3D What's up with Warner? Kiss Me Kate last 3D Blu-ray release in 2015 (1 Viewer)

[Camps]

You're mixing metaphors

Fair enough, and with apologies for my poor use of the nomenclature.

Nevertheless, we still have not moved any closer to an answer as to why 3D Film Archive should not be permitted a crack at working with whatever WB can provide them in order to produce a 3D blu ray of (just singling this out as an example) Phantom of the Rue Morgue?

I only ask because your posts seem to suggest that WB would eschew doing this themselves due to prohibitive costs.

And how, pray tell, would WB propose to monetize a title like this if it doesn't consider options for a 3D blu ray release? (And please, showing it at festivals/retrospectives/revivals hardly seems a tremendous revenue generator.)

 

[John Hermes]

The French Line (musical), Phantom of the Rue Morgue (horror), and Charge at Feather River (western) are at the top of my list.

Here's a list of all of the ones NOT on 3-D Blu-Ray.

Arena
Second Chance
Charge at Feather River
Devil's Canyon
Son of Sinbad
The Moonlighter
Louisiana Territory
The French Line
Dangerous Mission
Phantom of the Rue Morgue
The Command
The Bounty Hunter

Wasn't The Command just initially planned for 3-D but not shot that way?

 

[Jack Theakston]

THE COMMAND was shot twice. Once with standard optics in 3D and with one camera equipped with CinemaScope. The 3D version exists.

 

[revgen]

It was shot in 3-D but it was released in 2-D only in Cinemascope. The 3-D version is non-anamorphic 1.85:1 AR. The 3-D footage exists, but hasn't been edited. It will be a tough chore to restore. There's a chance the soundtrack for the 3-D version doesn't even exist, which may force Warner to use the Cinemascope version for sound, so it may end up looking like an Italian horror movie with dubbed English dialogue. It's still better than no sound at all.

 

[Robert Harris]

Bob, you sound like Frank McHugh in FOOTLIGHT PARADE. "It can't be done, Mr. Kent!"

No, factor in a photo-out and you can't do it for that price tag. But that's not a home video department priority, and it can be done in that range out-of-house. And has been with at least three major studios so far. We can argue semantics as to what constitutes a "restoration" these days, but I can tell you that everyone involved thus far has been very happy with the work the 3D Archive is doing.

I'm taking 3D Archive, a group whom I respect out of this equation.

Referencing a query, above, I don't insist upon a 4K film out, but data files must be available for a filmout, should one be desired.

I've not perused inventories on these films, and have no idea if IPs may have been produced. As a guess, if they have been, they'll be left eye only, and will be of no value toward a 3D effort.

Presuming that only OCN and seps are available, and that none of the elements have been either tested or benched, I'm afraid that if I were making the decisions for the studio, I would turn down the idea of creating a 2k or HD image harvest from prime elements.

That said, if someone came to me, offering to support the cost, either fully, or toward a major proportion, I would release the elements to MPI, where they could be scanned in 4k, and restored in 2k, by the licensor.

By that mechanism, data would be archived, and the public good could be satisfied.

Keeping in mind that these are, for the most part, WarnerColor productions, once files received basic color, it would be known if additional scanning in 4K would be necessary from masters.

I don't speak for Warner Bros., but if I did, and a legitimate distributor, with whom I desired to be in business, made me that offer, I'd probably be inclined to accept as a win/win.

I'm extremely conservative when it comes to accessing original elements, and don't consider home video, when it comes to access or preservation. That noted, I hope I'm being clear.

RAH

 

[phillyrobt]

How much would it cost for the shorts such as Lumber-Jack Rabbit,Popeye Ace of Space and the Pete Smith short?

 

[Robert Harris]

How much would it cost for the shorts such as Lumber-Jack Rabbit,Popeye Ace of Space and the Pete Smith short?

Rough numbers, about $5,000 for the scan, plus re-combine, plus color, plus clean-up.

Could end up around 20k.

 

[Jack Theakston]

Perhaps those numbers reflect in-house costs, but when we did BOO MOON, the whole thing was wrangled, including optical printing from the SE OCNs, for under $5000.

 

[Robert Harris]

Perhaps those numbers reflect in-house costs, but when we did BOO MOON, the whole thing was wrangled, including optical printing from the SE OCNs, for under $5000.

Confused. You're referring to making prints?

 

[Jack Theakston]

Workflow was IP/IN, prints and later 2K scan for home video. Admittedly the labwork was done a couple of decades ago, but with a digital recombine/digital out workflow, it would probably be around the same.

 

[Robert Harris]

Workflow was IP/IN, prints and later 2K scan for home video. Admittedly the labwork was done a couple of decades ago, but with a digital recombine/digital out workflow, it would probably be around the same.

Sounds about right for 1500 feet of 35.

But we're discussing scanning 62,000 frames in 4k, plus all finishing. I've not run a budget, and could only do so, after elements are fully inspected.

Presuming that quality, original elements survive.

If not, costs just went up.

 

[Camps]

Over at another board Bob Furmanek has posted that we all should not hold our breath for these titles to be pried from WB because WB would demand an extraordinary amount of money. He did not elaborate much, so I'm left to wonder whether these funds would be required for restoration and/or some other preparatory work necessary before 3D Film Archive could work its magic -- or whether it's simply for luxurious (translation: unrealistic) rights fees.

As I've made abundantly clear here, I'm all thumbs in distinguishing between "materials" and "elements," and between a "preservation," a "restoration," a "remastering," a "scan" or the creation of "true, full resolution asset data." So forgive (or shoot) me.

But what I do know is that:

1) The major studios -- among them, presumably, WB -- reportedly have staff archivists and/or preservationists. Wouldn't whatever is needed of a WB 3D title already be ship-shape for a blu ray process?

2) A 3D 35mm print of Phantom of the Rue Morgue (for example) has been shown at festivals:
http://jeffjoseph.com/3d/expo_I_Phantom_Of_The_Rue_Morgue.html

So forgive me for scratching my head over the apparent impossibility of ever seeing more WB 3D blu rays.

I happily bought House of Wax and Dial M (kudos, WB!). 3D or no, I'm afraid you'd have to pay me to buy Kiss Me Kate. (Sorry....). But I would leap at the opportunity to pay a premium for 3D blus of Dangerous Mission, Second Chance, etc. -- and needless to say, Phantom of the Rue Morgue. (Especially if it included a bonus of the 1941 Pete Smith short Third Dimensional Murder. )

Just sayin'. Or maybe I'm simply raging against the night.... or emitting a last death rattle on the topic...

 

[StephenDH]

I you're being a bit hard on "Kiss Me, Kate". If you mute the sound when Kathryn Grayson starts to screech, it's brilliant.
Howard Keel's leering is a bit OTT but the songs are terrific, even though Cole Porter's rude lyrics have been toned down from the stage version.
That said, they're still somewhat naughty e.g., "Lisa, she gave new meaning to the Leaning Tower of Pisa", and "If she says your behaviour is heinous, kick her in the Coriolanus".

 

[Peter Apruzzese]

But what I do know is that:

1) The major studios -- among them, presumably, WB -- reportedly have staff archivists and/or preservationists. Wouldn't whatever is needed of a WB 3D title already be ship-shape for a blu ray process?

2) A 3D 35mm print of Phantom of the Rue Morgue (for example) has been shown at festivals:
http://jeffjoseph.com/3d/expo_I_Phantom_Of_The_Rue_Morgue.html

So forgive me for scratching my head over the apparent impossibility of ever seeing more WB 3D blu rays.

1. Not necessarily, especially for lower-profile titles.

2. Immaterial since it's unlikely Warner would use a theatrical print for a home video version.

 

[TJPC]

I you're being a bit hard on "Kiss Me, Kate". If you mute the sound when Kathryn Grayson starts to screech, it's brilliant.
Howard Keel's leering is a bit OTT but the songs are terrific, even though Cole Porter's rude lyrics have been toned down from the stage version.
That said, they're still somewhat naughty e.g., "Lisa, she gave new meaning to the Leaning Tower of Pisa", and "If she says your behaviour is heinous, kick her in the Coriolanus".

I had read years ago that a 3D print of KMK no longer existed, and was thrilled when this proved wrong. It was my #1 must purchase for years and I am thrilled to have it. I actually have not even heard of most of the 3D movies Camps mentions wanting. Years of watching people throw things at the movie flat are finally over!

 

[Camps]

1. Not necessarily, especially for lower-profile titles.

2. Immaterial since it's unlikely Warner would use a theatrical print for a home video version.

1. Thanks for the response. This is a helpful (even if disheartening) insight.

2. Why not? Is it related to the cost of a transfer? If it's due to quality issues, then my response would be that I'd far rather have a 3D blu ray of a WB classic in imperfect quality than none at all.

 

[Keith Cobby]

I had to buy Kiss Me Kate. I find the film so-so but the 3-D is wonderful.

 

[Peter Apruzzese]

2. Why not? Is it related to the cost of a transfer? If it's due to quality issues, then my response would be that I'd far rather have a 3D blu ray of a WB classic in imperfect quality than none at all.

Quality issues. WB, as a general matter of policy, doesn't release anything that doesn't meet a certain minimum standard. That's why several high profile titles - The Thing and The Sea Hawk for example - aren't yet on Blu-ray.

 

[Camps]

Quality issues. WB, as a general matter of policy, doesn't release anything that doesn't meet a certain minimum standard. That's why several high profile titles - The Thing and The Sea Hawk for example - aren't yet on Blu-ray.

While I admire this, and I realize it's a policy supported by perfectionists within their own ranks, I wonder to what extent their (and maybe other studios') decision-making may have been hijacked somewhat by chatboard and blogosphere extremists who scream bloody murder at studios when they issue DVDs or BDs that are imperfect in terms aspect-ratio, speckling, whatever. Especially when you consider our collective original frame of reference for most of these titles is from having seen them on antenna-based broadcast TV...

Anyway, thanks for the response, Peter.

 

[Stephen_J_H]

1. Thanks for the response. This is a helpful (even if disheartening) insight.

2. Why not? Is it related to the cost of a transfer? If it's due to quality issues, then my response would be that I'd far rather have a 3D blu ray of a WB classic in imperfect quality than none at all.

Prints haven't regularly been used for transfers or harvests since the early VHS/Beta days. When you consider that pre-DI, a print was typically 4 or 5 generations from the OCN, the degradation that builds up from generation to generation becomes a problem. Grain buildup, skewed contrast and lack of colour uniformity all come into play with release prints to varying degrees. Contrast variations are a nightmare in 3D, yielding what I would describe as "dead spots" in the 3D image. When it comes to 3D, having a compromised image is not better than having no image at all, and the work that the 3D Archive has done with some elements is nothing short of miraculous.