Go Back  DVD Talk Forum > DVD Discussions > DVD Talk
Reload this Page >

Do people get fooled by "colorized" cover art of B&W films?

DVD Talk Talk about DVDs and Movies on DVD including Covers and Cases

Do people get fooled by "colorized" cover art of B&W films?

Old 01-28-05, 11:01 AM
DVD Talk Legend
sracer's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Prescott Valley, AZ
Posts: 15,380
Received 59 Likes on 37 Posts
Originally Posted by Walter Neff
There's being a completist, and then there's being a completist. Sheesh. The Elite Millennium edition should be all anyone needs for the original NOTLD.
There's "being a completist", and there's "being a gushing fanboy with no sense of discernment", but that's a judgment call.


The whole purpose of colorized photos on the cover is to entice people to take an initial look. I don't think that is a bad thing... as long as the photos on the back are in B&W, and the film itself is in B&W. A colorful cover may attract someone to check it out... they flip it over, read a bit more about it. Hopefully the description will be interesting enough to convince the person to buy it.
Old 09-25-05, 03:27 AM
DVD Talk Legend
Join Date: Oct 2000
Posts: 12,306
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by BritTVfanMidwst
Quote Cameron said:
was The rush to save 100 years the show where they were showing cans filled with dust in the USC and UCLA vaults??? Can i find this on dvd? :unquote

Is "The Rush to Save 100 Years" on DVD? I don't think so. But you could check AFI (The American Film Institute) or TNT/TCM (Turner network television/turner classic movies).
Anyway --it's an EXCELLENt documentary, and I urge everyone to see it!

--Brit TV fan & classic film fan
bump to ask for any update...i can't even find anyone who taped this doc....scott benson did the doc on the ben hur disc as well. I can't even find a contact info for his office.

Last edited by Cameron; 09-25-05 at 03:47 AM.
Old 01-08-06, 04:02 PM
DVD Talk Legend
Join Date: Oct 2000
Posts: 12,306
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Does anybody know which station ran "The race to save 100 years"

this has been the hardest thing to find.

Last edited by Cameron; 01-08-06 at 04:04 PM.
Old 01-09-06, 11:01 AM
Cool New Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Western Massachusetts
Posts: 40
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by BritTVfanMidwst
haclong-- You're example of the Sarah Michelle Gellar film is PRECISELY my point!
When a widescreen film (a rectangle) is run at 3:4 ratio (normal TV, eg a square box) you are no longer seeing the original film-- you're seeing a MESSED-up version.
The problem is even BIGGER with Cinemascope (no pun intended) a early version of what we now call IMAX/widescreen, used in the 1960s. If you've ever seen *Earthquake!* or *The Towering Inferno* or *Journey to the Center of the Earth* on TV and thought, "What the heck is going on, I can't follow this!"-- it's because someone's taken a Cinemascope movie and used a process called pan-and-scan.
(Or *West Side Story* for that matter-- finally caught a *properly* restored version in the correct ratio and it's INCREDIBLE what a difference it makes! It POPS in widescreen! I know folks on this board probably aren't into musicals but watch a couple of the dance scenes in proper widescreen and then in 3:4 and you'll INSTANTLY get it!)

RE: whoever was taking about France only getting widecreen

The ONE country I know nothing about in terms of video/DVD is France (I thought they were still using SECAM, for pete's sake).
BUT here's the deal in the US-- Most major RECENT releases (Harry Potter, Indiana Jones, Star Wars, etc) will be released IN TWO versions-- "widescreen" and "full screen"). There are two problems: The "full screen" version is bad and shouldn't exist--it's NOT the full movie. Second, sometimes the widescreen *isn't* real widescreen, they've faked it by putting black bars OVER a full-screen pan-and-scan version. to have REAL widescreen you need a slightly more expensive animorphic print.
("Grease" has that problem-- Olivia Newton John's ad-lib of a fish movement during "Summer Nights" is GONE-- and the several of the dance sequences don't "look right" because the film ISN'T reproduced correctly). "Harry Potter", the first one, **I've heard** is also messed-up, with faulty/fake non-animorphic widescreen.

The PROBLEM in the US is two-fold: Studios who can't be bothered to treat their films with respect, especially classics; and two-- DUMB people.

No, honestly, I've BEEN in Suncoast and listened to a manager trying to explain to some IDIOT that the DVD is NOT broken if there are black bands on the top and the bottom. I have SEEN this!!! You have no idea how much I wanted to grab the guy, and say, "This is a rectangle, THIS is a square. You put the rectangle in the square and you get--BLANK Places!!!!!". I don't know how the manager kept her cool, but I did say something to her about her incredible ability to stay calm.
(Course I then probably pissed her off by requesting three Hitchcock films all of which were out of print!).
so you have studios who WON'T spend money, studios who think ALL Americans are as dumb as the guy I saw giving that manager grief, and a system that RE-ENFORCEs stupidity by putting the product out in TWO formats. (Like I said, if I had MY way, all movies would be on DVD in the original format-- 3:4 in 3:4, widescreen in widescreen, Cinemascope in a widescreen-like format; b&w as B&w, color as color!)

But then I'm such a movie purist I actually BROKE UP with someone when he said the following: "Ted Turner is such an idiot he colorised "Gone with the Wind"!

(For the FEW of you who might not know this GWTW was NOT made in black& white--it was made in the original Technicolor process (as was The Wizard of Oz, and the 1938 "The Adventures of Robin Hood" with Errol Flynn and Olivia DeHavaland). Technicolor, which shot FOUR pieces of film, simultaneously, in a camera literally 2 FEET by 2 FEET by 2 FEET, produced VERY bright, jewel-like colors, but with a slight "cartoonish" look to them by today's muted color-palette standard. Correctly adjusted/restored Technicolor is absolutely incredibly gorgeous! Beautiful! but not necessarily "real" looking, if you're used to the exetremely dark-looking modern movie methods.
But NO, *Gone with the Wind* was NEVER made in b/w!

Brit TV fan, who's being Roger Ebert tonight for your listening pleasure!

You're on the right track, but your info is a bit off. Cinemascope is NOT an early version of Imax. Cinemascope was the first of many 35mm anamorphic widescreen formats, the most successful of which is Panavision. Cinemascope's original aspect ratio was 2.55:1 but it was reduced slightly in 1957 to 2.35:1 so the print could accomodate an optical mono soundtrack as well as the original four track magnetic stereo soundtrack (Journey To The Center Of The Earth, a 1959 Cinemascope release, had this new aspect ratio). Due to the Panavision company designing and constructing superior anamorphic lenses, Cinemascope was discontinued in 1967. However the process is essentially the same as Cinemascope, just with the superior lenses of Panavision. In 1972 the frame of 35mm 'scope films was very slightly reduced to reduce flashes on screen from film splices, so the current aspect ratio of all Panavision and all other anamorphic 35mm prints is 2.39:1, many people simply round this ratio out and call it 2.4:1, in any case you are right when you call the non-letterboxed versions of these films "messed up", you're missing almost half the movie.

Imax is a variation of 70mm photography (West Side Story was shot in Super Panavision 70 with a projected aspect ratio of 2.21:1). But Imax uses three "Super Panavision 70" style frames together to make one Imax frame. The film is run through the projector horizontally (like the old Vistavision process) and produces an aspect ratio of about 1.4:1. Since this is almost the same shape as television's ratio of 1.33:1, Imax can be shown on TV without losing almost ANY of it's picture area. When presented in Imax, big budget Hollywood films have to be letterboxed within the Imax frame, just like DVD, so as not to lose any side picture information.

You are correct that no one can pin point the very first color film. Color cinematography goes back to the 1890's and there were countless experiments with color until Technicolor achieved full color photography in 1934. But this was done with three strips of film, not four as you stated.

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.