WARNER announces THAT'S ENTERTAINMENT COLLECTION for October 12!!!!! (1 Viewer)

[Roger Rollins]

MGM started issuing laserdiscs in 1983. Seven years into that business, there weren't any more MGM musicals on LD than there are seven years into the DVD business.

Warner is doing a great job. Heads and tails better than any other studio.

Give them time....

Most of the musicals that have profit potential are either in release or scheduled (per the last HTF chat). Finally, take into account that they are running a business (and running it brilliantly of late, I might add...). and if there are titles that can produce black ink for their owner, we can likely expect to see a DVD release of them.

If anything, hopefully the anticipated success of this well-conceived THAT'S ENTERTAINMENT! marketing initiative will heighten the demand for more musicals to be released.

 

[Jay Pennington]

I wonder what the depth of the "restoration" was. Did they just clean up the finished, edited feature, which was assembled using dupes made with the inferior duping technology of the time? Or have they gone back to the original films to grab the clips anew, thereby maximizing image quality?

I've only seen portions of these films on television, but I recall them being rather grainy/dupey.

 

[Conrad_SSS]

If you had seen these films in the theater, then you would know not to worry. There was much acclaim for how great all the clips looked at the time of these films' theatrical release. This was because Metro went back to the original negatives, because they were so concerned about quality.

The television versions of 1 & 2 were indeed made from dupe negatives, since the original was formatted for the 1.85 theatrical projection. #3 was done nearly 20 years later and the "old" transfer we saw of that on LD or TV, was quite beautiful to look at.

I'm confident Warner will do their very best on these, and they'll look as good as they did when they first hit theaters...maybe even better.

 

[TedD]

Roger, are you positive on the 1.85:1? There is no way you can split screen 2 1.33:1 frames into a 1.85:1 frame without drastically cutting either the size or the width of the images.

I sure seem to remember projecting "That's Entertainment" at the Village Theater in Boulder CO. in 35mm anamorphic 2.35:1 Scope, not in 1.85:1. I know for sure that we had a 4 track Magnetic print for the engagement as well.

You may want to check this out:

http://www.eofftv.com/t/tha/thats_en...nment_main.htm

http://www.eofftv.com/t/tha/thats_en...rt_ii_main.htm

Search for "That's Entertainment" on this page:

http://www.potentialfilms.com/n_z.htm

Both of these references specify that the 35mm prints for I and II were Scope.

Ted

 

[Roger Rollins]

Ted D., I'm pretty sure I'm on the money here, but anything is possible.

Here's what I based my comments on:

I saw the first two films as a kid in 70mm several times, then saw them again at our local 35mm cinema, where the aspect ratio was very much 1.85. Disappointingly less wide than what I had been used to from the 70mm screenings.

More currently, a friend of mine has 35mm (optical) release prints of THAT'S ENTERTAINMENT! and THAT'S ENTERTAINMENT, PART 2. (Both now sadly faded). They are both matted for 1.85 projection, and the split screen effects in PART 2 (There aren't any in part 1) did in fact slice off the sides of the 1.33 panels.

This is replicated in the opening sequence of PART 2 on LD
(with letterboxed mattes).

I also remembering renting 16mm prints of both films from MGM/UA when I was in college, and they were also matted for 1.85, with side panels for the 4x3 clips.

There could have been scope prints made, but I've never heard of any. Maybe they were made for special engagements.

Perhaps the fact that the original premiere releases of 1 & 2 were 70mm caused the confusion. I can only think of one non-scope film of that era blown up to 70mm (DIRTY DOZEN), so that may be the source of confusion.

It would make total sense that there could have been 4 track mag prints in 35mm of T.E. 1, as MGM also issued 35mm 4 track prints of WESTWORLD the year earlier.

 

[TedD]

Well, memory can play tricks on us, but I sure don't remember any black bars on the top and bottom for the 2.35:1 clips.

Now, I can't speak to III, cause I never had the opportunity to run that one.

It's a puzzlement.

But, the two sites I referenced in my previous post do call out a 2.35:1 ratio and also do reference the 35mm Mag prints.

Ted

 

[Peter Apruzzese]

Ted:

There's a mag/optical 35mm "That's Entertainment" floating around the local private archives here, it's 1.85. It's also red, so we never screened the whole thing, so I don't know how the scope clips are formatted. My very hazy recollection of the theatrical run was that they were slightly cropped to 1.85, but I won't swear to it.

 

[GerardoHP]

Neither do I. I saw THAT'S ENTERTAINMENT in 35mm in its original run and I swear I remember black bars on both sides of the pre-scope clips and no black bars at the top and bottom of the scope clips. In fact, I'm sure I remember the screen expanding to the sides every time the clips changed from 1.33:1 to scope.

Is it possible that there were two versions of the movie going around, just like there's going to be 2 versions on DVD?

 

[Roger Rollins]

Ted, you are likely correct about the 2.35 clips (such as GIGI and SILK STOCKINGS).

Where I remember the extra masking at top and bottom specifically were the clips from HIT THE DECK and 7 BRIDES at the end of T.E. 1. Those clips were 2.55:1.

 

[TomWoodward]

We've just posted the artwork for these here

 

[Drew Salzan]

I saw All three at the Ziegfeld Theater in NYC. The first two were in 70mm (blow ups), while Part III was matted to 1.85:1 35mm.

None were 'scope. In ALL presentations, the pre-1954 clips were windowboxed. During some sequences, the giant staircase sequence in the first for example, they opened up to fill the full 1.85:1 screen. The intros also were generally windowboxed as well. The CinemaScope clips were indeed letterboxed. I specifically remember the black bars at the top and bottom of the screen during The Seven Brides For Seven Brothers sequence, among others. Since I was only 14 in 1974, I thought this was odd because I didn't quite understand the concept of aspect ratios yet.

I still have the Roadshow souvenir booklet from That's Entertainment and it definitely states that they went back to the original film and audio elements for the clips. If you listen closely to "On the Atchison, Topeka and the Santa Fe" sequence, it is true stereo. Going back to the original multi-track stems was quite a feat for the time since it was before the digital age.

Even though I don't have a widescreen monitor yet, I'm pleased that Warner is including both presentations so the trilogy can be seen properly, irregardless of the type of screen one has. Warners continues to impress. Kudos.

 

[Eric Peterson]

I remember seeing this thread a few months back, but wasn't sure what the movie was.

My television is pretty much locked on TCM, and I caught the trailer for the first "That's Entertainment" the other night and was absolutely riveted. I'll be picking this set up as a no-brainer.

 

[SteveK]

Eric - "That's Entertainment" is indeed a great set of films, and I already have this on my "wish list" at DV2.com (an offshoot of Columbia House, but much better). As you probably know since you watch TCM frequently, they will be showing all 3 films of this series on October 4, and also will be showing "That's Dancing". I may record That's Dancing, but I intend to order the Entertainment set.

I probably watch TCM more than any other channel, and probably more than all other channels combined. It's the best channel on television, in my opinion. AMC used to be good too, but we all know what happened to them. Hopefully TCM will remain the commercial-free, classic movie OAR haven it is now.

Steve K.

 

[GlennH]

Unfortunately, Comcast here moved TCM from the digital cable tier down to a regular analog cable channel ). That's good for people who don't subscribe to digital cable, but not so good for picture quality, as it looks far inferior now on my RPTV.

I'd watch TCM a lot more often if they created an HD channel. Can you imagine all those classic movies in OAR HD transfers?