That's Entertainment

Richard M S

Supporting Actor
Joined
Mar 2, 2005
Messages
828
It was supposed to be out today but now it looks like it's been pushed back a month. (blu-ray.com says September 22nd) Maybe Warners wants to fix the glitch?
I looked through the thread and I cannot find what the "glitch" is that apparently is "still there" either.
 

Wayne_j

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Nov 7, 2006
Messages
3,653
Real Name
Wayne
It annoys me today that some of the smaller auditoriums in multiplexes show 2:35 ratio films letterboxed. Even Hateful 8, filmed in an ultra widescreen ratio was slightly letterboxed even though in a big theatre.
In Hateful 8's case it would be due to the lack of theaters that have screens wide enough to show 2.76:1 content. Also all digital cinema content has to be formatted in either 1.85:1 or 2.39:1 frames.
 
  • Sad
Reactions: MatthewA

Ejanss

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Mar 23, 2012
Messages
2,644
Real Name
EricJ
TE2 lacks the focus of the original. Including comedy clips and seemingly jumping from clip to clip randomly gets frustrating after a while, despite the presence of Astaire and Kelly. The opening credits are fun, though.
Also, it's still the mid-70's, and its love-hate relationship with old, quote, "late-nite movies"--
Like the humorous segment about famous MGM movie quotes, that eventually turns into a would-be campy snipe at how many times we heard the same "sunset" narration from the Traveltalk shorts.

TE1 felt more like a historic event, since even though it was the 50th anniversary, the unspoken sentiment behind the camera was that this was MGM's Last Will & Testament before tearing down the backlot, which, in 1974, Hollywood literally thought would be the End of Movies.

But anyway, what was I going to post?:
Oh, right--The usual stickler complaint that the TE "trilogy" is technically supposed to be four movies, since Warner always ignores 1985's That's Dancing! for going off-title.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PMF

MatthewA

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Apr 19, 2000
Messages
9,191
Location
Salinas, CA
Real Name
Matthew
They also went off-studio since it included non-M-G-M content such as West Side Story (already owned by them thanks to the UA merger), two films of Rodgers & Hammerstein musicals (one of which was Oklahoma!, partially owned by Samuel Goldwyn), and a Michael Jackson video, to name but a few of the things they had to license. Some of the films weren't even musicals, just films that featured dance.

At least they didn't wait to make it until after the Turner merger. That's Entertainment Part III, made from outtakes they now had to pay Ted Turner (during his Mr. Jane Fonda phase) to use after MGM escaped the clutches of Giancarlo Paretti only to end up right back where they started from with Kirk Kerkorian, didn't even play in theatres where I grew up in North Carolina! I had to hear about its existence because of a laserdisc release. They also pushed back The Fantastiks movie five years only to gut it in post-production, while outside of musicals they didn't give much of a theatrical release to the actual Jean Shepherd-inspired non-cash-grab sequel to A Christmas Story, called It Runs in the Family in what few theaters it did get shown in and then retitled My Summer Story for video. Meanwhile, that post-Home Alone 2 Macaulay Culkin/post-Cheers Ted Danson thing got the bejeezus hyped out of it and still bombed. At least they fared better than Orion, which ended up their corporate sibling during one of the later mergers.

For a studio that was on death's doorstep 45+ years ago, they sure seemed to have hung on awhile.
 
Last edited:

Matt Hough

Reviewer
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Apr 24, 2006
Messages
22,295
Location
Charlotte, NC
Real Name
Matt Hough
Yeah, I would gladly have paid to see That's Entertainment III in a North Carolina theater, but it never played here. I saw it first on a laserdisc set that got almost endless replays. I still watch it more on Blu-ray than the other ones these days.
 

Nick*Z

Screenwriter
Joined
Apr 30, 2003
Messages
1,219
Location
Canada
Real Name
NICK
TEIII looks atrocious on Blu-ray - with hints of digital combing and wan colors. The master here wasn't 'cherse' to quote Mr. Tracy. I would have preferred to have the option of viewing the first 2 movies with their clips restored in the proper aspect ratio. I know, that isn't how they were shown in theaters back in the day, but for a modern viewing experience it made a lot of sense.
 

Mark B

Supporting Actor
Joined
Sep 27, 2003
Messages
867
Location
Saranac Lake, NY
Real Name
Mark
There's a few seconds of repeated footage during the Singin' in the Rain segment. Kelly and Charisse appear to do the same move twice (it's the first time that's in the wrong place).
That's not a glitch, that is a jump cut that has always been a part of the film. A kiss originally was there that was deemed too sensuous. The bit was removed and the music rescored to sound less sexual.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GlennF

Bryan Tuck

Screenwriter
Joined
Jan 16, 2002
Messages
1,813
Real Name
Bryan Tuck
That's not a glitch, that is a jump cut that has always been a part of the film. A kiss originally was there that was deemed too sensuous. The bit was removed and the music rescored to sound less sexual.
There is no kiss in the missing footage. Here's the original scene from Singin' in the Rain:


The footage from 3:37 - 3:42 is missing on the Blu-ray of That's Entertainment Part II, while the footage from 3:42 - 3:47 plays twice. On the laserdisc of TEII, the scene from SITR played out correctly.

If you mean the jump cut at 3:53, then yes, that's always been there (though I didn't realize it took out a kiss).
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mark B and mBen989

GlennF

Second Unit
Joined
Aug 11, 2013
Messages
484
Location
Toronto, Canada
Real Name
Glenn Frost
That's not a glitch, that is a jump cut that has always been a part of the film. A kiss originally was there that was deemed too sensuous. The bit was removed and the music rescored to sound less sexual.
Well thanks for that response Mark B. I have always wondered why that strange cut was there. Always thought it was some sort of problem with the film or camera. Now I know the truth.
 

mBen989

Stunt Coordinator
Joined
Aug 28, 2014
Messages
53
Real Name
Matthew
Has anyone bought the Warner Archive blu ray? How is it?
This is a reissue/repackage of the 2008 set so keep that in mind right of the start.

Also, the audio defaults to Dolby Digital so you'll have to bring up the pop-up menu and swap over to the Dolby TrueHD track.

Now I'm assuming Warners scanned the negative for all three then swapped in updated masters when necessary ("Over the Rainbow" in the first film has the sepia tone which I'm assuming original prints didn't).

Is this the best the three movies will look? Yes.
Are there some ugly sections of dupe negative? Yes, especially when sections zoom in to fill the 16x9 frame (which we should point, OAR lovers, is true to the original theatrical presentation).
Would the individual BluRay's of certain movies look better? Yes.
Would you pass this up for its current asking price on Amazon? Only Mr. Bungle would unless you already have the original set.
 

Mark B

Supporting Actor
Joined
Sep 27, 2003
Messages
867
Location
Saranac Lake, NY
Real Name
Mark
There is no kiss in the missing footage. Here's the original scene from Singin' in the Rain:


The footage from 3:37 - 3:42 is missing on the Blu-ray of That's Entertainment Part II, while the footage from 3:42 - 3:47 plays twice. On the laserdisc of TEII, the scene from SITR played out correctly.

If you mean the jump cut at 3:53, then yes, that's always been there (though I didn't realize it took out a kiss).
I finally pulled out the Blu and watched this bit. Very strange. I can understand them trying to cover that jump cut but that's still there, as you said, so it just makes no sense. I don't imagine anyone can recall from the original release if there was a weird edit there that they tried to emulate.
 

Bryan Tuck

Screenwriter
Joined
Jan 16, 2002
Messages
1,813
Real Name
Bryan Tuck
I finally pulled out the Blu and watched this bit. Very strange. I can understand them trying to cover that jump cut but that's still there, as you said, so it just makes no sense. I don't imagine anyone can recall from the original release if there was a weird edit there that they tried to emulate.
I imagine it was either an encoding error or a random clip accidentally left in the output timeline. Probably similar to the out-of-place shot on the initial pressings of the Star Trek II Director's Cut BD; just that no one caught this one until much later.
 

Forum Sponsors

Forum statistics

Threads
345,101
Messages
4,730,792
Members
141,386
Latest member
amitsecond