Legend Films' latest: "She", "Things To Come", etc.
12-11-06, 08:22 PM
#76
DVD Talk Legend
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Building attractions one theme park at a time.
Posts: 10,800
Received 82 Likes
on
49 Posts
Barry,
Do you think your sig is the reason for the removal of your posts?
It could be the filters think your links are SPAM.
Do you think your sig is the reason for the removal of your posts?
Barry B. Sandrew, Ph.D.
President/COO
Legend Films, Inc.
President/COO
Legend Films, Inc.
12-11-06, 09:30 PM
#77
Needs to contact an admin about multiple accounts
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 84
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Colorization: Some points to consider.
I don't intend to get cought up in the debate on this forum because after almost three decades in this business, I know that those opposed to colorization will not be swayed to my direction no matter how convincing the arguement.
I do understand and appreciate all the opinions on this forum, but I do not feel that colorization should be be villanized. It's ironic that the advent of colorization in the late 80's and early 90's was central in focusing film community interest in saving our film heritage; not so much from colorization as from decades of deterioration and neglect. Indeed most of the films produced in the US no longer exist in any form.
That said, it should be noted that each evergreen classic Legend Films colorizes produces significantly more revenue then the black and white versions ever did. The key to Legend's success is to produce the highest quality restoration and colorization and supply both the black and white and colorzed versions to serve both colorization fans and film purists.
Some major studios still have little incentive to fully restore and market most of their deep catalog titles and have even less incentive to restore and release their public domain titles. Why should they spend the required telecine, restoration, packaging, duplication and marketing money when shlock PD distributors release the same titles for a buck from deplorable film and video elements they dig up.
Colorization subsidizes the restoration of these evergreen classics. It allow these wonderful films to be presented with the respect they deserve and significantly increases their exposure to both old and new generations.
Barry
I do understand and appreciate all the opinions on this forum, but I do not feel that colorization should be be villanized. It's ironic that the advent of colorization in the late 80's and early 90's was central in focusing film community interest in saving our film heritage; not so much from colorization as from decades of deterioration and neglect. Indeed most of the films produced in the US no longer exist in any form.
That said, it should be noted that each evergreen classic Legend Films colorizes produces significantly more revenue then the black and white versions ever did. The key to Legend's success is to produce the highest quality restoration and colorization and supply both the black and white and colorzed versions to serve both colorization fans and film purists.
Some major studios still have little incentive to fully restore and market most of their deep catalog titles and have even less incentive to restore and release their public domain titles. Why should they spend the required telecine, restoration, packaging, duplication and marketing money when shlock PD distributors release the same titles for a buck from deplorable film and video elements they dig up.
Colorization subsidizes the restoration of these evergreen classics. It allow these wonderful films to be presented with the respect they deserve and significantly increases their exposure to both old and new generations.
Barry
Last edited by Barry_Sandrew; 12-11-06 at 10:10 PM.
12-11-06, 10:34 PM
#79
Needs to contact an admin about multiple accounts
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 84
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I don't intend to get caught up in the debate on this forum because after almost three decades in this business, I know that those opposed to colorization will not be swayed to my direction no matter how convincing the argument.
I do understand and appreciate all the opinions on this forum, but I do not feel that colorization should be villainized. It's ironic that the advent of colorization in the late 80's and early 90's was central in focusing film community interest in saving our film heritage; not so much from colorization as from decades of deterioration and neglect. Indeed most of the films produced in the US no longer exist in any form.
That said, it should be noted that each evergreen classic Legend Films colorizes produces significantly more revenue then the black and white versions ever did. The key to Legend's success is to produce the highest quality restoration and colorization and supply both the black and white and colorized versions to serve both colorization fans and film purists.
Some major studios still have little incentive to fully restore and market most of their deep catalog titles and have even less incentive to restore and release their public domain titles. Why should they spend the required telecine, restoration, packaging, duplication and marketing money when schlock PD distributors release the same titles for a buck from deplorable film and video elements they dig up.
Colorization subsidizes the restoration of these evergreen classics. It allows these wonderful films to be presented with the respect they deserve and significantly increases their exposure to both old and new generations.
Barry
I don't intend to get caught up in the debate on this forum because after almost three decades in this business, I know that those opposed to colorization will not be swayed to my direction no matter how convincing the argument.
I do understand and appreciate all the opinions on this forum, but I do not feel that colorization should be villainized. It's ironic that the advent of colorization in the late 80's and early 90's was central in focusing film community interest in saving our film heritage; not so much from colorization as from decades of deterioration and neglect. Indeed most of the films produced in the US no longer exist in any form.
That said, it should be noted that each evergreen classic Legend Films colorizes produces significantly more revenue then the black and white versions ever did. The key to Legend's success is to produce the highest quality restoration and colorization and supply both the black and white and colorized versions to serve both colorization fans and film purists.
Some major studios still have little incentive to fully restore and market most of their deep catalog titles and have even less incentive to restore and release their public domain titles. Why should they spend the required telecine, restoration, packaging, duplication and marketing money when schlock PD distributors release the same titles for a buck from deplorable film and video elements they dig up.
Colorization subsidizes the restoration of these evergreen classics. It allows these wonderful films to be presented with the respect they deserve and significantly increases their exposure to both old and new generations.
Barry
12-11-06, 11:18 PM
#80
DVD Talk Special Edition
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Georgia, USA
Posts: 1,030
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by baracine
But I love the colourized King Kong.
12-12-06, 04:14 AM
#82
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Bolton, United Kingdom
Posts: 365
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If one of Barry's aim was to come on here and sell Legend product, let me tell him, right here and now, that he's...succeeded. 
That review of March of the Wooden Soldiers did it for me. Barry; you probably know by now that I'd sooner have my eyeballs pricked with very sharp sticks than watch the 'colorized' version, but I'll lap up the rest...
As for Things to Come (wasn't that title mentioned in this thread somewhere?), I'll stick with my current R2, which is fairly decent; I'm not confident that Network will come up with anything too much better come March (the sound needs particular attention), but we live in hope.
That review of March of the Wooden Soldiers did it for me. Barry; you probably know by now that I'd sooner have my eyeballs pricked with very sharp sticks than watch the 'colorized' version, but I'll lap up the rest...
As for Things to Come (wasn't that title mentioned in this thread somewhere?), I'll stick with my current R2, which is fairly decent; I'm not confident that Network will come up with anything too much better come March (the sound needs particular attention), but we live in hope.
12-12-06, 05:34 AM
#83
DVD Talk Special Edition
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Upstate, NY
Posts: 1,192
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi Barry,
I own your company's release of My Man Godfrey, and have to say you did a fantastic job with it. Watching the colorized version, you'd never know it was originally filmed in B&W. I also have the two Basil Rathbone/Sherlock Holmes films you put out, and those are also top-notch releases. Now, here's my question...I have your latest release ('John Wayne In Color') being shipped as I write this. If the set sells well, do you think Legend Films would consider releasing more of John Wayne's Lone Star films in color? He did make 16 of them...
Thanks...keep up the great work!
I own your company's release of My Man Godfrey, and have to say you did a fantastic job with it. Watching the colorized version, you'd never know it was originally filmed in B&W. I also have the two Basil Rathbone/Sherlock Holmes films you put out, and those are also top-notch releases. Now, here's my question...I have your latest release ('John Wayne In Color') being shipped as I write this. If the set sells well, do you think Legend Films would consider releasing more of John Wayne's Lone Star films in color? He did make 16 of them...
Thanks...keep up the great work!
12-12-06, 06:57 AM
#84
Suspended
Thread Starter
Originally Posted by PatrickMcCart
Well, to be honest, it does look alright... when I'm 10 feet away from my monitor and not wearing contact lenses.
they were inspired by the engravings of Gustave Doré for Chateaubriand novels set in America like "Atala", "René" and "Les Natchez", e.g.:
... and by his fairy-tale illustrations, like "Tom Thumb":
They weren't aiming for absolute realism but for a more traditional, romantic and operatic conception of exoticism. Gustave Doré often worked in colour and often had his engravings colourized for publication, e.g.:
... so the artist himself had no taboo against the process and Cooper and Ernest B. Schoedsack probably saw them that way.
As Mr. Sandrew says so eloquently, a colourization has to be judged on its own merits and independently from the black and white film and, to me, the colourized King Kong brings out the fairy-tale, children's book quality of those landscapes/engravings and that totally artificial universe.
Or, as Joe Banks says, in my favourite line from Joe and the Volcano: "It looks fake; I like it!"
Of course, I'd be delighted to see Legend Films try their hand at that film...
Last edited by baracine; 12-13-06 at 06:36 AM.
12-12-06, 10:24 AM
#85
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 363
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Barry,
Since you seem able to post in this thread again, I thought I'd return to ask you a couple of questions. (I hope I don't come across as confrontational, since there's no denying I loathe colorization.)
First, I'm hearing rumors that you'll be releasing another version of She to reinsert the "additional scenes" back where they belong. Is that true? And if so, will that updated release be available separately? (I hear that it will only be available in a two-pack with Things to Come.)
Second, can you offer any explanation for the discrepancy between the 100-minute run-time listed on the back cover of Things to Come and actual run-time? (Again, I hear that it's the same old 92-minute cut.)
If these titles offer the best available versions of these two films (in b&w), I'd probably buy them, and I must say I was particularly disappointed to hear that we wouldn't be getting a longer/better cut of Things to Come. But I still may buy She, once the "additional scenes" are restored correctly.
Since you seem able to post in this thread again, I thought I'd return to ask you a couple of questions. (I hope I don't come across as confrontational, since there's no denying I loathe colorization.)
First, I'm hearing rumors that you'll be releasing another version of She to reinsert the "additional scenes" back where they belong. Is that true? And if so, will that updated release be available separately? (I hear that it will only be available in a two-pack with Things to Come.)
Second, can you offer any explanation for the discrepancy between the 100-minute run-time listed on the back cover of Things to Come and actual run-time? (Again, I hear that it's the same old 92-minute cut.)
If these titles offer the best available versions of these two films (in b&w), I'd probably buy them, and I must say I was particularly disappointed to hear that we wouldn't be getting a longer/better cut of Things to Come. But I still may buy She, once the "additional scenes" are restored correctly.
Last edited by Ambassador; 12-12-06 at 10:37 AM.
12-12-06, 01:09 PM
#86
Needs to contact an admin about multiple accounts
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 84
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Ambassador
Barry,
Since you seem able to post in this thread again, I thought I'd return to ask you a couple of questions. (I hope I don't come across as confrontational, since there's no denying I loathe colorization.)
First, I'm hearing rumors that you'll be releasing another version of She to reinsert the "additional scenes" back where they belong. Is that true? And if so, will that updated release be available separately? (I hear that it will only be available in a two-pack with Things to Come.)
Second, can you offer any explanation for the discrepancy between the 100-minute run-time listed on the back cover of Things to Come and actual run-time? (Again, I hear that it's the same old 92-minute cut.)
If these titles offer the best available versions of these two films (in b&w), I'd probably buy them, and I must say I was particularly disappointed to hear that we wouldn't be getting a longer/better cut of Things to Come. But I still may buy She, once the "additional scenes" are restored correctly.
Since you seem able to post in this thread again, I thought I'd return to ask you a couple of questions. (I hope I don't come across as confrontational, since there's no denying I loathe colorization.)
First, I'm hearing rumors that you'll be releasing another version of She to reinsert the "additional scenes" back where they belong. Is that true? And if so, will that updated release be available separately? (I hear that it will only be available in a two-pack with Things to Come.)
Second, can you offer any explanation for the discrepancy between the 100-minute run-time listed on the back cover of Things to Come and actual run-time? (Again, I hear that it's the same old 92-minute cut.)
If these titles offer the best available versions of these two films (in b&w), I'd probably buy them, and I must say I was particularly disappointed to hear that we wouldn't be getting a longer/better cut of Things to Come. But I still may buy She, once the "additional scenes" are restored correctly.
A deluxe version of “She” will be released in May, 2007. It will include the 8 minutes edited into both the black and white and colorized versions of the movie. The new deluxe version will also include many other new bonus materials. The DVD will not include “Things to Come.”
The run time on “Things to Come” has a mistake on the packaging. We regret the error.
Ray Harryhausen very much wanted to color design “Things to Come” and despite our efforts to find the long version, the best we could find was the short version on a good quality 16mm print which we restored and enhanced. It’s Legend’s policy to use only 35mm elements on our movies but Ray was insistent and we’re glad that we completed the film under his direction.
We are very proud of “She,” as is Ray Harryhausen, and we feel that it has been greatly enhanced by his design and our colorization technology. It was premiered at the Aero Theater in LA to an all industry audience and received overwhelming acclaim during the Q&A after the viewing. Both Ray Harryhausen and Ray Bradbury were at the premier reception. “She” was one of their all time favorite films and they used to travel around together to catch the show when ever it played nearby.
Having the benefit of Ray’s extensive knowledge of these Sci-Fi and fantasy classics was a thrill to us. He has studied them throughout his extensive career and they inspired many of his own films. Ray’s vision of how to best to use color to enhance the matte paintings and mood of these films has become a treasure to many of his fans and fans of these great classics.
12-12-06, 02:15 PM
#87
DVD Talk Legend
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 Barry_Sandrew
Hey Ambassador - You were not at all confrontational :-)
A deluxe version of “She” will be released in May, 2007. It will include the 8 minutes edited into both the black and white and colorized versions of the movie. The new deluxe version will also include many other new bonus materials. The DVD will not include “Things to Come.”
A deluxe version of “She” will be released in May, 2007. It will include the 8 minutes edited into both the black and white and colorized versions of the movie. The new deluxe version will also include many other new bonus materials. The DVD will not include “Things to Come.”
Why the decision to release two versions of She? Will the existing extras from the current version be ported over?
12-12-06, 04:43 PM
#88
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 363
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by The Valeyard
Why the decision to release two versions of She? Will the existing extras from the current version be ported over?
Many thanks for the info, Barry! Sounds like I'll be picking up your delux edition of She when it comes out. Again, I'll probably be watching it in the original b&w, but the trailer that Baracine linked to seems to suggest that the picture quality is superior to Kino's OOP edition.
Shame about Things to Come, though. I guess I'll wait to hear what Network comes up with over in the UK. So far, they've had pretty good luck releasing complete cuts of other Alexander Korda movies: Elephant Boy, The Man Who Could Work Miracles, Jungle Book, etc. (The main drawback is that Network's A/V quality is so variable.)
12-12-06, 10:51 PM
#90
Defunct Account
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: State College, PA
Posts: 5,920
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by The Cow
Please elaborate.It really wasn't until the 60's that people started trying to save films. It's sad but true.
12-13-06, 07:42 PM
#91
Suspended
Thread Starter
I got my March of the Wooden Soldiers, by mail, from amazon.ca this morning and I almost managed to go through the whole package (well, except for the black and white version) in one day.
The colourized version: The film starts with the MGM lion and the original title "Babes in Toyland" on a wooden block. The first five minutes are pictureboxed. The colours are subdued but absolutely essential to make this film, which I have always considered "unwatchable", acceptable. The print is in good shape and complete. The colours help make visible some of the detail that was always missed before, especially in the darker recesses of Bogeyland, green crocodiles and all. Tom-Tom is played by singer Felix Knight, who is a dead ringer for Elijah Wood
. What limitations there are to my enjoyment come from the faults of the film itself. Marketed as a screen rendition of Victor Herbert's operetta "Babes in Toyland", this film is in reality a Laurel and Hardy vehicle 
toned down for the kiddie crowd and not given the production values it needed to emulate the 1903 stage version that came with upwards of 24 musical numbers, an onstage shipweck, an enchanted forest with moving, talking trees, numerous ballets, a show-stopping Toyland and a theatre-wide snowfall. In this version, five songs were preserved, the rest being heard as Muzak elevator music behind the dialog. It's a little creaky and you see a lot of what made Lisa Simpson wince in that Skinner's Sense of Snow episode: Mother Goose's goose is moulting, every other costume has threads dangling, some of the brickwork is obviously wallpapered on, etc. It's better than nothing but we're a long way from The Wizard of Oz, folks... Like everything in this package, this panto extravaganza is unusual, among other things, for the fact that Disney apparently gave permission to use his tradermarked Three Little Pigs characters as well as a mouse character (a costumed monkey, I think, supplemented by some puppetry) that looks a lot like Mickey Mouse and throws bricks at a cat, which is an allusion to Krazy Kat's relationship to Ignatz Mouse (another famous cartoon strip of the period, mostly aimed at adults).
The sound is good and clear but not spectacular and this print allowed me to confront my childhood fear of the horrible Bogeymen and Silas Barnaby's notorious' villainy 
. It also shows a lot of whimsy and has great repeat value for the details you invariably miss on a first viewing. For a weird review of the weird stuff: http://www.cosmoetica.com/B467-DES400.htm .
The extras: The extras are a compendium of vintage Christmas-themed films from the 40's and 50's in all their kitschy glory (Xmasploitation?), including a couple of 50's B&W films that cannibalize public domain cartoons from the thirties to integrate them in live-action featurettes about "The Night Before Christmas" or "The Christmas Toyshop" (both by Castle films - any relation to William The Tingler Castle?). Also on board is a Laurel & Hardy Technicolor PSA about wood products, a "Howdy Doody Christmas" TV featurette, all rarities, and some of the scariest toy commercials you have ever seen, including a Shirley Temple doll
straight out of What Ever Happened to Baby Jane. They make the Ren and Stimpy Whammo brand look tame by comparison. The trailers include the original B&W trailer for the main feature and other Legend Films products, one of which is The Shirley Temple Storybook Collection (the original 1960 season 2 in colour), that covered a lot of ground, from a puppet production of "Winnie the Pooh" to a rendition of "Pippi Longstocking", all with an all-star cast. Also included is a rendition of "We Wish You a Merry Christmas" by Spanky and Our Gang and a lot of crazy stuff. The prize of the package is the original colour Max Fleisher 8-minute cartoon Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer, which was made a whole year before the song of the same name was written in 1949 and a full 16 years before the classic 1964 stop-motion TV special. It's in good shape and very much along the lines and production values of Fleisher's "Superman" cartoons of the 40's. I happen to own a 1950 View-Master reel of this story which practically reproduces scenes from this famous cartoon, including Santa's encounter with an airplane 
. Mysteriously, the opening titles music and end music have been replaced by an electronic rendition of a Chrismas Carol, probably to cover a later inclusion of the famous song in that print, for which copyright still exists.
All in all, this collection is essential viewing for any serious sociology student who wants to understand how Christmas progressively became the commercial potlatch it is today.
The colourized version: The film starts with the MGM lion and the original title "Babes in Toyland" on a wooden block. The first five minutes are pictureboxed. The colours are subdued but absolutely essential to make this film, which I have always considered "unwatchable", acceptable. The print is in good shape and complete. The colours help make visible some of the detail that was always missed before, especially in the darker recesses of Bogeyland, green crocodiles and all. Tom-Tom is played by singer Felix Knight, who is a dead ringer for Elijah Wood
. What limitations there are to my enjoyment come from the faults of the film itself. Marketed as a screen rendition of Victor Herbert's operetta "Babes in Toyland", this film is in reality a Laurel and Hardy vehicle toned down for the kiddie crowd and not given the production values it needed to emulate the 1903 stage version that came with upwards of 24 musical numbers, an onstage shipweck, an enchanted forest with moving, talking trees, numerous ballets, a show-stopping Toyland and a theatre-wide snowfall. In this version, five songs were preserved, the rest being heard as Muzak elevator music behind the dialog. It's a little creaky and you see a lot of what made Lisa Simpson wince in that Skinner's Sense of Snow episode: Mother Goose's goose is moulting, every other costume has threads dangling, some of the brickwork is obviously wallpapered on, etc. It's better than nothing but we're a long way from The Wizard of Oz, folks... Like everything in this package, this panto extravaganza is unusual, among other things, for the fact that Disney apparently gave permission to use his tradermarked Three Little Pigs characters as well as a mouse character (a costumed monkey, I think, supplemented by some puppetry) that looks a lot like Mickey Mouse and throws bricks at a cat, which is an allusion to Krazy Kat's relationship to Ignatz Mouse (another famous cartoon strip of the period, mostly aimed at adults). The sound is good and clear but not spectacular and this print allowed me to confront my childhood fear of the horrible Bogeymen and Silas Barnaby's notorious' villainy . It also shows a lot of whimsy and has great repeat value for the details you invariably miss on a first viewing. For a weird review of the weird stuff: http://www.cosmoetica.com/B467-DES400.htm .The extras: The extras are a compendium of vintage Christmas-themed films from the 40's and 50's in all their kitschy glory (Xmasploitation?), including a couple of 50's B&W films that cannibalize public domain cartoons from the thirties to integrate them in live-action featurettes about "The Night Before Christmas" or "The Christmas Toyshop" (both by Castle films - any relation to William The Tingler Castle?). Also on board is a Laurel & Hardy Technicolor PSA about wood products, a "Howdy Doody Christmas" TV featurette, all rarities, and some of the scariest toy commercials you have ever seen, including a Shirley Temple doll
straight out of What Ever Happened to Baby Jane. They make the Ren and Stimpy Whammo brand look tame by comparison. The trailers include the original B&W trailer for the main feature and other Legend Films products, one of which is The Shirley Temple Storybook Collection (the original 1960 season 2 in colour), that covered a lot of ground, from a puppet production of "Winnie the Pooh" to a rendition of "Pippi Longstocking", all with an all-star cast. Also included is a rendition of "We Wish You a Merry Christmas" by Spanky and Our Gang and a lot of crazy stuff. The prize of the package is the original colour Max Fleisher 8-minute cartoon Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer, which was made a whole year before the song of the same name was written in 1949 and a full 16 years before the classic 1964 stop-motion TV special. It's in good shape and very much along the lines and production values of Fleisher's "Superman" cartoons of the 40's. I happen to own a 1950 View-Master reel of this story which practically reproduces scenes from this famous cartoon, including Santa's encounter with an airplane . Mysteriously, the opening titles music and end music have been replaced by an electronic rendition of a Chrismas Carol, probably to cover a later inclusion of the famous song in that print, for which copyright still exists.All in all, this collection is essential viewing for any serious sociology student who wants to understand how Christmas progressively became the commercial potlatch it is today.
Last edited by baracine; 12-13-06 at 10:28 PM.
12-13-06, 08:51 PM
#92
DVD Talk Legend
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Building attractions one theme park at a time.
Posts: 10,800
Received 82 Likes
on
49 Posts
Is March of the Wooden Soldiers complete? Previous prints have missing bits here and there. The MGM opening is one of them (Thank goodness it's here). Most importantly, is the ending intact? Passport Video released a wonderful version of the film, complete EXCEPT for the very end.
From an Amazon review:
Also missing from other prints:
- the Mother Goose prelude (more than likely on this release)
- the scene of Tom Tom and Bo-Peep drifting into slumber in Bogeyland as the dream fairies dance over their heads)
What's the run time of the feature? How does the restoration look on the....(gasp)...Black & White original? If all the above is present and the restoration beats out the Passport release, I'm definately picking this up.
From an Amazon review:
Stopped at the one yard line!!, February 16, 2005
Reviewer: Robert Badgley (London,Ontario,Canada) - See all my reviews
This review is for the Passport Video version of "March of the Wooden Soldiers".
This is a marvellous print in glorious black and white of this perennial favourite still seen on TV to this day.However for some time on TV we have been getting a terribly pastey colourized version which has nothing on this relatively clean black and white version;this is the way it was meant to be seen!
Both contrast and sound in this version are very good and the movie is as complete as one would hope.
And Passport Video would almost have had a touchdown with this movie....if it hadn't been stopped dead in its' tracks inexplicably at the one yard line!
The movie as I have said is quite complete with the original opening sequence,the musical numbers and others various scenes intact but Passport for some unfathomable reason changed the ending.The movie progresses along very well until the moment where the Boys attempt to give the Bogeymen a "parting shot" and the cannon reverses and gets Ollie in the behind instead.While Stan plucks away at the darts the scene suddenly "rolls up" from the bottom right corner to the top left.Music plays out to a dark screen.The end!??
The original ending has Stan plucking away until the scene fades onto a title card with Mother Goose and a "They lived happily ever after" on it.Music finishes.
What "creative" soul at Passport thought that they should fiddle with the original ending after going through almost the entire picture leaving things as they were?
Well here's another nice mess Passport's gotten themselves into.
What a shame because the film deserves a higher rating than I have given it but due to Passports' "liberties" I'm forced to downgrade it to no more than three at best.
If this ending is of no consequence to you then this version will suit you to a tee.But if you want this movie in its' original version,in good quality black and white and complete then I suggest you give this a pass.For there still is NO such version yet extant on DVD as of this writing.
Reviewer: Robert Badgley (London,Ontario,Canada) - See all my reviews
This review is for the Passport Video version of "March of the Wooden Soldiers".
This is a marvellous print in glorious black and white of this perennial favourite still seen on TV to this day.However for some time on TV we have been getting a terribly pastey colourized version which has nothing on this relatively clean black and white version;this is the way it was meant to be seen!
Both contrast and sound in this version are very good and the movie is as complete as one would hope.
And Passport Video would almost have had a touchdown with this movie....if it hadn't been stopped dead in its' tracks inexplicably at the one yard line!
The movie as I have said is quite complete with the original opening sequence,the musical numbers and others various scenes intact but Passport for some unfathomable reason changed the ending.The movie progresses along very well until the moment where the Boys attempt to give the Bogeymen a "parting shot" and the cannon reverses and gets Ollie in the behind instead.While Stan plucks away at the darts the scene suddenly "rolls up" from the bottom right corner to the top left.Music plays out to a dark screen.The end!??
The original ending has Stan plucking away until the scene fades onto a title card with Mother Goose and a "They lived happily ever after" on it.Music finishes.
What "creative" soul at Passport thought that they should fiddle with the original ending after going through almost the entire picture leaving things as they were?
Well here's another nice mess Passport's gotten themselves into.
What a shame because the film deserves a higher rating than I have given it but due to Passports' "liberties" I'm forced to downgrade it to no more than three at best.
If this ending is of no consequence to you then this version will suit you to a tee.But if you want this movie in its' original version,in good quality black and white and complete then I suggest you give this a pass.For there still is NO such version yet extant on DVD as of this writing.
- the Mother Goose prelude (more than likely on this release)
- the scene of Tom Tom and Bo-Peep drifting into slumber in Bogeyland as the dream fairies dance over their heads)
What's the run time of the feature? How does the restoration look on the....(gasp)...Black & White original? If all the above is present and the restoration beats out the Passport release, I'm definately picking this up.
12-13-06, 09:04 PM
#93
Suspended
Thread Starter
Originally Posted by The Valeyard
Is March of the Wooden Soldiers complete? Previous prints have missing bits here and there. The MGM opening is one of them (Thank goodness it's here). Most importantly, is the ending intact? Passport Video released a wonderful version of the film, complete EXCEPT for the very end.
Also missing from other prints:
- the Mother Goose prelude (more than likely on this release)
- the scene of Tom Tom and Bo-Peep drifting into slumber in Bogeyland as the dream fairies dance over their heads)
What's the run time of the feature? How does the restoration look on the....(gasp)...Black & White original? If all the above is present and the restoration beats out the Passport release, I'm definately picking this up.
Also missing from other prints:
- the Mother Goose prelude (more than likely on this release)
- the scene of Tom Tom and Bo-Peep drifting into slumber in Bogeyland as the dream fairies dance over their heads)
What's the run time of the feature? How does the restoration look on the....(gasp)...Black & White original? If all the above is present and the restoration beats out the Passport release, I'm definately picking this up.
is priceless and contains trick photography, a Laurel & Hardy bit and that moulting goose. I can understand why the slumber scene was cut by early censors, between the "fairies" looking like voyeuristic horny midgets and Tom and Bo-Peep 
snuggling awfully close to each other on that narrow rock ledge, for unmarried teens, that is... The contrast looks optimal to me and the film only suffers from a few speckles and unevenness (drifting in and out of focus at scene changes.) The picture is stable throughout.
Last edited by baracine; 12-13-06 at 09:56 PM.
12-13-06, 10:04 PM
#94
Suspended
Thread Starter
Message from Barry Sandrew:
This is a message from Barry_Sandrew at DVD Talk Forum ( http://forum.dvdtalk.com/index.php ). The DVD Talk Forum owners cannot accept any responsibility for the contents of the email.
To email Barry_Sandrew, you can use this online form:
http://forum.dvdtalk.com/sendmessage...6&userid=70424
OR, by email:
mailto:[email protected]
This is the message:
Hi Benoit,
Thanks for the review in the forum. I received some interesting information from a member of the Sons Of The Desert in Los Angeles.
According to him, Stan Laurel contacted Technicolor and Walt Disney about the possibility of filming the picture using the color process. Technicolor couldn't allow it without the consent of Disney who had the sole right to the process until 1936 and Walt wasn't about to let Stan use it or let him use Mickey Mouse for sequences.
If true it's an interesting footnote. I DO know that Disney prevented Warner Bros from using Technicolor during this period. Maybe this is why Stan made the Mickey Mouse look alike appear so bizarre.
Barry
To email Barry_Sandrew, you can use this online form:
http://forum.dvdtalk.com/sendmessage...6&userid=70424
OR, by email:
mailto:[email protected]
This is the message:
Hi Benoit,
Thanks for the review in the forum. I received some interesting information from a member of the Sons Of The Desert in Los Angeles.
According to him, Stan Laurel contacted Technicolor and Walt Disney about the possibility of filming the picture using the color process. Technicolor couldn't allow it without the consent of Disney who had the sole right to the process until 1936 and Walt wasn't about to let Stan use it or let him use Mickey Mouse for sequences.
If true it's an interesting footnote. I DO know that Disney prevented Warner Bros from using Technicolor during this period. Maybe this is why Stan made the Mickey Mouse look alike appear so bizarre.
Barry
12-13-06, 11:17 PM
#95
DVD Talk Legend
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
Message from Barry Sandrew:
According to him, Stan Laurel contacted Technicolor and Walt Disney about the possibility of filming the picture using the color process. Technicolor couldn't allow it without the consent of Disney who had the sole right to the process until 1936 and Walt wasn't about to let Stan use it or let him use Mickey Mouse for sequences.
If true it's an interesting footnote. I DO know that Disney prevented Warner Bros from using Technicolor during this period. Maybe this is why Stan made the Mickey Mouse look alike appear so bizarre.
According to him, Stan Laurel contacted Technicolor and Walt Disney about the possibility of filming the picture using the color process. Technicolor couldn't allow it without the consent of Disney who had the sole right to the process until 1936 and Walt wasn't about to let Stan use it or let him use Mickey Mouse for sequences.
If true it's an interesting footnote. I DO know that Disney prevented Warner Bros from using Technicolor during this period. Maybe this is why Stan made the Mickey Mouse look alike appear so bizarre.
Now that's interesting because Walt Disney allowed Hal Roach to use the "Who's Afraid of the Big Bad Wolf" theme to accompany the appearance of the Three Little Pigs. Roach and Disney supposedly had a good relationship around this time.
12-14-06, 07:19 AM
#97
Suspended
Thread Starter
Originally Posted by The Valeyard
Now that's interesting because Walt Disney allowed Hal Roach to use the "Who's Afraid of the Big Bad Wolf" theme to accompany the appearance of the Three Little Pigs. Roach and Disney supposedly had a good relationship around this time.
He would have been more reticent about Mickey Mouse, a character close to his heart that is difficult to translate as a live character and that would have to be mute besides, unless Disney gave him his voice. Either way, the way the Mouse is portrayed in the film is certainly "weird" and possibly a poke at Disney, mixing as it does characteristics of Krazy Kat and Ignatz' brick-throwing antics (a long time before Tom and Jerry and Itchy and Scratchy). I don't think Mickey ever tortured cats...
Last edited by baracine; 12-14-06 at 07:35 AM.
12-14-06, 07:52 AM
#98
Suspended
Thread Starter
From Dan Schneider's elaborate review ( http://www.cosmoetica.com/B467-DES400.htm ) of the GoodTimes DVD (possibly using the same colourization?):
1 Actually an actor named Kewpie Morgan.
The scariest dreams are tattered and not seamless. They are not like slick Hollywood special effects laden films, but like those lower budget masterpieces; Carnival Of Souls or the original Night Of The Living Dead. Thus the most scary villains to ever appear onscreen in film may well be the semi-simian Bogeymen in the Hal Roach Studio’s 1934 filmic adaptation of Glen MacDonough’s and Victor Herbert’s 1903 operetta Babes In Toyland, starring Stan Laurel and Oliver Hardy, in what may not be their best film, in terms of pure screen comedy, but is easily their most memorable one. However, the film is not much like the original operetta, for only a few of the original songs remain. Of course, no one in this movie is killed, mutilated, raped, nor has anything worse than a clonk on the head or a dart in the ass happen to them, but this only reinforces the dream logic of the film. Thus, grown men in bad ape-like suits and phony masks are even creepier than paranormal ghouls, because they should not scare, but amuse. Yet….they scare, especially a child.
(...) Ask yourself just how well most recent kids films will appeal to youngsters in seven decades? Yet, films like this, and the later, more polished, The Wizard Of Oz, whose endebtedness to this film is manifest, still appeal, and will appeal, in that later time precisely because they are not reliant on the ‘gee wiz’ special effects factor.
(...) But it’s not just the anarchy of Babes In Toyland that leaves decades long nightmarish images in the mind of a child. Really look at some of the deeper goings on- such as the precariously perched Rockabye Baby in the crib up in the tree, Barnaby’s evil bidding dwarf, the doubly sharpened wooden peewees that somehow behave like boomerangs when whacked by Stannie’s stick, the unmovable expressions of the masks the Three Little Pigs wear- which seem like the masks of Drama and Comedy, and the psychotic glee of the Mickey Mouse knockoff puppet, who acts more like the brick tossing Ignatz Mouse to the man in a bad cat suit’s Cat with the Fiddle’s Krazy Kat. Many critics cite Tom and Jerry as the inspiration for this antagonistic duo, but they were, in fact, the derivations that had yet to appear in cartoons. The obvious inspiration was really the then wildly popular Krazy Kat newspaper cartoon. The fact that the mouse puppet is so badly operated also adds to its inhuman creepiness. Also, there is something very fascistic about Toyland, where a fat Old King Cole (Alan Hale, Sr., father of Gilligan’s Island’s The Skipper, in an uncredited role 1 ) takes to torturing subjects accused of crimes without a writ of habeas corpus, nor a trial by jury (Ollie’s dunking/Iraq War detainees’ waterboarding?), and the enforcers of all this are sadistic black hooded and bare armed executioners. The horror is even added to by the annoyingly saccharine songs sung by the cartoonish lead characters, as well as the very stagey sets used in the film. Absolutely no attempt at reality is made.
And, it should be noted, this DVD is the colorized version of the movie, and runs a brisk 78 minutes, which really adds to the nightmarish tinge. Usually, black and white is [a] more dream-like medium, but the bright colors tend to ‘realize’ the nightmarish aspects of the tale even more, and this version never goes too far in saturating the skin color. Stan Laurel’s hair color, as example, is his natural auburn, not the glaring orange other colorized versions have it. It is also rumored that the comedy team always wanted this feature filmed in color, but the costs were too prohibitive for that technology when it was filmed. This is a film crying out for a film commentary to expound upon such aspects of the film and its making, but, alack, there is none.
(...) Ask yourself just how well most recent kids films will appeal to youngsters in seven decades? Yet, films like this, and the later, more polished, The Wizard Of Oz, whose endebtedness to this film is manifest, still appeal, and will appeal, in that later time precisely because they are not reliant on the ‘gee wiz’ special effects factor.
(...) But it’s not just the anarchy of Babes In Toyland that leaves decades long nightmarish images in the mind of a child. Really look at some of the deeper goings on- such as the precariously perched Rockabye Baby in the crib up in the tree, Barnaby’s evil bidding dwarf, the doubly sharpened wooden peewees that somehow behave like boomerangs when whacked by Stannie’s stick, the unmovable expressions of the masks the Three Little Pigs wear- which seem like the masks of Drama and Comedy, and the psychotic glee of the Mickey Mouse knockoff puppet, who acts more like the brick tossing Ignatz Mouse to the man in a bad cat suit’s Cat with the Fiddle’s Krazy Kat. Many critics cite Tom and Jerry as the inspiration for this antagonistic duo, but they were, in fact, the derivations that had yet to appear in cartoons. The obvious inspiration was really the then wildly popular Krazy Kat newspaper cartoon. The fact that the mouse puppet is so badly operated also adds to its inhuman creepiness. Also, there is something very fascistic about Toyland, where a fat Old King Cole (Alan Hale, Sr., father of Gilligan’s Island’s The Skipper, in an uncredited role 1 ) takes to torturing subjects accused of crimes without a writ of habeas corpus, nor a trial by jury (Ollie’s dunking/Iraq War detainees’ waterboarding?), and the enforcers of all this are sadistic black hooded and bare armed executioners. The horror is even added to by the annoyingly saccharine songs sung by the cartoonish lead characters, as well as the very stagey sets used in the film. Absolutely no attempt at reality is made.
And, it should be noted, this DVD is the colorized version of the movie, and runs a brisk 78 minutes, which really adds to the nightmarish tinge. Usually, black and white is [a] more dream-like medium, but the bright colors tend to ‘realize’ the nightmarish aspects of the tale even more, and this version never goes too far in saturating the skin color. Stan Laurel’s hair color, as example, is his natural auburn, not the glaring orange other colorized versions have it. It is also rumored that the comedy team always wanted this feature filmed in color, but the costs were too prohibitive for that technology when it was filmed. This is a film crying out for a film commentary to expound upon such aspects of the film and its making, but, alack, there is none.
Last edited by baracine; 12-14-06 at 08:02 AM.
12-20-06, 05:49 AM
#99
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Bolton, United Kingdom
Posts: 365
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A couple of disturbing comments at the HTF on March of The Wooden Soldiers:
I wonder if Barry would care to comment?
Originally Posted by LaurenceGarvey
This has been discussed over on the L&H Newsgroup, where it's offered that the so-called "B&W" version from Legend is simply the colorized version with the color turned off. Bleccchhh.
Originally Posted by Paul Penna
I went through my copy of the Legend disc in hopes of finding a "smoking gun" instance that would unequivocally demonstrate this to be the case. An example of what I'm talking about can be seen in the colorized versions of early Mickey Mouse cartoons once shown on the Disney Channel. In the original black and white, Mickey's pants are white. When colorizing, the pants were made red, in keeping with the color scheme eventually adopted. Of course, this changed the gamma of the pants, so that when de-colorized (as sometimes happened when these were shown in b/w on DC's "Ink & Paint Club"), the pants looked gray.
I tried to find similar instances on the Legend disc, comparing the "b/w" version to a tape I had of the real b/w version. While I was not able to find any "smoking gun" so dramatically obvious, it was clear that something looked off with the Legend "b/w" version. There was a flattening of the gray scale in objects, such as a lack of modeling or chiaroscuro in faces that, in contrast (!) was present in the tape of the real black and white print. This was obvious in many other kinds of textures as well, such as the folds of cloth in costumes. It gives the whole image a kind of dull, washed-out appearance, objects looking more 2-D than sculpted. Faces looked as if covered in pancake makeup in comparison with their appearance in the real b/w.
A shame, as in other respects, the print is quite crisp and hints at a reasonably nice gray scale if it hadn't been compromised by the overlay of color. So my strong suspicion is that this is, indeed, the colorized version without the color. Either that or they managed to screw it up some other way.
I tried to find similar instances on the Legend disc, comparing the "b/w" version to a tape I had of the real b/w version. While I was not able to find any "smoking gun" so dramatically obvious, it was clear that something looked off with the Legend "b/w" version. There was a flattening of the gray scale in objects, such as a lack of modeling or chiaroscuro in faces that, in contrast (!) was present in the tape of the real black and white print. This was obvious in many other kinds of textures as well, such as the folds of cloth in costumes. It gives the whole image a kind of dull, washed-out appearance, objects looking more 2-D than sculpted. Faces looked as if covered in pancake makeup in comparison with their appearance in the real b/w.
A shame, as in other respects, the print is quite crisp and hints at a reasonably nice gray scale if it hadn't been compromised by the overlay of color. So my strong suspicion is that this is, indeed, the colorized version without the color. Either that or they managed to screw it up some other way.
12-20-06, 06:30 AM
#100
Suspended
Thread Starter
Originally Posted by John Hodson
A couple of disturbing comments at the HTF on March of The Wooden Soldiers: [...]
I wonder if Barry would care to comment?
I wonder if Barry would care to comment?