Press Release Warner Archive Collection Press Release: That's Entertainment (1974) (Blu-ray) (1 Viewer)

[battlebeast]

Oklahoma and Carousel were last released by Fox. They probably belong to Disney (although they may belong to Rodgers&Hammerstein)
The Shirley Temple/Bojangles and Down Argentine Way segments were Fox (now Disney)

I thought those two R&H films were fox.

 

[Garysb]

I thought those two R&H films were fox.

Oklahoma! and South Pacific videos are no longer with Fox/Disney. The current Amazon listing say Samuel Goldwyn films distributes the films. Carousel is still with Fox/Disney as far as I know. Same with Sound of Music whose deal between R&H Organization's owner and Disney was renewed last year, I believe.
I assume The King and I and State Fair both versions are still with Fox/Disney.

 

[Stephen_J_H]

Oklahoma! and South Pacific videos are no longer with Fox/Disney. The current Amazon listing say Samuel Goldwyn films distributes the films. Carousel is still with Fox/Disney as far as I know. Same with Sound of Music whose deal between R&H Organization's owner and Disney was renewed last year, I believe.
I assume The King and I and State Fair both versions are still with Fox/Disney.

Given recent activity with Criterion, I would say Disney are more open to licencing under current management.

 

[Filmic]

One of the films featured, Good News (1947), I saw in the 80s from the most puzzling source imaginable. For every two reels or so of wretched faded almost pinkish Eastman, we had another reel or so of blazing brilliant color. Different gamma and definition. Exactly what was available then for distribution in the UK, I am not sure, but usually you had either a very bad faded print or a good to excellent print, and not a combination of the two. Probably assembled from the best of two different prints.

 

[Nick*Z]

That's Entertainment! is beloved, and for very good reason. The previous Blu was a let down and not just for the graininess of some sequences. Color balancing was off, and certain clips fared better than others in terms of overall image integrity. Some of the B&W snippets were plagued with incorrect telecine exposure to slightly cast them with a pall of blue or green.

There was also some curious streaking that occasionally ran down the right side of some of the Technicolor clips, including the Astaire/Charisse pas deux from The Band Wagon.

And the MGM logo at the start, as well as all of the end titles were severely faded. Overall, the opinion was that this was a middling effort of a movie that, in 1974 at least, had been given the utmost care and consideration for optimal presentation theatrically in 70mm.

That's Entertainment! also reminds us just how many great MGM movies still remain MIA on home video.

Rosalie, Rose Marie, The Toast of New Orleans, Small Town Girl, It Happened in Brooklyn, High Society, Easy to Love, On An Island With You, Cynthia, Little Nellie Kelly, Thousands Cheer, A Date With Judy, Two Weeks With Love, Born to Dance, Broadway Melody of 1938, Babes on Broadway, Babes in Arms, Royal Wedding, and The Barkleys of Broadway.

 

[Garysb]

That's Entertainment! also reminds us just how many great MGM movies still remain MIA on home video.

Rosalie, Rose Marie, The Toast of New Orleans, Small Town Girl, It Happened in Brooklyn, High Society, Easy to Love, On An Island With You, Cynthia, Little Nellie Kelly, Thousands Cheer, A Date With Judy, Two Weeks With Love, Born to Dance, Broadway Melody of 1938, Babes on Broadway, Babes in Arms, Royal Wedding, and The Barkleys of Broadway.

I assume you mean on blu ray as these films have been on DVD (and Laser Disc and VHS) . It will be interesting to see how the clips from films not yet released on blu ray look to see if any work has been done on them.

 

[Bryan Tuck]

I know memories fade worse than film, but for anyone who saw this movie in its original release... were the film clips really presented in a multi-aspect ratio format (aside from some of the 1.37 material being cropped to 1.85)? If so, would that have been the first example of "letterboxing" as we think of it today?

And how much of a difference was there between the 35mm and 70mm presentations? For example, were the Cinemascope clips letterboxed to fit within the 1.85 frame in 35mm, but within the full 2.20 frame in 70mm? If the latter, was the 1.85 material just pillarboxed on the 70mm screen?

Just curious, as it seems that would have been fairly innovative for the time.

 

[Bryan Tuck]

I had only seen the film on CBS and KTLA as a kid, but around 1988 I got to see a fading 70mm print at Edwards Newport Beach Cinema for a “senior matinee”. The screen for 70mm was around 65-feet wide, and footage from Hit The Deck, 7 Brides and Gigi was pretty amazing to see then that huge----

Anyhow, I’m not sure if all original 70mm prints were struck this way, but the print I saw had the 1.37:1 footage “corrected” for keystoning in the 2.20:1 frame---here is a frame I got from the projectionist (who I knew) many years ago showing this scene from Royal Wedding on what I’m speaking about.

View attachment 233868

I guess I'm not sure what "keystoning" means in this context?

 

[Garysb]

I know memories fade worse than film, but for anyone who saw this movie in its original release... were the film clips really presented in a multi-aspect ratio format (aside from some of the 1.37 material being cropped to 1.85)? If so, would that have been the first example of "letterboxing" as we think of it today?

And how much of a difference was there between the 35mm and 70mm presentations? For example, were the Cinemascope clips letterboxed to fit within the 1.85 frame in 35mm, but within the full 2.20 frame in 70mm? If the latter, was the 1.85 material just pillarboxed on the 70mm screen?

Just curious, as it seems that would have been fairly innovative for the time.

Yes the film clips were presented in multi-aspect ratio format. It wasn't anything I thought about at the time but the movie must have been projected at 2:20 or 1:85 with the clips letter or pillow boxed within the frame. The host intros were in 1:37. The film clip referenced above seems to suggest there was also manipulation of the clips to accommodate curved screens so that the film clips used would appear normal. Most if not all the 1:37 that were cropped to full frame started at 1:37 and switched to full frame within the segment. What I remember is not noticing when the change occurred. It wasn't until seeing it on home video and looking for the change that I saw where it occurred.

 

[Bryan Tuck]

I guess I'm not sure what "keystoning" means in this context?

Never mind; I figured it out.

 

[Garysb]

Still no preorder almost a month after it was announced. With a November 26th scheduled release date, I guess it is too soon to say that it has been delayed.

 

[Garysb]

Movie Zyng has the preorder up as well as a slightly revised cover.

That's Entertainment! 50th Anniversary Remastered Edition

That's Entertainment! 50th Anniversary Remastered Edition

www.moviezyng.com

 

[Garysb]

Amazon now has a listing, but they are not taking orders yet. "Currently unavailable. We don't know when or if it will be in stock." Still lists 11/26 release date.

Amazon.com: That's Entertainment! 50th Anniversary Remastered Edition [Blu-ray] : Jack Haley, Jr., Fred Astaire, Gene Kelly, Frank Sinatra, Jack Haley, Jr., Daniel Melnick: Movies & TV

Amazon.com: That's Entertainment! 50th Anniversary Remastered Edition [Blu-ray] : Jack Haley, Jr., Fred Astaire, Gene Kelly, Frank Sinatra, Jack Haley, Jr., Daniel Melnick: Movies & TV

www.amazon.com

 

[Robert Crawford]

Amazon Preorder link is active and has been added to second post.

 

[Indy Guy]

I was generally impressed with the new version of 'Thats Entertainment" with a few exceptions including an appalling Leo the Lion MGM logo, and pale contrast issues with early B&W footage.
I showed it for a few friends this past Saturday and everyone was so energized that we decided to have a go with "Thats Entertainment Part III" from the old boxed set.

What surprised everyone was the excellent quality of that decade old BR transfer. The film was initially released 20 years after the first film so it may have benefited from better film stock and transfer technologies available when it was assembled. Imagery clarity, contrast and color (including films and a few scenes present in the first film) were far superior compared to similar material in the new release! This held true throughout TE III's entire running time.

This prompted a revisit to the boxed set's pressing of part I. To my surprise, it was a mixed bag. MGM's Leo logo looked better, while black and white early film grain was horrendous. The June Allison color clips were more vibrant while the 3 scope sequences were less crisp and refined. Esther Williams was a toss up.

Neither version was a home run. That honor is reserved for the third film which presents every scene in "as good as we'll probably ever get" quality. Part 2 was not considered in this comparison as conceptually it runs a pale third.