Some bad news concerning the dvd release of the original "King Kong" (1 Viewer)

[oscar_merkx]

I am resurrecting this thread because of new information about a possible King Kong Release.

Straight from George Feltenstein himself

http://www.digitallyobsessed.com/sho...iew.php3?ID=55

dOc: Are there some films in the library that are in such poor shape that no matter how well-loved and classic they may be, they just aren't suitable for DVD?

GF: No. There's nothing in that state of affairs. This is no secret, but the reason we have not yet released King Kong is that we are still searching around the globe for better film elements.

dOc: So you could have released it, but you choose not to.

GF: Right. We could have released it, and it would look the way the old laserdisc looked or it would look the way it looks when you see it on Turner Classic Movies. But generally, the DVD format, because it is so spectacular in terms of the clarity of picture and sound, has brought forth very demanding consumers, and we want to give them the very best possible product. So we could have put out a mediocre King Kong and made oodles of dollars and then come back years later with another version when we were ready to bring it out in a way that looked and sounded terrific. We do not believe in doing that.

 

[Gary Seven]

^^^

Interesting... the laserdisc I have of it (a two disc set with Son of Kong included) is a stellar transfer. The sequel not, but I was always impresssed with the quality of picture of the first one. I wonder if that is the laserdisc he is referrring to?

 

[Conrad_SSS]

Amen. I'd rather wait until we have a beautiful KONG then be handed a sub-standard one.

The quote is taken out of context, however. In the interview, he specifically states they are waiting to do it right, like they did with CITIZEN KANE. A beautiful disc, well worth waiting for. I trust their KONG will be as superb an effort...

The laserdisc transfer of KONG was good for its day, but is riddled with damage that would not be acceptable to DVD enthusiasts.

 

[Nick Graham]

All else fails, we'll get it in 2005 no matter what elements they have or have not found. They won't risk losing a tie-in with what will likely be the biggest summer movie that year.

 

[John Sparks]

There were 3 LD's:

1)Criterion
2)Yours
3)Ted Turner 60th Anniversary

All of them looked great. If you look at some of the stills from the movie published in "The Making of King Kong,", you can see why they are looking for the best elements.

Kudos to them for wanting to give us the best!!!

 

[Ruz-El]

I'll wait as long as we have too for this! I hate to double dip, and it is admirable that they are not rushing it out to market.

 

[Jack Briggs]

So, in other words, a transfer hasn't even been started yet? They're still looking for elements?

 

[BruceKimmel]

I would take everything Mr. Feltenstein says publicly with a large container of salt. Trust me on this.

 

[Bryant Frazer]

I dunno, man. With even John Lowry himself recently admitting (in The New York Times, wasn't it?) that technique has improved enough in the last couple of years that he'd like to have another go at Citizen Kane, I have to wonder how long it makes sense to put off major DVD releases in the hope that something better will come along. Speaking for myself, I'd have been happy to pay money for DVDs of Citizen Kane and King Kong back in 1998, with the implicit understanding that I might be making a decision later on whether to shell out additional ducats on the inevitable super-duper reissues.

Maybe we should hold off on the King Kong release for another five years because, you know, HD-DVD has just been approved by the DVD Forum ... or maybe not. I'm very happy that I own King Kong on laserdisc, but really, can we have the DVD already?

-bf-

 

[Ed St. Clair]

Well, being this is my favorite movie:
I am willing to wait (six years, and counting) for the 'best' elements.
However, are they just sitting around hoping something better shows up?
Or, do they really know of better elements?
I can & do enjoy this movie on SD TV.
Have never owed the VHS (any opinions?), let alone any LD (lucky you!).

Was lucky enough too catch a 16mm print in '77.

My MAIN concern at this point is the AUDIO!
Will it be 5.1?
Will it have the original mono?
Will it be overly processed?
All that stuff!
Cause, the audio on the TV broadcasts has BAD cuts from scene to scene.
And, distortion, as well.
Here's hoping my seven year wait, pay's off!!!

 

[Ronald Epstein]

I would take everything Mr. Feltenstein says publicly with a large container of salt. Trust me on this.

Bruce, I'd be very careful about accusing anyone
at a studio of being a liar on this forum without
proof of such.

Please keep such speculations to yourself. I am
receiving complaints.

Thank You for understanding.

 

[BruceKimmel]

Ron: I have accused no one of being a "liar". And would never do so. I know Mr. Feltenstein and I know many people at Warners. However, I'm happy to say nothing.

BTW, there's a UK region 2 King Kong available - anyone know what the print quality of that is like?

 

[Paul_Scott]

The problem i see with what Mr Feltenstein has said is this-
"better" is only something you can determine if you have two of something side by side.
its one thing to say- "we are not going to put another disc unless we can come up with better elements this time".
but when you have nothing -how do you judge better?
in this case anything would be better (than nothing).

no matter what the final disc looks like-how would we even know if it was better or worse?
as some people have said, the print used on the KK/SOK double disc was already an improvement over the one Criterion used.
i don't understand why that, coupled with a lowry passover to tweak it wouldn't yield a satisfying dvd image.
in fact, i'm sure it would be just fine and people would be quite complimentary of the finished product simply due to the ability of DVD to resolve a bit more detail and render truer blacks/ more robust greyscale.

if you take Mr. Feltenstein at his word in the interview it does sound as if they are just waiting in the hopes something might turn up-
that seems quite odd to me.

i can wait for this just fine, i just find the stated reasons for its delays to be...a little curious.

 

[Patrick McCart]

i don't understand why that, coupled with a lowry passover to tweak it wouldn't yield a satisfying dvd image.

Well, it depends on source quality. Warner Bros. tracked down a fine-grain positive (or internegative?) for Citizen Kane so that a better photographic source could be used. It supposedly had a lot of dirt, scratches, lines, nitrate decomposition, etc... but it had great image quality.

For example: If LDI restored "Sunrise," you'd have a very clean image, but it would still carry the photographic quality of a 6th generation source.

So, if WB finds elements closer to the original negative, they can have the great photographic quality.

 

[Jack Theakston]

Lowry being great and all... if they're going to do anything to their current materials, the first step should be photochemical, obviously. Saving that stuff on a legitimate format (sorry to all of you who find digital to be the way on this, I don't agree)... ie film.

 

[Claes Ljunghorn]

I'm glad Mr Feltenstein said the silent films (The Lon Chaney Collection) has been profitable. This gives me hope of one day maybe seeing "The Cameraman" (1928) with Buster Keaton on DVD.

 

[Jim_K]

Unfortunately that's how I read it also. :frowning: If you read the entire article he states it takes an average of 18 months from start to finish to prep an older film for DVD release.

Don't think 2004 is going to happen with this title.

 

[Roger Rollins]

Warner Brothers has been doing a stellar job with their classics recently. Releases like THE ADVENTURES OF ROBIN HOOD or LOONEY TUNES GOLDEN COLLECTION are proof that optimum quality is worth waiting for.

I have the R2 DVD of KONG and it is, at best, "decent". It looks like it was derived from a release print. It's about the same as the last Image LD.

The situation seems to be similar to what Fox is doing with THE GRAPES OF WRATH. They withdrew their plans to release it last year, so they could end up with a better product for consumers a little later on.

I appreciate the efforts of both of these studios in doing their best deliver a first-class product to the buying public. The same certainly can't be said about some of their competitors.

 

[Joseph Bolus]

Hmmm ... I suppose that it could just be the cynic in me that thinks that all this is just a convenient way of ensuring that Kong is released in close proximity to the new Peter Jackson re-make in 2005 ...

Seriously, there were lots of rumors from usually reliable sources that indicated that as early as 2001 LDI had been commissioned to work on this project for a supposed 70th anniversary release in 2003. Then we were informed that new materials had been found that would allow the inclusion of scenes that Willis O'Brien had originally intended to be in the movie but were deemed too gory for 1933 audiences to endure (such as the infamous spider scene following the sailors being knocked off the log.) We were then told that LDI, after receiving the new materials in mid-2002, had requested more time to properly re-integrate the new scenes into the movie.

Now, we are to believe that all of these rumors that have propagated for the past 18-24 months are totally false and that work has not even begun on this project?

Sorry, but it's hard to believe. Why don't they just come right out and state that they're holding this release to capitalize on the promotion for the re-make?

Sorry I'm so cynical here ... Perhaps I'm just feeling a little exasperated by the long wait for this release on DVD.

 

[Mark Zimmer]

The R2 disc is pretty contrasty; it's about comparable to seeing the movie on TCM, frankly. But if you want to be able to watch it whenever you want, it's about as good as it gets right now.