SOUND OF MUSIC 4K restoration and 70mm reissue??? (1 Viewer)

[ArnoldLayne]

Not a fan of these filmouts to 70mm either - if you go digital you may as well stay digital.
Oh well, if it keeps all kind of 70mm equipment going I will be fine with that but I will always try to see the real deal instead of these pixel/film hybrids.

Since DCP packages max at 4K, a 70mm print from 8K should be sharper. Maybe?

 

[Worth]

Since DCP packages max at 4K, a 70mm print from 8K should be sharper. Maybe?

They scan at 8K, but all additional work is done at 4K. For now.

 

[AnthonyClarke]

THE SOUND OF MUSIC had several record-breaking seasons ,when it was originally released. These record runs have never been broken by ANY other film, in over 50 years. It was the second longest run of any film in London (over 3 years) (SOUTH PACIFIC in London ran almost a year longer).It was the only film ever to run more than a year in Auckland,New Zealand. It ran for 41 weeks in Wellington,New Zealand - the longest ever for a film in that city. In Sydney it also ran over 3 years. There maybe many other record-breaking runs that still stand to-day.

I'm glad that South Pacific still holds that record ... it's my favourite R & H musical .. I saw it on a giant widescreen in Melbourne Australia on its first release .. .saw it, and saw it, and saw it. I think I went about five times in a fortnight .. I was 14 or 15 at the time. Pure magic.

 

[zoetmb]

IMO, 70mm is a waste of effort if it's derived from a digital intermediate. It's just like the myth of the LP: over 90% of new LP's are derived from digital masters, yet people buy into vinyl because they think they're listening to analog.

Once you're in the digital domain, you might as well stay there and have the advantages of no dirt or scratches, even screen brightness and a brighter, crisper image that's perfectly steady.

And there are very few theaters still equipped to show a 5 full range stage channel format and a DTS track is never going to sound like the original analog mag tracks anyway. Some Dolby Atmos theaters optionally have five screen channels, but I'm not aware of any Dolby Vision theaters that are also equipped for 70mm with the possible exception of the Disney-owned El Capitan (although some Dolby Atmos theaters that don't have Dolby Vision might be).

When SOM first played at roadshow theaters, they tended to be quite large and many had curved screens. In NYC, it played at the Rivoli, the same theater where West Side Story played to spectacular effect. The curved screen was 52' across the cord, making it over 57' wide for a 2.2:1 image. I believe that SOM played there for close to two years.

IMO, you can never replicate the experience of Todd-AO in today's mostly tiny theaters. Having said that, a high quality new restoration would be welcomed, but the last time I caught some of this film on cable, it already looked damned good to me.

 

[Robin9]

IMO, 70mm is a waste of effort if it's derived from a digital intermediate. It's just like the myth of the LP: over 90% of new LP's are derived from digital masters, yet people buy into vinyl because they think they're listening to analog.

That may be true of buyers today, but my large collection of L.P.s dates way back, long before "digital" was ever thought of. My first L. P. was the soundtrack of Can Can from around 1961.

 

[JPCinema]

I want to hear clearly again Julie's hand slap her dress during the opening "the Sound of Music".

 

[Mark Booth]

One of probably less than 10 films that I'll buy over and over and over again if they keep making a better quality version.

Fingers crossed for a quality 4K HDR Blu-ray that is leaps and bounds better than the 50th Anniversary Blu-ray.

Mark

 

[chrislong2]

You all make it sound like the existing SOM blu is terrible. In reality, I think it is the 2nd best looking disc in my entire collection, topped only by the Todd-AO release of Oklahoma! I'll be honest and say that I had only casually seen SOM before seeing it on Blu, so maybe those that talk of color grading issues have a legit point in some way that it wasn't as originally intended. Maybe. But all I know is that the Blu they put out is breathtakingly beautiful and I don't have one iota of a complaint regarding coloring and am not the slightest bit enthralled with the idea of them making it more redder/yellow-ish looking. If that was the original intent, forgive me for saying it, but I'm glad they changed it. As for the sound, I find the audio on SOM blu to be amazingly clear and balanced. I watched with my quality headphones instead of surround, but I have long dabbled in audio and consider myself somewhat of an audiophile, and I have pretty much zero complaints about the audio based on what I heard. If the complaint is that the audio track is missing a couple of foley sounds, I guess I would say: "Ok - they should fix, but who really cares if we hear an extra slap of a hand or something?..." Sorry I just don't get the knocking in this thread of what I consider to be one of the most amazing blu's I own...

 

[Mark Booth]

I'm not unhappy with the image on 50th Sound of Music but, let's be real here, it isn't in the same league as the latest Todd-AO release of Oklahoma.

Mark

 

[trajan007]

I'm not unhappy with the image on 50th Sound of Music but, let's be real here, it isn't in the same league as the latest Todd-AO release of Oklahoma.

Mark

Don't forget SOM used alot of filters.

 

[chrislong2]

I'm not unhappy with the image on 50th Sound of Music but, let's be real here, it isn't in the same league as the latest Todd-AO release of Oklahoma.

I personally don't have ANY other Blu's that are like the latest Oklahoma - it stands alone as a unique critter. But next up in my collection anyway is SOM. Both to me are astounding, but Ok's in a different category.

 

[RichMurphy]

I personally don't have ANY other Blu's that are like the latest Oklahoma - it stands alone as a unique critter. But next up in my collection anyway is SOM. Both to me are astounding, but Ok's in a different category.

I'd put the latest MY FAIR LADY Blu in the same category, for both picture AND sound.

But I agree with you on SOUND OF MUSIC. I've seen 70mm prints in two different theaters over the years, and was never that impressed with the visuals. The most recent Blu recreates the theatrical presentation just fine for me.

 

[haineshisway]

Don't forget SOM used alot of filters.

The filters have nothing to do with it - the color is off.

 

[Brian Kidd]

OKLAHOMA is definitely a stunner... but SUSPIRIA...........

Honestly, and I have no scientific basis for this opinion, I've always felt that the SoM Blu is pretty, but could be sharper. I'll jump on a UHD if it's released.

 

[warnerbro]

The movie won an Oscar for sound achievement. The blu ray should receive a Razzie.

 

[trajan007]

The filters have nothing to do with it - the color is off.

I'm talking about when people compare SOM to Okal

OKLAHOMA is definitely a stunner... but SUSPIRIA...........

Honestly, and I have no scientific basis for this opinion, I've always felt that the SoM Blu is pretty, but could be sharper. I'll jump on a UHD if it's released.

Its not as sharp as OKLAH0MA because of filters in many scenes.

 

[Noel Aguirre]

You all make it sound like the existing SOM blu is terrible. In reality, I think it is the 2nd best looking disc in my entire collection, topped only by the Todd-AO release of Oklahoma! I'll be honest and say that I had only casually seen SOM before seeing it on Blu, so maybe those that talk of color grading issues have a legit point in some way that it wasn't as originally intended. Maybe. But all I know is that the Blu they put out is breathtakingly beautiful and I don't have one iota of a complaint regarding coloring and am not the slightest bit enthralled with the idea of them making it more redder/yellow-ish looking. If that was the original intent, forgive me for saying it, but I'm glad they changed it. As for the sound, I find the audio on SOM blu to be amazingly clear and balanced. I watched with my quality headphones instead of surround, but I have long dabbled in audio and consider myself somewhat of an audiophile, and I have pretty much zero complaints about the audio based on what I heard. If the complaint is that the audio track is missing a couple of foley sounds, I guess I would say: "Ok - they should fix, but who really cares if we hear an extra slap of a hand or something?..." Sorry I just don't get the knocking in this thread of what I consider to be one of the most amazing blu's I own...

I couldn't agree with you more. Some of these posters who dislike the SOM blu-ray have no problem with the teal King and I or the blooming white Hello Dolly blu-rays? I too have an audio file system and the music sounds absolutely perfect. And the image is a VAST improvement over the previous blu-ray- the golds are golden as they were in the theater.
Would I buy it for a missing foley sound or 2? Probably but there are a lot more films in need of fixing- and we can begin with the King and I. Just makes no sense.

 

[Noel Aguirre]

The filters have nothing to do with it - the color is off.

Yet if I'm not mistaken you luv both The King and I and Hello Dolly's images?

 

[warnerbro]

The image on THE KING AND I blu ray is a total mystery to me. It is almost unwatchable. The DVD looked better! What happened? It looks teal and rust-colored and horrible. THE SOUND OF MUSIC looks good to me. It doesn't have the color scheme of the previous DVD which I liked, but in theatres I believe this was the original look. I think they did tone down "In the last Golden Days of the Thirties" sepia tone. They seemed embarrassed by it.

 

[Garysb]

The Bridge on the River Kwai seems to be the oldest film to get a 4K release. The next oldest is may be Close Encounters of the Third Kind. So not much love yet for older films in 4K. 2001 is coming soon. Small pickings from the 1960's roadshow films.