A Few Words About While we wait for A few words about...™ Lawrence of Arabia -- in 4k/UHD Blu-ray (2 Viewers)

[Dennis Nicholls]

That article in Nat. Geo. is well worth seeking out. It has a photo of the real-life guy on the bicycle who caused Lawrence to crash trying to swerve around. HIs name is Frank Fletcher, and the photo shows him as an old man sitting on a bicycle.
A proper bibliography of Lawrence includes many books. I have a first edition (1935) of Seven Pillars Of Wisdom and a first edition (1927) of the condensed version Revolt In The Desert. It's been 40 years since I read it but I also recommend Lowell Thomas's book With Lawrence In Arabia.

 

[Adam_S]

So how is this new restoration? The man responsible for it, Sony’s Grover Crisp, spoke before the screening and at some point he said rather honestly, “Is it perfect? No.” That kind of honesty is so refreshing, I must say, and Mr. Crisp is self-effacing and charming. And I would agree with his assessment that it’s not perfect. However, it’s pretty damn impressive, really impressive, and as good as it looked last night, it will look magnificent on the Blu-ray. There were moments when the clarity was amazing, and other moments (not many, though) where it was less amazing. They got the color just right, and it’s just so much fun to see a film like this projected, albeit digitally, on a huge screen. The scope of it is breathtaking.

I'm not a huge fan of digital projection, particularly 2K DCPs with low light. One of the remarkable things about the projection last night was the light level of the screen, it's always refreshing to see a film at the Samuel Goldwyn where the FL of the projection are actually what they are supposed to be. I found this 4k presentation to be quite a bit better than the 4K presentation of Wizard of Oz they held a few years ago.

I was especially impressed by the color and grain in the transfer, the color is absolutely perfect and it's great to see the character that grain gives the image. The grain is most noticeable in all those blue skies and in the day for night scenes (which had the poorest quality).

The point I think I was most blown away by was the scene in the Water at Aqaba, The dimensionality of that scene was incredible, which I attribute to the scene itself having so much water movement that the grain just vanished and it was like looking through a window, the level of detail and depth of the image was just stunning. I felt a little dizzy because of the perspective of looking down at the water while looking up at the screen.

I also felt that some of the haloing I'd noticed on some 70mm prints (usually happens when a figure is silhouetted as its an optical thing, not edge enhancement) seemed slightly less prominent, though still present of course. I attribute to working off the original negative, rather than viewing something a few generations down the line.

To be fair, I sat in the third row, so about thirty feet from the screen, because I really wanted to get a good look at how the projection held up. I've noticed before in the Samuel Goldwyn that 4K isn't quite enough resolution from further back in the theater, so I agree that digital projection, while 95% there, isn't there just yet for 70mm (though I do think 4K is golden for 35mm). 6K projection would probably get us there from a 70mm print, based on Roberts numbers above, a 4K 65mm image has about 3x the area of a 4K 35mm image, and 65mm film has more than 4x the area of 35mm film, so a step up could still be made, in theory.

 

[Robert Harris]

Originally Posted by Adam_S /t/308191/while-we-wait-for-a-few-words-about-lawrence-of-arabia-in-blu-ray/1920#post_3951705

I'm not a huge fan of digital projection, particularly 2K DCPs with low light. One of the remarkable things about the projection last night was the light level of the screen, it's always refreshing to see a film at the Samuel Goldwyn where the FL of the projection are actually what they are supposed to be. I found this 4k presentation to be quite a bit better than the 4K presentation of Wizard of Oz they held a few years ago.

I was especially impressed by the color and grain in the transfer, the color is absolutely perfect and it's great to see the character that grain gives the image. The grain is most noticeable in all those blue skies and in the day for night scenes (which had the poorest quality).

Not a great deal of day for night in the film. The sequence in which Gasim "drifts" and fall from his camel was shot without lights just around dawn. The bey sequence was studio, as I recall.

 

[AdrianTurner]

Today, this literate and great screenplay by Robert Bolt and Michael Wilson wouldn’t get past a reader. They’d get ten pages in and toss it. Or, let’s say some miracle happened and a studio bought it. It would then go through numerous sets of writers, the punks who run the studios would ask for stupid change after stupid change – I mean, can you even imagine? “What’s Lawrence’s backstory, what obstacles is he overcoming, what’s his arc, what’s his journey, we need a big action scene up front, we need a scene of Lawrence as a child where something happens to him and then at the end we pay it off.”
.

Brilliant, Mr Haineshisway. Absolutely spot on.
Mr Parker - Yes, I'm following, assiduously. AE Lawrence was seduced into approving the picture. Michael Wilson wrote a treatment which was designed to get AEL's approval, if for no other reason than Spiegel thought of calling the film Seven Pillars of Wisdom. So AEL gave his consent and sold the rights to his brother's book. There was a lot of legal argy-bargy, as we say in the UK, and I'm writing this in the middle of nowhere without my own book to refer to which has all the grisly entrails. Anyway, Wilson goes off and does his own thing, followed by Bolt and when AEL sees the script the main thing he objects to is the "No prisoners" thing. He argues that TEL is portrayed as a mass murderer and a sadist.

 

[Stefan Andersson]

Further notations re: Nostromo -- most facts are available in Brownlow´s excellent DL biography.
Here´s some more reading: http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/films/features/how-sir-david-lean-had-an-epic-falling-out-with-steven-spielberg-over-the-filming-of-a-conrad-novel-846161.html
For color production sketches, go here:
http://explore.bfi.org.uk/4ce2b79da256a
and here - scroll down several times:
http://versionsofsouthamerica.blogspot.se/2009/04/chapter-5.html
Personally I´d be very happy if the storyboards for Nostromo and the Bounty screenplays (The Lawbreakers, The Long Arm and the slightly later Pandora´s Box, a lengthy one-film abridgement of the earlier screenplays, written by Lean and Melvyn Bragg) could be released on DVD or Blu-Ray as a sort of slideshow, or in book form. Taschen, the German publishing house specializing in affordable fine art, photography and film books, would be ideal for the project. They published The Stanley Kubrick Archives and also a big volume on Kubrick´s Napoleon project.
Further notations about books about DL --
Constantine Santas: The Epic Films of David Lean (Amazon)
Gene D. Phillips, Jr.: Beyond the Epic (Amazon) - full overview of DL´s life and films; some fine research into DL´s early editing assignments
Martin Stollery: LOA volume of York Film Notes series (Ebay) - good primer-type comments on story and style of LOA
Lady Sandra Lean / Barry Chattington: David Lean an Intimate Portrait
The two South Bank Shows featuring DL and Bolt are featured as extras on the R2 (UK) release of This Happy Breed (Network). One show is a lengthy on-set story from Passage to India, with wonderful scenes of DL working on set.
Various notes for the record:
Brownlow´s biography has most of the facts concerning the Bounty project. Bligh would be played by either Anthony Hopkins or Oliver Reed, Fletcher Christian probably by Christopher Reeve. The project passed from WB (they were agreeable to one expensive film on the subject, but not two expensive films) to Dino de Laurentiis and then to Sam Spiegel, who AFAIK persuaded DL to do just one film.. But finance was not forthcoming.
Brief other info can be found in the booklet for the R2 (UK) DVD release of The Bounty; in a volume of the Projections series (British Film Institute) containing an interview with Eddie Fowlie; and in passing in Steven Bach´s Final Cut (UA chose to do Heaven´s Gate rather than The Bounty).
Melvyn Bragg´s archives were transferred to Leeds University, UK, a few years back. I imagine researching these papers might yield new info about their collaboration, which, according to a brief note in an online blog (link now broken) did not last long. It also said that DL intended Bounty to be his swan song, and that DL and Bolt disagreed on the proportions in the screenplay between visual description of action (Lean) and characterization (Bolt).
Some time later, DL devoted some time to the idea of filming Out of Africa. He also had a project with Dennis Potter (subject unknown to me).
Nostromo is indeed one of the great, tantalizing unmade films. Lean and Christopher Hampton wrote six drafts. Then Lean and Bolt collaborated. Then Lean and Maggie Unsworth continued working on the screenplay. Alex Thomson was pencilled in as DP (John Alcott and Nestor Almendros were other candidates). David Watkin shot test footage, probably featuring the Greek actor George Corraface, who was originally offered the part of Nostromo, the strong and handsome young Italian stevedore, generally perceived as an unselfish man of integrity, but undone by vanity and greed after spiriting away a silver treasure originally intended to be used in a revolution against a military dictatorship in an imaginary Central American republic. This is the basic story of the film, interweaved with subplots: a British silver mine boss, his uncorruptible Latin wife, their friend the disheartened priest, a doomed intellectual, Nostromo´s two teenage love interests and their Italian parents.
Shortly before DL passed away Variety listed the following cast: Dennis Quaid, Christopher Lambert, Isabella Rossellini, Julian Sands, Paul Scofield, Anthony Quinn, Irene Papas, Klaus Maria Brandauer and Marlon Brando (highly dubious that Brando ever committed to the film). Sundry online sources mention Liam Neeson being offered and declining a part, Spanish actor Fernando Rey being considered for a part, and French actress Amira Casar being slated to appear, probably as one of the young girls. The Silver & Ursini book on DL mention Mel Gibson and Kevin Kline as candidates to play Nostromo (my guess).
Sets by John Box were built at Studios Victorine in the South of France. Maurice Jarre would score the film (DL to Jarre according to an online source: "On this film I want you to be
very free"). Eddie Fowlie had found desert locations in Almería in Spain, a departure from the jungle/tropical setting of Joseph Conrad´s novel.. Shooting was also slated for Baja California.
Alec Guinness was offered and declined the part slated for Scofield (originally written for Eric Porter). DL also wanted Peter O´Toole for the film; my guess it was for the part finally assigned to Scofield.
Guy Hamilton took the assigment as standby director. Robert Altman and Arthur Penn were offered the assignment.
DL chose Hugh Hudson to direct in case he couldn´t. Hudson tried for three years to finance the film. Keanu Reeves was agreeable to do it, but he was then not as big a star as today, so Hollywood money could not be raised on his name.
Later, producer Serge Silberman, Lady Sandra Lean and actor James Fox have made attempts to restart the project, most famously offering it in 2002 to Martin Scorsese. Just a few years ago, it was listed on an internet site as property of a US film company.
Christopher Hampton has published yet another script of Nostromo.
In the mid-Seventies, there was brief mention in a distributors´ press release of DL planning to remake The Good Earth, starring Marlon Brando and Rita Gam. Very intriguing.
In his book "A Hollywood Memoir", editor Elmo Williams briefly mentions how he, around 1977, asked DL to direct Caravans, from the James Michener novel. DL was interested, provided that Bolt wrote the screenplay. Bolt declined the offer.

 

[Doctorossi]

Guy Hamilton took the assigment as standby director. Robert Altman and Arthur Penn were offered the assignment.

Would that be 2nd unit?

DL chose Hugh Hudson to direct in case he couldn't. Hudson tried for three years to finance the film.

Odd, if sets were already built... Sounds like they were almost ready to go; how was the financing (and a completion bond) not already in place?

 

[JParker]

Brilliant, Mr Haineshisway. Absolutely spot on.
Mr Parker - Yes, I'm following, assiduously. AE Lawrence was seduced into approving the picture. Michael Wilson wrote a treatment which was designed to get AEL's approval, if for no other reason than Spiegel thought of calling the film Seven Pillars of Wisdom. So AEL gave his consent and sold the rights to his brother's book. There was a lot of legal argy-bargy, as we say in the UK, and I'm writing this in the middle of nowhere without my own book to refer to which has all the grisly entrails. Anyway, Wilson goes off and does his own thing, followed by Bolt and when AEL sees the script the main thing he objects to is the "No prisoners" thing. He argues that TEL is portrayed as a mass murderer and a sadist.

Thank you, Mr. Turner, most kind; that explains a great deal. Obviously we are seeing Lawrence with different eyes than his brother. I hope you enjoyed the idiosyncratic review I provided above...
I was searching on Sam Spiegel, an old school Producer and stumbled upon, after a search, this BAFTA page, which may have already been posted on this thread, one can see the issue in Flash Player:
http://www.bafta.org/heritage/features/david-lean/the-making-of-lawrence-of-arabia,900,BA.html

The Making of Lawrence of Arabia
05 November 09
We open-up the pages of a 1962 Academy Journal dedicated to Lawrence of Arabia, and explore Lean’s epic production with the crew who made it happen.
Originally released in 1962, David Lean’s Lawrence of Arabia has cemented its place in history as one of the cinema’s masterpieces. With some of the most iconic scenes in film history, the production was epic in both the scale of Lean’s ambition and the size of the finished film: its original running time stood at 210 minutes.
Lawrence of Arabia won both critical and popular acclaim on its release, receiving five SFTA nominations in 1963 and scooping Awards for British Actor (Peter O’Toole), British Film, British Screenplay (Robert Bolt) and Film From Any Source. In the same year, the film notched-up ten Oscar nominations, winning in seven categories including Best Director. In 2007, the Academy’s 60th anniversary year, the membership voted Lawrence of Arabia their favourite film of all time.
The quarterly Journal above was published in Winter 1962-63 and offers a fascinating insight into the film’s creation. As its introduction explains:
“This is the first time a complete issue of the JOURNAL has given an account of the thought and work that has been put into a single film … Quite apart from the imaginative enterprise and exceptional degree of organisation involved, the making of Lawrence of Arabia presented every responsible person in the unit with unusual problems, not least of which was the kind of interpretation to be given to the hero.”

Alongside original scene sketches and on-set photographs, the journal contains contributions from the film’s major figures including screen writer Robert Bolt, production designer John Box, photographer F. A. Young, film editor Anne V. Coates and the director himself, David Lean. They discuss their experiences of making the film including the technical difficulties of working in the desert, shooting and editing for the first time in Panavision 70mm, and creating a tracking shot of a camel.

Just starting to look at it now, all new to me, I mean this article. I think it is well done. But I wish a re-issue of your book were possible.
Perhaps eBay sells the old National Geographic issue discussed.
Thank you again. Do let us know if you get to see the 4K presentation, I certainly hope it is screened in the U.K.
p.s. Cinematographer F.A. Young is on page eleven of fourteen of the Flash Player image of the magazine.
Link to David Lean Showcase: http://www.bafta.org/heritage/features/david-lean/

 

[Stefan Andersson]

Would that be 2nd unit?
No, Hamilton was to stand by to direct the whole film in case of DL being unavailable for health reasons. DL was quite incensed by this demand, entailing expensive life insurance premiums.
Odd, if sets were already built... Sounds like they were almost ready to go; how was the financing (and a completion bond) not already in place?

DL passed away only months or days before shooting was slated to begin. AFAIK (there is very little written about this) all concerned parties chose to dismantle the whole production. I guess they simply felt that it, after losing DL at such a late stage, would be a disappointment to shoot it immediately with another director. I remember some short Variety notice (in my archive and not handy right now for doublechecking) saying that insurance arrangements would cover costs incurred up to that point. Hugh Hudson´s involvement probably came some time later.
Hudson wrote an article in Sight & Sound in 1991 about DL. There was an intriguing sidebar about DL shooting and editing, as a favor, short information films about some UK retirement homes. The article said those films were getting hard to see so probably they were made on videotape.

 

[rsmithjr]

WRT The Music Man: I probably saw it 20 times during original release, in a 4-track mag dye-transfer print, and have seen it numerous times since.
I cannot agree that the Blu-ray is "yellow and ugly". It looks just right. And the sound is still a wonder, one of the best stereo tracks ever.

 

[owen35]

Bill Hunt, over at Digital Bits, posted a nice summary of Thursday's screening. Makes me regret even more that I couldn't be there. If you were not already excited by this recent announcement on the 4k restoration, this may do it for you. I also wish I could get my hands on the souvenir program!
"Now back to Lawrence of Arabia. Last night I had the good fortune (along with Matt Rowe) to take in the official U.S. premiere of the new 4K restoration of the film at the Academy's Samuel Goldwyn Theater in Beverly Hills, which is arguably the best screening venue in all of Southern California. Now I've seen this film many times, but never have I enjoyed it this much, not just because of the impressive technical quality of the presentation but because the sell-out audience was just so into the film. Obviously, this was a largely industry crowd mixed with serious Lawrence fans, all of whom knew the film's various ins and outs well. They reacted to every little moment of humor, every shift of mood and tone. As a result I think I got more out of this viewing than I ever have before.
As I mentioned, the quality of the presentation was first rate. Sony's EVP of Asset Management, Film Restoration and Digital Management, Grover Crisp, introduced the screening and discussed the restoration effort itself. Work began in 2009 with an 8K scan of the original 65mm camera negative - itself the subject of the excellent 1988 physical restoration by Robert Harris in collaboration with director David Lean. The goal this time around was to build on that work. But the fact was, when Sony went back and looked at the negative, they noticed serious deterioration. Strange vertical bands had appeared throughout the film that looked like faded sections of the emulsion. These turned out not to be actual fading or a photochemical issue, but rather bands of literally hundreds of tiny cracks in the negative. So for those of you who've wondered why it took so long to bring this film to Blu-ray, now you know. Grover actually showed a short restoration demo reel before the start of the film, and the before and after contrast was so striking that the audience burst into applause. The result of this new restoration effort is truly impressive. There are still minor issues in a few places - notably a couple instances of missing frames that have been there on all the previous DVD releases. But I'll tell you... Robert actually offered me the chance to screen the film in 70mm a few years back, and the new 4K digital presentation compares wonderfully to that experience. The color and detail is just extraordinary. Subtle textures in the rocky terrain, the fine detail of blowing sand - all the detail in the original negative is visible in the new digital master. The film is actually going to start screening around the country in 4K on October 4th, and I strongly encourage you all to try and experience it that way. In any case, you're very much in for a treat when the film finally arrives on Blu-ray on November 13th. It can truly be said that most of you have never seen the film like this before - in this level of A/V quality. Trust me... it's going to be an absolute revelation for you. Here's a look at the cover of the program for last night's event..."

 

[Allansfirebird]

I wish I could find a larger version of the poster that was used for the Cannes screening from this year. Definitely my favorite concept since the "dark head" posters from the original release.

 

[DSmith1984]

I'm confused slightly by Bill Hunt's words. He says "There are still minor issues in a few places - notably a couple instances of missing frames that have been there on all the previous DVD releases." Now what I'm confused on is does he mean that these missing frames have been missing in all the previous releases or is he saying that this new restoration is missing frames that had previously been included in all previous releases? Basically did we lose anything that was previously there with this new restoration?

 

[Dennis Nicholls]

Perhaps eBay sells the old National Geographic issue discussed.

Back issues of Nat. Geo are commonly available via Amazon partners. Your local library should have them too.
If all else fails you can buy the DVD-ROM of ALL issues of Nat. Geo. from 1888 to present for $29. :jawdrop:
http://www.amazon.com/The-Complete-National-Geographic-Every/dp/B003XIKA4W

 

[GlennH]

One would assume the former from the context, but I agree, a poor choice of words by Mr. Hunt in that sentence. Meaning ambiguous.

 

[Vincent_P]

I'm confused slightly by Bill Hunt's words. He says "There are still minor issues in a few places - notably a couple instances of missing frames that have been there on all the previous DVD releases." Now what I'm confused on is does he mean that these missing frames have been missing in all the previous releases or is he saying that this new restoration is missing frames that had previously been included in all previous releases? Basically did we lose anything that was previously there with this new restoration?

What happened was, whenever a negative is cut, frames are lost at the cut points. Since LOA was recut more than once after it's initial release, and later put back together by Robert Harris and his team, frames were inevitably lost at points where cuts to the negative were made. The result is an occasional "jump" at a point where footage has been restored and a frame or two has been lost at the point where the cut was made and Robert reinstated the footage. What Bill is saying is that those occasional jumps are still present, just as they were when Robert Harris restored the film back in the late 1980s.
Vincent

 

[Robert Harris]

Originally Posted by Vincent_P /t/308191/while-we-wait-for-a-few-words-about-lawrence-of-arabia-in-blu-ray/1920#post_3951839
What happened was, whenever a negative is cut, frames are lost at the cut points. Since LOA was recut more than once after it's initial release, and later put back together by Robert Harris and his team, frames were inevitably lost at points where cuts to the negative were made. The result is an occasional "jump" at a point where footage has been restored and a frame or two has been lost at the point where the cut was made and Robert reinstated the footage. What Bill is saying is that those occasional jumps are still present, just as they were when Robert Harris restored the film back in the late 1980s.
Vincent

Vincent,

Thank you so much.

RAH

 

[Patrick Mason]

A beautiful job. The colors and the clean up done are remarkable, and the Blu-ray will be a stunner. A great night out at the movies, and it was so much fun to see it with such an appreciative crowd.

 

[William Ross]

Can someone who was there say whether the balcony scene was included?

 

[DSmith1984]

What happened was, whenever a negative is cut, frames are lost at the cut points. Since LOA was recut more than once after it's initial release, and later put back together by Robert Harris and his team, frames were inevitably lost at points where cuts to the negative were made. The result is an occasional "jump" at a point where footage has been restored and a frame or two has been lost at the point where the cut was made and Robert reinstated the footage. What Bill is saying is that those occasional jumps are still present, just as they were when Robert Harris restored the film back in the late 1980s.
Vincent

That's good. Well...not good but you know what I mean. The quote was rather ambiguous and honestly, I wasn't previously aware that the DVD's were missing frames and this led to part of my confusion.

 

[Robert Harris]

Can someone who was there say whether the balcony scene was included?

While I was unable to make it, I can confirm that there was no additional footage. The film is locked at 217/27.
That does not mean that additional footage may not appear on the Blu-ray.
RAH