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

Legend Films' latest: "She", "Things To Come", etc.

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

Legend Films' latest: "She", "Things To Come", etc.

Old 12-10-06, 04:17 PM
  #51  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 576
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
interesting...
How about all the "reviewers" on Amazon who are pissed that Amazon is selling "The Black and White Version!" of "It's A wonderful Life" and why not the "color version" and that they are mad and wanting to return their copies...?
Like how DARE amazon...?!?!?

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/cus...views.start=11

Last edited by Davy Mack; 12-10-06 at 04:22 PM.
Old 12-10-06, 05:04 PM
  #52  
Suspended
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Toronto
Posts: 3,039
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by Davy Mack
interesting...
How about all the "reviewers" on Amazon who are pissed that Amazon is selling "The Black and White Version!" of "It's A wonderful Life" and why not the "color version" and that they are mad and wanting to return their copies...?
Like how DARE amazon...?!?!?

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/AS...views.start=11
I have seen the comment of a customer who was pissed that he ordered the colourized version of MOTFS and got the B&W version instead (which means that he ordered an old edition). Another customer complains that there is never enough information on Amazon to distinguish between the different versions BEFORE ordering, a problem I have encountered myself. To make matters worse, Amazon will dump together all customer comments on the same title whether or not they pertain to one edition or the other, thereby confusing the customers even more. There is a lot to complain about the way Amazon does business...

Amusing fact: Like it or not, the colourized version of Miracle on 34th Street is now part of our culture. When the film was remade in 1994, production designer Doug Kraner naturally tried to emulate the artificiality of the first colourized version of the film¨(predominance of browns, indigo blues, greens and reds), a fact that was totally lost on the critics who never deigned to lower their eyes on the colourized version.

Last edited by baracine; 12-11-06 at 07:23 AM.
Old 12-10-06, 07:10 PM
  #53  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 363
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by baracine
Well, there are noir Technicolor films.
True, but you have to admit that there are very few -- at least in terms of the classic noir period. I can name four off the top of my head: Niagara, House of Bamboo, Leave Her to Heaven, and Party Girl. Personally, I wouldn't consider Vertigo to be a true film noir, but I admittedly define "noir" a little more narrowly than many film buffs do today.


When I watched The Wages of Fear in colour, I thought it was a much more realistic representation of what it is to toil, sweat, bleed (red blood) and die in the merciless sunshine of a (yellow) banana republic, drowning in (grey) mud to earn a few (green) Yankee dollars than I did when the film was more of a black and white abstraction appealing to esthetes and intellectuals for the beauty of its editing and its stark contrasts of light and shadow.
See, when I think of Clouzot, I think of a director who was a master of b&w filmmaking: Wages of Fear, Diabolique, The Raven, etc. Watching Wages of Fear in color just doesn't appeal to me, especially since deciding to make a film about such morally complicated individuals in b&w seems like a master-stroke to me.


I like having the choice and I don't like warning labels that say watching a colourized film will destroy my soul and lead to harder stuff like the raiding of black and white film libraries at night with torch in hand.

I also resent the lack of respect shown colourization in the industry and among film reviewers especially where any mention of such a product is treated either with condescencion ("surprisingly well done and worth a look, actually") or with total prejudice, like in the case of a certain reviewer of the Miracle on 34th Street 2-disc (original black and white and colourized version) edition who simply refused to have a look at the colourized disc because "it just doesn't feel right".
If colorization remains a fairly marginlized niche home video market, then that's fine. I can live with it. When TV stations force colorized films on viewers, as TNT did back in the late-1980s/early-1990s, that's another story, though. The default option should always be the original. Of course, I can't even think of the last time I noticed a colorized movie on TV, since I tend not to watch classic movies on any other station than TCM. I seem to remember getting disgusted with the colorized version of Scrooge once and turning it off. I think that was AMC several years ago.

I guess the last thing I'll say is that I simply find colorization displeasing aesthetically. And none of the screenshots you've posted in this thread have convinced me otherwise. I tend to think of colorization as similar to pan-and-scanning: Typically, it's the work of someone other than the director, and it tends to wreak havoc on the film's framing, lighting, mise en scene, and so forth.
Old 12-10-06, 07:16 PM
  #54  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 363
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by baracine
Actually, I think Legend Films should test its mettle by de-colourizing a few early Technicolor movies that are so bad they could be salvaged as half-way decent black and white films, like Nothing Sacred (1937) with Carole Lombard and Fredric March, whose colours are an affront to civilization:





You're probably going to roll your eyes at this one, Baracine, but I honestly think that those three caps above look far more natural and pleasing than this one you posted earlier:



I don't think we're ever going to see eye-to-eye on this issue.
Old 12-10-06, 07:51 PM
  #55  
Suspended
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Toronto
Posts: 3,039
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by Ambassador
You're probably going to roll your eyes at this one, Baracine, but I honestly think that those three caps above look far more natural and pleasing than this one you posted earlier. I don't think we're ever going to see eye-to-eye on this issue.
Damn right. May I suggest you curl up to the colourized version of My Man Godfrey with a magnum of champagne on ice?

Little-known fact: Pre-Gone With the Wind, Technicolor required so much lighting, most actors' faces looked sunburned (because they were), The Adventures of Robin Hood notwithstanding (most of it was shot outdoors in the late fall). It's nice to see a film like My Man Godfrey where the actors are actually enjoying themselves, and then, to see it in colour!

Last edited by baracine; 12-10-06 at 10:45 PM.
Old 12-10-06, 09:58 PM
  #56  
Defunct Account
 
John Sinnott's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: State College, PA
Posts: 5,920
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Your argument seems to come down to "I like these colorized films." That's fine. Some people also like pan and scan movies since they fill up their 4:3 TV. Fine, they are entitled to their opinion. Just don't expect a lot of "respect" for a DVD that alters a film from its original form, at least in this forum.
Old 12-10-06, 10:00 PM
  #57  
Defunct Account
 
John Sinnott's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: State College, PA
Posts: 5,920
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by baracine
Damn right. May I suggest you curl up to the colourized version of My Man Godfrey with a magnum of champagne on ice?
I suggest cocaine. Something that will numb the pain more that champagne.
Old 12-10-06, 10:33 PM
  #58  
Suspended
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Toronto
Posts: 3,039
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by videophile
Your argument seems to come down to "I like these colorized films." That's fine. Some people also like pan and scan movies since they fill up their 4:3 TV.
Some people even like video games. Who am I to judge?



http://www.machinima.com/article.php?article=459

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i3tR-chxBS8

Last edited by baracine; 12-11-06 at 02:12 PM.
Old 12-11-06, 07:40 AM
  #59  
DVD Talk Special Edition
 
PatrickMcCart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Georgia, USA
Posts: 1,030
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Colorization is just like translating Shakespeare into American English. The meaning isn't drastically changed, but it's changed nonetheless.

There's no justifying colorization outside of restoration purposes (i.e. lost color sequences in "Doctor Who" or the silent The Phantom of the Opera). It's a process with the only purpose to make B&W films seem more palatable to audiences... just like pan & scan, remixing mono to 5.1, or editing for television. They're not all equal alterations, but they're alterations. I'm absolutely sure that I could create a very watchable 60 min. version of Ben-Hur (1959), with a new Hans Zimmer score, new special effects, tastefully cropped to 1.78:1, and given new sound effects. Although, it would make the "Directed by William Wyler" credit an elaborate joke.

Legend Films does a great job of colorizing, though. It's just not accurately presenting the film. When I wish to see movies, I want to see the film as intended by the filmmakers (or as closely as humanly possible). I don't want someone else's interpretation of what it "could have" or "should have" looked like. A film stands on its own without needing to be tinkered with. If you don't like Casablanca because it's in B&W, it says more about your character than the film itself.

I think it's funny that baracine used really poor quality captures to "demonstrate" bad color for Nothing Sacred. I'm sure I could prove the same by tracking down captures from a 1980s VHS of Gone with the Wind instead of using the restored version's quality. I'm not sure how anyone can defend the laughably bad quality of the King Kong colorization, either. On the other hand, I'm surprised by how My Man Godfrey is pretty close to looking accurate. It seems to have more to do with the transfer quality.

Last edited by PatrickMcCart; 12-11-06 at 07:49 AM.
Old 12-11-06, 08:00 AM
  #60  
Suspended
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Toronto
Posts: 3,039
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by PatrickMcCart
Legend Films does a great job of colorizing, though.
I think it's really nice to hear a positive comment once in a while.

If you don't like Casablanca because it's in B&W, it says more about your character than the film itself.
Because, most of the time, anti-colourization comments have a tendency to mix moral judgments with aesthetic preferences, like mixing one's propensity to look at pretty pictures with intangibles such as "character".

I think it's funny that baracine used really poor quality captures to "demonstrate" bad color for Nothing Sacred. I'm sure I could prove the same by tracking down captures from a 1980s VHS of Gone with the Wind instead of using the restored version's quality. I'm not sure how anyone can defend the laughably bad quality of the King Kong colorization, either. On the other hand, I'm surprised by how My Man Godfrey is pretty close to looking accurate. It seems to have more to do with the transfer quality.
Unfortunately, there are no good quality captures of Nothing Sacred because it's a public domain film that is only available in an unrestored form that reproduces faithfully everything that was wrong with early three-strip Technicolor itself, a process Carole Lombard herself called "screwy": The actors were put to torture under 140 degrees F of lighting and expected to act natural and look pretty while wearing underarm sweat pads that could soften a piano drop and being sponged off by stagehands after every take. It also happens that the particular copy of this film that is used for transfers doesn't have very clear registration. Ditto A Star Is Born (1937). Trying to watch those films is like diving for mud worms in a murky pond. Trust me, watching the Legend Films My Man Godfrey is a much more pleasing and sophisticated aesthetic experience than watching the Technicolor Nothing Sacred.

On the other hand, I'm surprised by how My Man Godfrey is pretty close to looking accurate. It seems to have more to do with the transfer quality.
Because Lord knows it couldn't possibly have anything to do with the talent, research, dedication and hard work of the colourization team at Legend Films.

Last edited by baracine; 12-11-06 at 10:43 AM.
Old 12-11-06, 11:35 AM
  #61  
DVD Talk Legend
 
The Valeyard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Building attractions one theme park at a time.
Posts: 10,800
Received 82 Likes on 49 Posts
Originally Posted by baracine
Because Lord knows it couldn't possibly have anything to do with the talent, research, dedication and hard work of the colourization team at Legend Films.

I for one have never pissed on Legend Films restoration work and have repeatedly said they do a great job with the PD prints they can get their hands on. And have gone so far as to say that when they release a title I'm interested in...I'm the first one to pick it up. In fact, a few years back, I had a long e-mail conversation with Barry Sandrew about restoration and the techniques they use for their releases. Very nice guy. Very knowledgeable. I even got invited to visit their offices if I'm ever near San Diego (gotta do that some day).

So I don't believe most the negative views are directed against Legend Films nor their restoration work. It's mainly against colorization as a whole. Combing back through the thread, you've mentioned Legend Films more than anyone else. I think I've only seen a couple of desparaging remarks made against Legend and that was that.

If you want protect your views on colorization, have at it. Just stop with the Legend Films propaganda.
Old 12-11-06, 11:50 AM
  #62  
Suspended
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Toronto
Posts: 3,039
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by The Valeyard
I for one have never pissed on Legend Films restoration work and have repeatedly said they do a great job with the PD prints they can get their hands on. And have gone so far as to say that when they release a title I'm interested in...I'm the first one to pick it up. In fact, a few years back, I had a long e-mail conversation with Barry Sandrew about restoration and the techniques they use for their releases. Very nice guy. Very knowledgeable. I even got invited to visit their offices if I'm ever near San Diego (gotta do that some day).

So I don't believe most the negative views are directed against Legend Films nor their restoration work. It's mainly against colorization as a whole. Combing back through the thread, you've mentioned Legend Films more than anyone else. I think I've only seen a couple of desparaging remarks made against Legend and that was that.

If you want protect your views on colorization, have at it. Just stop with the Legend Films propaganda.
Just a quick reality check here... You DO know that this thread I started is about Legend Films' latest releases, right? (See title.) So, you see, mentioning Legend Films sort of feels natural to me? Good, for a moment I thought...

Your attitude is very commendable. I just wish about 3,691 reviewers would also wise up to the fact that Legend Films even exists, rate their work on its own merits, even do (gulp!) comparisons with other colourized versions and inform the consumer instead of volunteering the usual mealy-mouthed puritan platitudes about the evils of colourization.

Well, that and world peace, of course...

Last edited by baracine; 12-11-06 at 12:12 PM.
Old 12-11-06, 12:11 PM
  #63  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Bolton, United Kingdom
Posts: 365
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by The Valeyard
I for one have never pissed on Legend Films restoration work and have repeatedly said they do a great job with the PD prints they can get their hands on. And have gone so far as to say that when they release a title I'm interested in...I'm the first one to pick it up. In fact, a few years back, I had a long e-mail conversation with Barry Sandrew about restoration and the techniques they use for their releases. Very nice guy. Very knowledgeable. I even got invited to visit their offices if I'm ever near San Diego (gotta do that some day).

So I don't believe most the negative views are directed against Legend Films nor their restoration work. It's mainly against colorization as a whole. Combing back through the thread, you've mentioned Legend Films more than anyone else. I think I've only seen a couple of desparaging remarks made against Legend and that was that.

If you want protect your views on colorization, have at it. Just stop with the Legend Films propaganda.
Hear, hear; I too have had some email chat with Barry and he does indeed sound like a decent chap (and takes much of this stuff right on the chin in a good humoured manner).

You cannot fail to admire the technology behind what they're doing (much as I admire, oh, lots of stuff that I don't actually like), and, yes, on odd occasions the by-product of their process has been a cleaned up print of a previously dirty and scratched film that deserved a wash and brush up.

But it is only a by-product - not the raison d'etre - of a process that is, from where I sit, on the whole wrong. Plain wrong.
Old 12-11-06, 12:13 PM
  #64  
Suspended
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Toronto
Posts: 3,039
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by John Hodson
But it is only a by-product - not the raison d'etre - of a process that is, from where I sit, on the whole wrong. Plain wrong.
That's what I'm talking about.
Old 12-11-06, 01:09 PM
  #65  
Suspended
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Toronto
Posts: 3,039
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by PatrickMcCart
I'm absolutely sure that I could create a very watchable 60 min. version of Ben-Hur (1959), with a new Hans Zimmer score, new special effects, tastefully cropped to 1.78:1, and given new sound effects. Although, it would make the "Directed by William Wyler" credit an elaborate joke.
Actually, it's already been done and they called it Gladiator.

I'm not sure how anyone can defend the laughably bad quality of the King Kong colorization, either.
I'd just like to say that IMHO this colourization shows more imagination than Peter Jackson's remake. He had this crazy idea to make his film look like the two-strip Technicolor process of the time of the original film (1933) with the result that it only has two colours: peach-pink and pukish blue-green...

Last edited by baracine; 12-11-06 at 02:08 PM.
Old 12-11-06, 03:10 PM
  #66  
Needs to contact an admin about multiple accounts
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 84
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Legend Films' latest: "She", "Things To Come", etc.

[QUOTE=baracine]Legend Films has put out at least three new releases of its restored colourized/original B&W packages of public domain classics last Nov. 28, 2006. These titles don't make the news or even the review circuit but they are available on the Legend Films website ( http://www.legendfilms.net/ ) and at least on amazon.com and amazon.ca.[QUOTE]

I'm enjoying the debate on this forum about colorization and Legend Films' growing library of creative derivative works. Our Christmas titles are doing extremely well as are our Ray Harryhausen color designed titles, SHE and Things to Come. Of course we always work to satisfy both the colorization fans and the film purists with the fully restored colorized version and fully restored black and white version on the same DVD. Choice is a wonderful thing.

One should remember that colorization is a creative process and therefore the objective is not necessarily to create reality nor even realistic color in every case. Each title is treated differently and as an interpretation of the original work, the colorized version should be considered separate and apart from that original work.

For those interested, check out John Gallagher of the National Board of Review regarding March Of The Wooden Soldiers. The full column can be found at the URL below.

http://www.nbrmp.org/features/NewYorkRetrospectives.cfm

GENIUS ENTERTAINMENT: A huge hats off to the folks at Legend Films, releasing through Genius, who have released Laurel and Hardy's perennial holiday classic MARCH OF THE WOODEN SOLDIERS a.k.a. BABES IN TOYLAND (1934). The amazing news is that they have unearthed a beautiful 35mm print -- remastered in high definition -- of the original version, including MGM logo, and original credits under the origiinal title, BABES IN TOYLAND. WPIX-TV in New York used to show this every year at Thanksgiving and Christmas, and here we have a version unseen since it's theatrical debut nearly 75 years ago. Hal Roach Studios outdid themselves with spectacular sets of Toyland and Bogeyland, Stan and Ollie are delightful, and the Bogeymen can still scare the hell out of little kids the way it did this writer umpteen years ago. It is quite remarkable to realize that the actor playing the villainous Barnaby, Henry Kleinbach, is the same guy who would play Chief Scar 22 years later in John Ford's classic THE SEARCHERS (under a new name, Henry Brandon, coined when the U.S. went to war with Germany). Laurel and Hardy's only color film, TREE IN A TEST TUBE (1944), a government educational film, is included, along with classic toy commercials, the animated RUDOLPH THE RED-NOSED REINDEER, and a slew of vintage Christmas cartoons and shorts. Both the original black-and-white version and a newly colorized version of BABES IN TOYLAND are included. This is one great holiday gift!

Happy Holidays everyone!
Barry

Barry B. Sandrew, Ph.D.
President/COO
Legend Films, Inc.

Last edited by Barry_Sandrew; 12-11-06 at 03:13 PM. Reason: Title Change
Old 12-11-06, 06:48 PM
  #67  
DVD Talk Legend
 
The Valeyard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Building attractions one theme park at a time.
Posts: 10,800
Received 82 Likes on 49 Posts
Hey, did Barry Sandrew post here and then delete it or something? He's listed as generating the last post (well, before my post here).

Wonder what he had to say and why did I miss it?
Old 12-11-06, 07:08 PM
  #68  
Suspended
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Toronto
Posts: 3,039
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by The Valeyard
Hey, did Barry Sandrew post here and then delete it or something? He's listed as generating the last post (well, before my post here).

Wonder what he had to say and why did I miss it?
Barry Sandrew just wrote to yours truly to say he posted (post # 66) and re-posted (post # 68) but his post was deleted, I would like to think as SPAM, even though you and I know it's ANTI-COLOURIZATION CENSORSHIP.

Here's Barry's "restored" (if not colourized) post:

Originally Posted by baracine
Legend Films has put out at least three new releases of its restored colourized/original B&W packages of public domain classics last Nov. 28, 2006. These titles don't make the news or even the review circuit but they are available on the Legend Films website ( http://www.legendfilms.net/ ) and at least on amazon.com and amazon.ca.
I'm enjoying the debate on this forum about colorization and Legend Films' growing library of creative derivative works. Our Christmas titles are doing extremely well as are our Ray Harryhausen color designed titles, SHE and Things to Come. Of course we always work to satisfy both the colorization fans and the film purists with the fully restored colorized version and fully restored black and white version on the same DVD. Choice is a wonderful thing.

One should remember that colorization is a creative process and therefore the objective is not necessarily to create reality nor even realistic color in every case. Each title is treated differently and as an interpretation of the original work, the colorized version should be considered separate and apart from that original work.

For those interested, check out John Gallagher of the National Board of Review regarding March Of The Wooden Soldiers. The full column can be found at the URL below.

http://www.nbrmp.org/features/NewYorkRetrospectives.cfm

GENIUS ENTERTAINMENT: A huge hats off to the folks at Legend Films, releasing through Genius, who have released Laurel and Hardy's perennial holiday classic MARCH OF THE WOODEN SOLDIERS a.k.a. BABES IN TOYLAND (1934). The amazing news is that they have unearthed a beautiful 35mm print -- remastered in high definition -- of the original version, including MGM logo, and original credits under the origiinal title, BABES IN TOYLAND. WPIX-TV in New York used to show this every year at Thanksgiving and Christmas, and here we have a version unseen since it's theatrical debut nearly 75 years ago. Hal Roach Studios outdid themselves with spectacular sets of Toyland and Bogeyland, Stan and Ollie are delightful, and the Bogeymen can still scare the hell out of little kids the way it did this writer umpteen years ago. It is quite remarkable to realize that the actor playing the villainous Barnaby, Henry Kleinbach, is the same guy who would play Chief Scar 22 years later in John Ford's classic THE SEARCHERS (under a new name, Henry Brandon, coined when the U.S. went to war with Germany). Laurel and Hardy's only color film, TREE IN A TEST TUBE (1944), a government educational film, is included, along with classic toy commercials, the animated RUDOLPH THE RED-NOSED REINDEER, and a slew of vintage Christmas cartoons and shorts. Both the original black-and-white version and a newly colorized version of BABES IN TOYLAND are included. This is one great holiday gift!
Happy Holidays everyone!
Barry

Barry B. Sandrew, Ph.D.
President/COO
Legend Films, Inc.

Last edited by baracine; 12-11-06 at 07:15 PM.
Old 12-11-06, 07:37 PM
  #69  
DVD Talk Special Edition
 
PatrickMcCart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Georgia, USA
Posts: 1,030
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by baracine
Because, most of the time, anti-colourization comments have a tendency to mix moral judgments with aesthetic preferences, like mixing one's propensity to look at pretty pictures with intangibles such as "character".
A certain cinematic morality is needed. It's the philosophy of keeping a film true to its form. I don't want to see a film that has been re-edited, colorized, redubbed, time compressed, censored, panned & scanned, or digitally tampered with for the sake of marketing. I think colorization is much lesser alteration of a film (if done well) than pan & scan, redubbing, or re-editing/censorship. However, I'd like to know your take on those sort of alterations. I seriously hope you're not clueless to why people are criticizing your support of colorization.

Originally Posted by baracine
Unfortunately, there are no good quality captures of Nothing Sacred because it's a public domain film that is only available in an unrestored form that reproduces faithfully everything that was wrong with early three-strip Technicolor itself, a process Carole Lombard herself called "screwy": The actors were put to torture under 140 degrees F of lighting and expected to act natural and look pretty while wearing underarm sweat pads that could soften a piano drop and being sponged off by stagehands after every take. It also happens that the particular copy of this film that is used for transfers doesn't have very clear registration. Ditto A Star Is Born (1937). Trying to watch those films is like diving for mud worms in a murky pond. Trust me, watching the Legend Films My Man Godfrey is a much more pleasing and sophisticated aesthetic experience than watching the Technicolor Nothing Sacred.
I'm not exactly sure how a bad public domain release is supposed to reflect problems with Technicolor. Technicolor films require a lot of attention for proper transfers. One only has to look at the wonderful remasters of Gone with the Wind or The Wizard of Oz to see how great Technicolor can look. Running an analog transfer of an old battered print just demonstrates the poor quality control of the distributor. It's just like how bad colorizations like King Kong don't reflect the quality of good ones by Legend Films.

Originally Posted by baracine
Because Lord knows it couldn't possibly have anything to do with the talent, research, dedication and hard work of the colourization team at Legend Films.
I know they put a lot of effort into releasing a very pleasing product. There's no arguing that Legend Films does an incredible job. There's just no way they can accurately colorize a film unless they had the filmmaker dictating what colors would be there. The props and costumes used in a film only reflect what was needed for good photographing in B&W. Consider how chocolate syrup was used for blood in Psycho.

I wish Mr. Sandrew good luck and I hope the releases sell well. I'll definitely buy a copy of March of the Wooden Soldiers, especially since it'll be uncut, but it's for the B&W version. If the colorization helps expose more people to a movie, that's fine. Hopefully they'll appreciate the original B&W version, too. Just like with any other alteration (P&S, editing, redubbing), just keep the original intended version. P&S is there to make things more palatable at the cost of compromising the original intended image... colorization also compromises the intentions, although to a much lesser degree.

I'm very happy that LF does an excellent job, though. It would be horrible if people were first exposed to a classic like King Kong via that hideous colorized version. Their stuff is less damaging and would probably make the revelation of the original B&W version easier to watch.

Last edited by PatrickMcCart; 12-11-06 at 07:54 PM.
Old 12-11-06, 08:09 PM
  #70  
DVD Talk Legend
 
The Valeyard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Building attractions one theme park at a time.
Posts: 10,800
Received 82 Likes on 49 Posts
Originally Posted by baracine
Barry Sandrew just wrote to yours truly to say he posted (post # 66) and re-posted (post # 68) but his post was deleted, I would like to think as SPAM, even though you and I know it's ANTI-COLOURIZATION CENSORSHIP.

Here's Barry's "restored" (if not colourized) post:

Thanks for the repost. Barry e-mailed me as well.

Weird.


I really don't think it's ANTI-COLORIZATION censorship because if such a thing were true, your PRO-COLORIZATION posts would have been deleted as well.
Old 12-11-06, 08:10 PM
  #71  
Suspended
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Toronto
Posts: 3,039
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
This is Barry Sandrew's second censored message:

Originally Posted by The Valeyard
Hey, did Barry Sandrew post here and then delete it or something? He's listed as generating the last post (well, before my post here).

Wonder what he had to say and why did I miss it?

Yes I posted earlier in the day but the content might have been interpreted as SPAM. It would have been appropriate for the admin to advise me why it did not register.

BTW: I've enjoyed the give and take on this forum.

Barry

Barry B. Sandrew, Ph.D.
President/COO
Legend Films, Inc.
Old 12-11-06, 08:13 PM
  #72  
Suspended
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Toronto
Posts: 3,039
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by The Valeyard
I really don't think it's ANTI-COLORIZATION censorship because if such a thing were true, your PRO-COLORIZATION posts would have been deleted as well.
Call me paranoid but I really think some people (especially in the South) confuse "colourization" with "the advancement of coloured people".
Old 12-11-06, 08:15 PM
  #73  
DVD Talk Legend
 
The Valeyard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Building attractions one theme park at a time.
Posts: 10,800
Received 82 Likes on 49 Posts
Oh, and thanks Mr. Sandrew for an UNCUT March of the Wooden Soldiers/Babes in Toyland. That is indeed a rare thing to come by. I'll definately pick it up when I see it next and look forward to watching the restoration work done. The extras sound great too.
Old 12-11-06, 08:20 PM
  #74  
DVD Talk Legend
 
The Valeyard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Building attractions one theme park at a time.
Posts: 10,800
Received 82 Likes on 49 Posts
Originally Posted by baracine
Call me paranoid but I really think some people (especially in the South) confuse "colourization" with "the advancement of coloured people".



You know what, baracine? You're okay.
Old 12-11-06, 08:21 PM
  #75  
Suspended
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Toronto
Posts: 3,039
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by PatrickMcCart
It's just like how bad colorizations like King Kong don't reflect the quality of good ones by Legend Films. (...) It would be horrible if people were first exposed to a classic like King Kong via that hideous colorized version.
But I love the colourized King Kong.

Last edited by baracine; 12-11-06 at 09:19 PM.

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.