eau

Looks like I will have to keep the original 1-disc release and double dip for the 3-disc SE.

The Valeyard

THANK YOU!

I was 1 day away from selling this DVD!

baracine

WARNING (continued): I didn't have time to compare all the audio extras from the old DVD with the 2-CD set from Rhino but it appears that some of the DVD audio extras are NOT on the Rhino set. For instance, the Rhino set has two alternate takes of "Over the Rainbow" while the DVD has four. It is also possible that the Rhino set has stuff that is not on the original DVD. Either way, you will pry the old DVD from my cold, dead hands!!!
(It will also be a useful reference to compare the image before and after Ultra Resolution remastering.)

baracine

I posted the following rant on the "Ben-Hur 4-Disc Collector's Edition" thread before I realized that Ultra Resolution meant "electronic restoration, colour correction, realignment and reshaping of the three-strip Technicolor elements" (Is my face red!), but some of my comments on the DVD that could have been are still valid, I think.

P.S.: I will probably buy the 3-DVD set anyway ....

PatrickMcCart

I think the biggest draw is to improve on a very good DVD by using more current DVD authoring. After all, the original DVD is six years old... it was a great DVD in 1999, no doubt, but it can be done better now.

I think the menus were a little too convoluted. Creative, yes, but you really had to dig around to get to everything. Warner's newer DVD's are much more streamlined... I think a good example is the Adventures of Robin Hood DVD. Everything is easy to navigate, well organized, and lacking the useless menu animations and transitions.

Also, it's imporant to note that the DVD lacked the original mono track, a commentary, and only had brief clips of the other Oz films.

The 1999 DVD is apparently based on the '98 re-release. I had the chance to see a dye-transfer print of that restoration in a theater. It looked very good, but it had the same color jumps visible in the '99 DVD. Also, the colors went out of alignment a few times. However, the print had perfect black levels (what do you expect from a Technicolor print?) and extremely nice detail. You could see the burlap textures on Ray Bolger's face makeup.

On a standard TV, I'm sure the old Gone with the Wind DVD looked very pretty. However, seeing it on a larger TV set or a digital display, you could see bad color artifacts (ringing), softer image, and digital noise. Check out the comparisons between the two GWTW DVD's and you'll see how much more detailed and sharp the UR restoration is. Also, the '99 DVD has a really low bitrate (I think somewhere around 4.5 mbps) and a lot of fine detail is smoothed over because of that.

I remember when Warners announced an SE of Casablanca. The old '97 DVD was quite good and had "plenty" of extras. I argued that it was kind of unnecessary. Well, when I was able to compare the two, I found that the '97 DVD had a little too much noise, had a few tears, and wasn't as sharp. The new DVD kept a more natural grain texture rather... especially on shots derived from dupes (like a closeup of Ingrid Bergman). Of course, the "plenty" of extras were overshadowed by the SE by including Ebert and Behlmer commentaries, radio shows, Carrotblanca, outtakes and deleted scenes, etc.

It's not like it's a big deal to improve on good DVD's by making them better. At least WB puts them out at more appropriate times. For GWTW, there was a seven year wait for the SE. For Ben-Hur, there was a four year wait. For Casablanca, there was 5 year wait. For Oz, there's a 6 year wait. It's at least better than the scheduling studios like Fox and Columbia are pulling when they could have released the better edition originally!


On the other hand, it's really facinating to see DVD's of the '99 Oz's vintage that still hold up today. For example, the '98 DVD of American Graffiti. Even in 2005, it's still one of the best DVD's I've seen in terms of transfer quality. Anamorphic, absolutely no digital artifacts, no edge enhancement, no fudging with the increased grain of Techniscope, and the '78 Dolby Stereo soundtrack.

Then, there's DVD's like the original Dirty Harry. Bad color, out of focus, way too soft, not progressive in certain chapters... even if the 5.1 remix is great and it's anamorphic. Or the original Bullitt... anamorphic, but soft, a little dirty, and bad color in spots. The new DVD, by comparison, is one of the most perfect I've seen.

Cameron

well I have heard it confirmed that this is in fact a new commentary track recording for the dvd...so before you sell off your ultimate OZ laserdisc, it might be a good idea to keep a copy for the sake of being a completist. if anyone would be so kind to help out someone who has parted ways with the laserdisc, please feel free to e mail me.

baracine

Wasn't the first DVD almost identical in content to the Ultimate Oz laserdisc boxset, including the commentary?

Cameron

the dvd did not have the commentary

dolphinboy

I tend to be someone who doesn't like to pass up a 3 disc for a 2 disc, even if there isn't a great reason for me to do it, but can anyone be objective about the contents of the 3rd dvd please?

Is there anything on that 3rd dvd that is really special or is it really for die-hard Wizard of Oz fans?

I have no interest in film cells, pics, or what the ticket stub or something like that looked like back when they film came out. But if there is some really great content on the 3rd disc, something that would be great to have for even a casual fan, than that's how I will decide.

I still stay the 2-disc is the better looking cover.

Can I please get some opinions of the 3rd disc's content to help me decide?

Thanks.

Zodiac_Speaking

Well, the 3 discer has 5 previous versions of Wizard of Oz before the famous 1939 version. Historically, I think that's the real reason to pick it up over the two disc one.

I can't wait for this, I preordered the 3 disc version, and I'm pumped for everything WB has to offer. I use to regret getting WB dvds, now I'm rushing to get them.

kevin75

plus the 3 disc cover art is much cooler.

bboisvert

Wow, really? Thanks -- I was just about to sell off my Ultimate Oz box set.

That now makes 3 commentaries for Oz:

1. Criterion Laserdisc
2. MGM Ultimate Oz laserdisc
3. Warner DVD

Plus, with the extra audio on the previous Warner DVD, it's hard to be an Oz completist!

GuessWho

Any reviews/cmparisons on whether the picture is different enough from the 1999 digitally remastered version to warrant another dip?

Big Worms

http://www.hometheaterforum.com/htfo...hreadid=244274

GuessWho

Thanks. In many of those screenshots, I prefer the 1999 release. What to do, what to do...

JuryDuty

Wow. I had fully planned on buying this 2-disc release just for the new transfer, but after seeing that review, I think I may not now. I really like the 1999 transfer better on many of them (for my eyes). And the sound seems to be the same (for the 5.1 surround). Besides, with all the extras on the original release, for a casual fan, I really don't feel I'm missing out on anything.

And with the TON of releases coming over the next month, I think this may be a good place to save $20. Thanks for the link.

Here are some more comparisons, including bit rate and screenshots: http://www.dvdbeaver.com/film/dvdcompare/wizard.htm

Laser Movies

If you have a Columbia House membership it is possible to get the 3 disc set for $23.97. Here's a discussion with more details.

http://forum.dvdtalk.com/showthread.php?t=441783

PGHFlyer

The price discrepancy on these set is HUGE. 2-disc set is $12.99 at Best Buy and 3-disc set is $33.99.

I really want the 3-discer but one extra disc for $21.00 is a little much to ask.

DVDFreaker

DarthMarino

Yeah, I was shocked when I opened the Best Buy ad this morning. Keep in mind though that it's actually 16.99 with the special price of 12.99 for Reward Zone members. Regardless, that's an absurd price difference.

Spiderbite

Yeah, the price difference is getting to me also. I was set to buy the 3 disc collection but for 20 bucks extra? The 3rd disc sounds great but I have to ask myself how many times I will watch the documentary (twice...maybe...over the next 5 years) and the silent flicks. The silent films would be fascinating to watch the first time but as for repeat viewings...well, if they are like other silent films I have watched in the past (mostly which are considered the classics), probably not often. Silent films tend to be poor quality, dull, and over-acted (I know, it is supposed to be over-acted, it's silent but it still can be hard to watch with the modern eye tends to make things unintentionally humorous). [Many will disagree so I want to make it clear that this is only my personal opinion.]

$12.99 is just a hard price to beat for this 2 disc set.

Zvbxrpl

I tip my hat to WB, because they created two special editions AT THE SAME TIME, so consumers could choose which they want. The 2 disc edition has the magnificent (don't listen to the clueless naysayers....it's been lauded and praised by dozens of respected reviewers and experts, while being debated by individuals who seem to not have a clue about Technicolor or its history, etc.)

One of the nation's leading magazines I bought this morning said that although the old disc looked very good, that it should be discarded in favor of the new transfer. If this were Sony or Fox or Universal, they would have released the 2-disc first, and then 6 months later re-released the title in a 3 disc set. Warner has never done that with classics, and they are to be applauded.

I have the new 3 disc set. The extras on Disc 3 are great for die-hard fans, and the physical extras included are gorgeous. I had never seen the Kodachrome photography, and it is rare to see imagery from films of that vintage having real color pix. They're gorgeous. The opening night program from Grauman's Chinese is amazing, as is the
MGM STUDIO NEWS repro from the film's opening week.

Bottom line: If you are an OZ fan, the 3 disc is something you will treasure beyond you wildest dreams. If you are a more casual OZ fan, the 2 disc has the spectacular Ultra-Resolution transfer (so sharp and gorgeous, it really looks the way TECHNICOLOR is supposed to look...only with sharpness Technicolor could never yield). The 2 disc also has a boat-load of special features. Everything that was on the very nice 1999 DVD, but oodles more extras to boot, including 2 brand-new, excellent documentaries, a commentary by John Fricke that highly improves upon his already excellent LD commentary from 1999, the music & effects track, a beautiful series of mini-bios dedicated to all the major cast members, with the obvious exception of Garland, whose life story is available on another Warner DVD, with the Emmy-winning 2 hour PBS special JUDY GARLAND: BY MYSELF.

Personally, this was a no-brainer for me, the 3 disc was easily my choice. The silents may be clunky, but the 1925 Oliver Hardy/Larry Semon version has been gorgeously restored and scored. Also, there's a wonderful new docu about L. Frank Baum.

So, it's really up to your own preferences...the sale prices on street date for the 2 disc are almost like getting it for free, considering the extraordinary supplements and superb Ultra-Resolution presentation. But if you are an Oz completist, the 3 disc is the way to go. Most die hard collectors would pay $40-$50 just for the Kodachrome photos inside!

Enjoy, all!

baracine

Two things:

The hometheaterforum review says:

... That's obviously longer than the 2-CD set ever offered (roughly 2 hours) but I'm still not sure it's as long or a longer than the original DVD offered, which was also spread out in 18 audio clips on three pages, the recording length of which is impossible to ascertain except with a timer in hand. So a track-for-track comparison is in order. But I have to believe that Warner went ahead and reproduced the original offering as is, which would have saved a lot of production time.

The other thing is the new picture may be clearer, offer more "dimensionality" and detail and have a higher yellow content but the fact remains that it is grainier than the previous version and has been slightly cropped on three sides (top, left and right), judging from the screen caps.

But, heck, I will probably get the new 3-disc edition anyway.

OK, three things:

The original DVD's packaging told a white lie when it said it offered both the 5.1 track and the original mono. My version only offers the "original mono" French track (is it only on my Canadian edition?). There is no mention of a French track - mono or otherwise - on the new offering in the hometheaterforum review. I remember the MGM laserdisc offerering French and Spanish tracks. [Correction: Amazon.com does mention a French track.]

kevin75

the price difference really bugs me. i would normally get the 2 disc, but that 3 disc cover is so damn cool.....crap.

bhauge

I'm also irked by the large price discrepancy. It's especially bothersome since ALL of the trade ads that I've seen list the MSRP at $39.92, not $49.92. I'm guessing that someone at Warner got a little greedy and decided to up the MSRP.