wizard of oz dvd?

Discussion in 'Archived Threads 2001-2004' started by Ryan L B, Mar 26, 2002.

  1. Ryan L B

    Ryan L B Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2002
    Messages:
    870
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    which version is better, the mgm or the warner. How in the world does that movie look so good every single time I see it for an old film. Do they constantly restore it.
     
  2. Malcolm R

    Malcolm R Executive Producer

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2002
    Messages:
    13,237
    Likes Received:
    894
    Trophy Points:
    9,110
    Real Name:
    Malcolm
  3. Ken_McAlinden

    Ken_McAlinden Producer
    Reviewer

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2001
    Messages:
    6,190
    Likes Received:
    76
    Trophy Points:
    9,110
    Location:
    Livonia, MI USA
    Real Name:
    Kenneth McAlinden
    The MGM looks marginally better (IMHO, of course) and includes the original mono sound. The Warner includes a 5.1 stereo remix without the original sound. The Warner also contains a boatload of extras not present on the MGM.

    If I could only own one Oz, I would probably go with the Warner despite my slight preference for the MGM presentation. As it is, I now own the Ultimate Oz laserdisc box set (which has the mono sound and a very informative commentary) and the Warner DVD.

    Regards,
     
  4. Patrick McCart

    Patrick McCart Lead Actor

    Joined:
    May 16, 2001
    Messages:
    7,564
    Likes Received:
    195
    Trophy Points:
    9,110
    Location:
    Georgia (the state)
    Real Name:
    Patrick McCart
    The MGM disc is the same transfer as the THX version from VHS and LD, I think.

    It lacks the full digital restoration, the excellent 5.1 track, and the extras.

    The WB edition is important mainly because it restores the sepiatone on the inside of Dorothy's house in the "door to Munchkinland" scene. The MGM version lacks this "stencil-toning" which was on the original release prints of Oz.

    The WB edition is virtually the Criterion LD sans the Ron Haver commentary.

    Besides some light grain and a few frames out of registration (usually only at a splice and hardly noticable), the WB edition is spotless.
     
  5. Enrique B Chamorro

    Enrique B Chamorro Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 1999
    Messages:
    514
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    If you want to be a real nut, (just like me!), then you should get;

    the Warner (5.1 and extras) & MGM (original mono and booklet) DVD,

    the Criterion laser disc (commentary by film historian Ron Haver)

    and Ultimate Box Set laser disc (commentary by Ron Fricke on the left analog channel,

    Outtakes and rehearsals of musical numbers on the right analog channel)

    and the 2 CD complete score & booklet with outtakes from Rino.
     
  6. Greg_Y

    Greg_Y Screenwriter

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 1999
    Messages:
    1,466
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Since I'm only a minor fan of this film, I'll be waiting until the (inevitable) next edition with the proper mono soundtrack and all (or most) of the extras.
     
  7. LukeB

    LukeB Cinematographer

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2000
    Messages:
    2,178
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Wizard of Oz is one of Warner's top sellers and hasn't even had a price reduction from $24.99. There is nothing inevitable about a DVD re-release, at least one which would improve upon Warner's release.

    And the Warner does have the original sound track. Just disconnect all the speakers except the center and bing, you got Mono sound.
     
  8. Patrick McCart

    Patrick McCart Lead Actor

    Joined:
    May 16, 2001
    Messages:
    7,564
    Likes Received:
    195
    Trophy Points:
    9,110
    Location:
    Georgia (the state)
    Real Name:
    Patrick McCart
    I got my disc of WoO for $19.99

    The only way I can see an improvement is if WB suddenly finds all that lost footage in great condition and restores the film to its roadshow cut. (Yeah, right!) A Roger Ebert commentary would be neat, too.
     
  9. Greg_Y

    Greg_Y Screenwriter

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 1999
    Messages:
    1,466
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
     
  10. LukeB

    LukeB Cinematographer

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2000
    Messages:
    2,178
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Well I was being mostly facetious, but your comparison is pretty off.
     
  11. Ryan L B

    Ryan L B Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2002
    Messages:
    870
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I thought the movie was in full frame since widescreen was not availible at this time.
     
  12. DonRoeber

    DonRoeber Screenwriter

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2001
    Messages:
    1,849
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The movie was shot in Academy Ratio, which is very very close to the 4:3 ratio on tvs.
     
  13. Edwin-S

    Edwin-S Producer
    Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2000
    Messages:
    6,460
    Likes Received:
    486
    Trophy Points:
    9,110
    On the Warner Box for this movie it indicates that the mono track is available along with the re-mixed 5.1 track. Is this a typo? I don't have this movie, though I have contemplated picking it up from time to time.
     
  14. Ryan L B

    Ryan L B Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2002
    Messages:
    870
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    yep
     
  15. Jon Robertson

    Jon Robertson Screenwriter

    Joined:
    May 19, 2001
    Messages:
    1,568
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Well, apparently the mono track IS available through the centre speaker - everything is right there and at the correct levels.
     
  16. Ken_McAlinden

    Ken_McAlinden Producer
    Reviewer

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2001
    Messages:
    6,190
    Likes Received:
    76
    Trophy Points:
    9,110
    Location:
    Livonia, MI USA
    Real Name:
    Kenneth McAlinden
    Are people forgetting to use smileys? The center channel of the dvd is not the original mono track. A mono mixdown of the 5.1 channels would not be the original mono track. Only the original mono track would be the original mono track.

    As Edwin suspected, the WB DVD has a misprint saying that the original mono track is included when it is not.

    Also, the Warner DVD looks nothing like the Criterion laserdisc and has many more supplements. The MGM DVD looks a lot like the last two MGM laserdiscs, including the Ultimate Oz Box set. The Warner version looks different than all of those, but also contains most of the supplements from the Ultimate Oz laserdisc except for the commentary, some of the deleted music cues, and the script.

    From the perspective of video, the MGM edition looks no less "fully restored" than the Warner version, although the Warner version was likely made from a different film source and was at a minimum timed slightly differently. Overall, I like the look of the MGM version better, but its a close call and Patrick was right about the Warner version matching the sepia tone better on the shot immediately prior to Dorothy opening the door to Munchkinland/Oz.

    Regards,
     
  17. LukeB

    LukeB Cinematographer

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2000
    Messages:
    2,178
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
     
  18. Patrick Larkin

    Patrick Larkin Screenwriter

    Joined:
    May 8, 2001
    Messages:
    1,759
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Why do two different studios release the same film?
    This is on my immediate "to buy" list and this thread came at the perfect time. Sounds like I'll go with the WB version only for more "stuff." [​IMG]
     
  19. Justin Lane

    Justin Lane Cinematographer

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2000
    Messages:
    2,149
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
     
  20. Colin Jacobson

    Colin Jacobson Producer

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2000
    Messages:
    6,248
    Likes Received:
    737
    Trophy Points:
    9,110
     

Share This Page