- Jun 10, 2003
- Real Name
- Josh Steinberg
Ah! I didn't know that. Thank you.Only the title and the character Jayne Mansfield played were carried over from the Broadway play . Rock Hunter did not appear in the play. The play's title was going to be "Will Success Spoil Rock Hudson" but his manager threatened to sue. The movie plot was completely new.
It's actually not too blue. It's actually pretty terrific. The proof, as Josh rightly points out, is always in the other colors in any given sequence. Tashlin loved bold colors which is why the film is littered with them - and if the blue seems too much all one has to do is look at the reds, golds, greens, and browns, where you will see not a HINT of blue, just perfect colors. I have the UK Blu, which is brownish and has none of the pop of the TT. And the pop is pure Tashlin. There's a scene where all the shots of Mansfield are against a yellowish/gold wall - perfect color, not a trace of blue anywhere. The reverses on Tony Randall are against a bluish wall. Again, perfect color. It's very, very good, transfer-wise and the film is a joy from start to finish.
If Fox is so wrong with this color scheme then how come they haven't made any corrections to their most recent transfers that keep coming out consistent with what they have been releasing for several years now? Perhaps their film documentation on these film elements support what they're doing and not what we think the color should look like based on previous video releases or showings of prints that may have been inaccurate. I'm just saying.
It's not a divisive issue for me. How do you know different colorists aren't involved? We don't know what their film element documentation is noting regarding color scheme? We don't even know whether our previous viewings of these movies were accurate color-wise or not?I appreciate that this is a divisive issue. It keeps coming up, and I keep adding my two cents. Frankly, I do not think Fox believes it are wrong about this blue lean. But if they had a different colorist, I suspect the results would be wildly different -- maybe truer to the intended look, but also maybe improperly skewed in an entirely different direction. Makes me want to work for the company! Just saying back.
If Fox is so wrong with this color scheme then how come they haven't made any corrections to their most recent transfers that keep coming out consistent with what they have been releasing for several years now?
It's not a divisive issue for me. How do you know different colorists aren't involved? We don't know what their film element documentation is noting regarding color scheme? We don't even know whether our previous viewings of these movies were accurate color-wise or not?
Obviously the people in charge of this stuff at Fox thinks everything is okay with these transfers, & love the new Fox "look". All strength to the few brave people here who put their head above the parapet & risk ridicule in saying that the king is in fact, in the all together
Original color timing notes?
These are being done in New York by a guy that is VERY fond of that teal look. A number of his timings have been rejected, but not all.
Just to be clear - only the BLUE shirts are blue. I keep saying the obvious, as Josh does in his review: Look at the other colors in any scene you think "leans blue" - they are perfect (as are the skin tones). Tony Randall's shirt is blue, not white - other shirts in the same scenes are WHITE. Do you think they colored in only Tony's shirt? And if you're seeing blue shirts on every person in a scene then yes something is either wrong with your eyes or your television. There are blue gels on lighting instruments - this is very clear because if you watch people's hair as they move about a scene, when they're standing under the gels their hair reflects that, and when they're not, it doesn't. Watch the scene I suggested, where Mansfield is agains an orange/yellow wall - no blue in her shots, not one IOTA of blue. In the reverses on Randall, there is blue, because that's the way that shot is lit. How do you account for zero blue in the Mansfield shots. How do you account for zero blue when Deborah Kerr first meets the King in his YELLOW chambers? You say it doesn't look like any theatrical print you've ever seen. How long have you been going to the movies? I've been going since around 1952 and I know what carbon arc projection looked and looks like, I know how prints were timed for that light source, I know what Technicolor prints looked like (I had one in 16mm for this film) and Eastman, too. And when you see a vintage color print that was timed for carbon arc but shown with today's light source (or any era post the change from carbon arc) of course it doesn't look right.
I also know that no one is going to change anyone's opinion on this. I think Fox is doing an absolutely perfect job for the most part. And I'm sure they see the complainers' posts and I thank them for doing their job and not bowing to the handful of complaints, as Kino did with The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly, with the result being they came out with The Ugly and all the complainers hated THAT, too. In other words, it's a no-win situation with certain films from certain studios and all they can do at Fox is use their notes and do their wonderful work and just know that the same twenty people are always going to trot out the "blue lean" or "TEAL" comments.