Blu-ray Review The Trials of Oscar Wilde Blu-ray Review (1 Viewer)

[Matt Hough]

For those who aren’t familiar with the story of the downfall of Irish writer Oscar Wilde at the hands of an intolerant Victorian society, Ken Hughes’ The Trials of Oscar Wilde does a good job in fleshing out the highlights of history without getting into any of the biological basics.



The Trials of Oscar Wilde (1960)



Released: 01 May 1960
Rated: PG
Runtime: 123 min




Director: Ken Hughes
Genre: Biography, Drama, History



Cast: Peter Finch, Yvonne Mitchell, James Mason
Writer(s): Ken Hughes, Montgomery Hyde, John Furnell



Plot: A chronicle of Oscar Wilde's libel suit against the Marquis of Queensberry and the tragic turn his life takes because of it.



IMDB rating: 7.1
MetaScore: N/A





Disc Information



Studio: MGM...

Continue reading...

 

[marcco00]

yes i will get. been waiting for many years for the sixties Wilde films to be released on home video. the whole Wilde story played out like a Shakespearean (you know i had to look up how to spell that) tragedy in real life.
and i've always been fascinated by Bosie, who seemed to be Dorian Gray appearing in the flesh in Oscar's life and contributing to his downfall. John Fraser does an excellent job here (as did Jude Law in WILDE) playing him as beautiful AND petulant, a deadly combination for anyone who was deeply in love with him, poor Oscar.

 

[Robin9]

Thanks for this review. Oh dear:

From the opening credits and throughout the presentation, there are dust specks, digs, and occasional scratches which MGM engineers have not dealt with. . . . . There is some flicker in the image, too

Well, I want this film in my collection so I'm going to buy the disc, but thanks for the warning.

 

[commander richardson]

This is a very good film so am not bothered by image flicker and so on. It is unavailable anywhere else and should have been released in UK where it was filmed instead of all the junk that gets released.

 

[roxy1927]

I have never seen or read Lady Windermere's Fan except for two silents movies! The first from the teens and the second the Lubitsch with Ronald Coleman. I have to say I was moved at the ending both times.

This film sounds like it needed better treatment and that Kino did a slapdash get it out and sell it job. They can be a peculiar company in their sloppiness.

 

[lark144]

This film sounds like it needed better treatment and that Kino did a slapdash get it out and sell it job. They can be a peculiar company in their sloppiness.

This is what they were given by MGM, who, as I'm sure you know, are not the best curators of the films in their care. Either it comes out the way it is, which sounds imperfect but certainly watchable, according to Matt's fine review, or it doesn't get seen at all. I, for one, prefer the latter choice.

 

[roxy1927]

3.5 out of 5 sounds pretty poor for the image of a bluray release of its vintage. And WarnerArchive has done wonders with MGM films. I guess I'm not quite understanding what exactly Kino does. Do they just act as a distributor? Because from the sound of it this could be just a good dvd release.

 

[Mark-P]

3.5 out of 5 sounds pretty poor for the image of a bluray release of its vintage. And WarnerArchive has done wonders with MGM films. I guess I'm not quite understanding what exactly Kino does. Do they just act as a distributor? Because from the sound of it this could be just a good dvd release.

The movie was not made by MGM. It is currently owned by MGM, by way of various acquisitions.

 

[Harold Chasen]

It's very confusing, and I don't claim to understand it all. But almost all of the films from what we all think of as "MGM" - the studio of Clark Gable and Judy Garland and Arthur Freed and Vincente Minnelli - are now owned by Warners, not MGM. Warners also owns almost all of the RKO titles, as well as Warner titles. Conversely, titles now owned by MGM are not from the old MGM - they were released by United Artists, or by others.

Warners has their own in-house scanning and restoration capabilities, and they make their own masters. Kino doesn't - they can only release what they are given, or not release it. Based on the comments from the Kino Insider, they are able to do a bit of fine-tuning, but that's it. Some of their releases are from studios, like Universal, that are doing extensive restorations and have active asset protection programs. But others titles don't have such TLC lavished on them, and again, Kino can only either release them as is, or not release them at all.

 

[roxy1927]

Ok but as I haven't been a collector for very long in such a case how does this get called a bluray release as opposed to a very good dvd release? MGM gave them what they have. Kino put it out. What was done and where was it done in the chain?

 

[rdimucci]

Kino put it out. What was done and where was it done in the chain?​

MGM has the film elements (negative, interpositive, whatever). MGM scanned those elements at some point (maybe recently, maybe not). They also may or may not have performed some clean-up of those scans to remove dirt, wear marks, or other artifacts. The scans are then corrected for consistent color or B&W density. The result of these MGM processes, in the form of a digital file, is offered to Kino Lorber for potential release on disc. KL looks it over and decides whether to release the film or not, and decides whether to do it as a Blu-ray or DVD. In some cases, KL may invest their own funds in doing some additional clean-up or image correction. But if KL finds the file unsatisfactory for release, all they can do is not release it. They cannot do a re-scan because they do not control the elements, and they generally cannot afford to have MGM do a re-scan for them.

 

[roxy1927]

So it would be up to MGM to decide if it is worth the money to do further work the digital files? And then as you say it is up to Kino to accept it and release it as a bluray or DVD.

 

[Stephen_J_H]

Kino put it out. What was done and where was it done in the chain?​

MGM has the film elements (negative, interpositive, whatever). MGM scanned those elements at some point (maybe recently, maybe not). They also may or may not have performed some clean-up of those scans to remove dirt, wear marks, or other artifacts. The scans are then corrected for consistent color or B&W density. The result of these MGM processes, in the form of a digital file, is offered to Kino Lorber for potential release on disc. KL looks it over and decides whether to release the film or not, and decides whether to do it as a Blu-ray or DVD. In some cases, KL may invest their own funds in doing some additional clean-up or image correction. But if KL finds the file unsatisfactory for release, all they can do is not release it. They cannot do a re-scan because they do not control the elements, and they generally cannot afford to have MGM do a re-scan for them.

Agreed. Based upon the description, I suspect that MGM scanned a 35mm reduction element.