce a colorized IAWL that could match what the film would’ve looked like if originally shot in Technicolor?

 

[BobO'Link]

...But if young children today can accept black and white (and they can, I assure you), I would ask...when does that change (at puberty?), and why?

From personal experience:

My 3 oldest grandkids - ages 8, 13, and 16, generally accept BW movies and TV shows. The older 2 more than the 8yo. They also pretty much grew up at my house where there's no distinction made or preference shown to BW over color or vice versa.

At one time the 2 oldest kids (ages 8 and 11 at the time) were watching some Three Stooges shorts when the younger turned to me and said "These would be funnier in color..." My response was to pause the disc and tell her "So... you're sitting there laughing so hard you're about to wet your pants and you think it'd be funnier in color!? Color has nothing to do with whether these are funny or not - funny is funny in color or BW." She thought a minute and agreed. To this day neither she nor her brother will let BW/color be the deciding factor in choosing a movie or TV show to watch. The 16yo's favorite TV show of all time is I Love Lucy. The 8yo, however, will choose to not watch something because it's BW. There've been a couple of times she's left the room because she asked "Is it color or BW?" and when getting the "BW" answer chose to watch something else on grandma's TV.

A few years back a younger coworker (she was ~24 at the time) and I were discussing movies (specifically horror movies) and I mentioned I have a preference for the pre-1960s horror movies for many reasons. She said she didn't watch "old" movies (anything before 1970), much less those in BW! Challenge accepted! I brought in a group of classic BW horror/sf movies and insisted she watch them. Surprise! (to her - not to me) She liked most of them and asked for more. That lead to her asking for and me loaning her classic comedy and noir films. She no longer restricts herself to "her generation" of movies.

I know people my age who grew up watching BW TV and movies who refuse to watch them today. I just don't get it.

The first time I saw The Exorcist was on a BW TV. It was pretty scary. I later saw it in color and found it wasn't as good so tried BW again to find that I much prefer BW for this one as, to me, it's just a scarier movie in BW. I now will only watch it in BW.

Were it not for my coworker who now *will* watch a BW movie/TV show I'd say it's all in how you were brought up. She kind of blows that theory away.

 

[Colin Jacobson]

This also is just one movie. If you want to experience the speeded up, damaged, jerky, monochrome footage as usual, there are hundreds of other sources.

There's room between NEW AND IMPROVED colorized/fake 3D/fake audio and crappy footage that looks like a truck ran over it.

If you watch the documentary on the "Old" BD, you'll see what the restored black and white footage looks like - and it's astonishing.

It continues to surprise me that a board of supposed cinephiles goes all for footage that's been radically manipulated from its source!

 

[Worth]

There's a difference between messing with a finished film and manipulating stock footage in the creation of a new film.

 

[John Morgan]

I have to figure a way to plug up the center hole to make an effective coaster. Even here, they fail.

 

[ScottHM]

I own a copy of MARCH OF THE WOODEN SOLIDERS (aka BABES IN TOYLAND) with its included colorized version that has been touted as being one of the best such conversions, but I just find the whole idea silly as shit, created for people who simply cannot accept an artist's original intent.

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, and "original intent" means absolutely nothing to 99.9% of viewers.

---------------

 

[Colin Jacobson]

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, and "original intent" means absolutely nothing to 99.9% of viewers.

---------------

You quoted me but I didn't make that statement...

 

[ScottHM]

You quoted me but I didn't make that statement...

It just looked like I quoted you. Sorry about that .

---------------

 

[RICK BOND]

I keep mine in the 4K case where it belongs. It looks Nice. I prefer the original B&W of course.

 

[BobO'Link]

I just watched the colorized version of IAWL. Never again. It's not in the category of a "good" colorization job (and, IMHO, those aren't that good). Flesh tones are mostly pasty in appearance with other colors that are mostly muted. Lots of pastels (which generally work better). Most of the time it looks much like an old faded color print. I wasn't too crazy about the colorization work done on the 3 Harryhausen movies but they're much better than what was done on IAWL.

 

[titch]

Never seen any colourised films before I saw They Shall Not Grow Old and I certainly have previously been very dismissive of such a low-brow way to try and commercialise a film for new audiences. However, that being said, I did recently see the World War 2 In Colour series on Netflix and I must say, the digital colouring wasn't as bad as I was expecting. It probably helps that the source material is old black and white documentary and not a studio production. Same with They Shall Not Grow Old - that film had both black and white and colourised sections and the colourising didn't ruin the film for me. I have no interest in purchasing the colorised version of It's A Wonderful Life and find it a bit strange that Paramount have released the disc so differently around the world. The UK version with the 4K disc and remastered blu ray is ideal.

 

[mBen989]

I would follow the example of John Entwistle.

 

[Jeffrey D]

I would follow the example of John Entwistle.

Cool video, and great song from Who By Numbers.

 

[AnthonyClarke]

Love that clip! One of our favourite moments from 'The Kids are Alright' .. which is a sensational documentary about the greatest performing rock group in the history of rock!