Carcosa

Sorry folks...that one was for VALEYARD....and a tip of the hat to JoeGRJoe...

baracine

I skipped over to Home Theater Forum to take a gander at Robert A Harris' latest pronouncement ( http://www.hometheaterforum.com/htf/...ut-el-cid.html ) and I'm sad to report that it's pretty much the same old same old.

Foppish authority Harris watches 20 minutes on Disc 1 and pronounces the transfer dead in the water - mostly because Miramax is not a major studio, in my opinion, or it doesn't gel with his Proustian reminiscences - and then, the chorus of sycophants and yes-men - none of which appear to have seen the DVD in question - chimes in telling Mr. Harris how wonderful he is to condescend to grace their humble persons with a few words about(TM) the transfer and offer to peel him a few grapes and fluff his cushions. After which, anyone with a contrary opinion (like "I don't think you should all cancel your orders just on the strength of Mr. Harris' words") has to act like he's walking on eggs.

Particularly ridiculous was the bit where Harris reported that the recent digital projection of the film was a failure at the AFI Silver Theater because, apparently, the left side of the screen was improperly aligned, which was meant to "somehow" confirm, however improbably and indirectly, his totally screwy opinion that the first reel of the DVD transfer had improper alignment on its left side. Anthropologists have a word for that mental exercise when it's practised by Papuans and it's called "magic thought".

The level of pomposity and wrong-headedness of this man just gets to me and I think it's getting worse with time...

John Hodson

Then why on earth didn't you make your comments straight to the man instead of sneaking in there and then sneaking back here to rubbish him? For gawd's sake have the courage of your convictions man!

flixtime

Watching this film again after so many years, a couple of things raised my curiosity...I wonder if that marvelously hypnotic drum beat in Miklos Rozsa's score might have somehow been an influence on Ennio Morricone's score for "The Good, the Bad and the Ugly" where you also hear a similar beat in the background. Film music isn't my area of expertise but to my untrained ears they seemed closely tied.

Also, I wonder if director Edward Zwick was influenced by this film in that at least a couple of the final beach attack images in "El Cid" seem closely mirrored during the final assault in his film "Glory".

Anyway, just wanted to get my two cents in, if not for insight, at least for variety.

baracine

Because the last time I had the courage of my convictions on that forum, I was roundly booted out and the thread I was on (about the latest Disney Peter Pan DVD edition) was locked down. I don't want anything more to do with those tea-and-crumpet Tuesday Morning Ladies' Club mouthpieces for the major studios.

The same thing automatically happens to anyone who stands up to Robert A Harris on that forum. I guess you know what the "A" stands for now.

baracine

Herein lies a story that you will hear when you listen to the commentary and the extras on Disc 2. Rozsa wrote at least 20 minutes of music more than what you hear in the finished film. What's really depressing is that these recorded bits have totally disappeared from the record, as has the isolated film score. One of those pieces of music were to be where you hear drums at the beginning and at the end of the film, in all important scenes involving Ben Youssef, in other words. You will also hear that for financing purposes, the Italian version of the film credits the music to an Italian composer, Mario Nascimbene, who was a teacher and collaborator of Ennio Morricone, and who made a name for himself with very unusual sound combinations as in Barabbas (1961). It is possible that in order to fulfill contract obligations and to write at least something for the finished film, Mario Nascimbene could be the "composer" and orchestrator of these drumbeats. What is certain is that Rozsa had nothing to do with them and only found out about the substitution and the mangling of his score at the film's premiere.

According to Nascimbene - and you won't find that in the extras - he was genuinely led to believe (by Bronston) that his music would be used in the final score, so his disappointment was probably even greater than Rozsa's.

The film's final attack images are also mirrored in the Helm's Deep sequences of The Two Towers and El Cid's Valencia is pretty much one of the major visual inspirations for Minas Tirith in that film. The scene where Ben Youssef's men ride up to the top of the city is exactly mirrored in the scene where Gandalf rides up the several levels of Minas Tirith to see the Steward.

John Hodson

That's depressing on so many levels.

flixtime

baracine, your feedback was an illuminating read, I appreciate your taking the time to share in such detail.

baracine

Thanks. I can keep adding to it. My main source for Nascimbene's point of view is the liner notes to an anthology CD of his where he clearly states that the El Cid affair was the major professional disappointment of his life. As the story is not very flattering to Bronston (talking both Rozsa and Nascimbene down the primrose path for purely monetary reasons), you won't find the whole story in the extras.

UngersPride

El Cid is a great film.

Below find several sites that have given this movie and the dvd transfer a big thumbs up:

91% at Rotten Tomatoes:

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/el_cid/


Amazon.com rates it 5/5 Stars:

http://tinyurl.com/ynq5b9


DVD SAVANT rates the video as excellent:

http://www.dvdtalk.com/dvdsavant/s2493cid.html

"Weinstein's Limited Collector's Edition of El Cid looks stunning in a new enhanced transfer. Savant saw the film in its 1993 70mm restoration, and while DVD can't match 70mm for detail, the colors overall have been smoothed out considerably. Criterion released a pricey laserdisc in the middle 1990s. Even it showed considerable dirt and damage, but this new release seems to have corrected most of it. In only a few shots are the colors flat, and a couple of slightly out-of-focus angles may have always been that way."


Slant Magazine (4/5 Stars):

http://www.slantmagazine.com/dvd/dvd_review.asp?ID=1281

"Mann shot El Cid in 70mm, and the nearly spotless DVD transfer attests to his spatial masterly in both epic and intimate settings. Clanking swords, galloping horses, and Miklós Rózsa's throbbing score come through fantastically in the persuasive 5.1 stereo track."


DVD REVIEW calls it a masterpiece:

http://www.dvdreview.com/reviews/pages/2751.shtml

"On this release, the film has been spread across two discs to make sure the film's 3-hour length will not compromise image quality. It is presented in its original 2.20:1 widescreen aspect ratio on the release, complete with the original Overture and Intermission. The image quality is remarkable and it is evident that quite a bit of work went into this release. It may not look quite as stellar as some of Warner's restore classics, but still for a film that is over 45 years old, this is a wonderful presentation. Coming from a 70mm print that has been pieced together from a wide variety of sources, the film boasts rich colors and shows virtually no grain. Flesh tones are warm and natural while the costumes and backdrops have rich hues and vibrant tinges. Occasionally some minor color-correction inconsistencies are visible and at one point a scene that I personally felt should be a nighttime shot was color-adjusted to a full daytime setting. I am not familiar enough with the film to know if it used to be a nighttime shot in the original presentation or if this day-for-night shot has always been exceedingly "hot" I must admit.

Blacks are deep and solid, giving the image good visual depth and add a nice dimension to the overall presentation. No edge-enhancement is evident and the presentation is free of compression artifacts."



DVD Movie Guide (Viewer Film Ratings: 4.2857/5 Stars):

http://www.dvdmg.com/elcid.shtml


"El Cid appears in an aspect ratio of approximately 5:1 on this single-sided, double-layered DVD; the image has been enhanced for 16X9 televisions. I found a lot to like in this fine transfer.

Sharpness rarely faltered. While the occasional wide shot showed a smidgen of softness, those examples remained negligible. Instead, the majority of the flick demonstrated solid accuracy and delineation. No issues with jagged edges or shimmering materialized, and I also noticed no edge enhancement.

Source flaws were modest but still became the main reason the DVD fell below �A�-level for its visuals. Throughout the film, I saw the occasional speck or marks. Again, these stayed minor, but I found a few too many for the film to get into that �A� range.

On the other hand, colors excelled. With all sorts of regal garb and lively settings, the hues got the chance to shine, and they did so on a consistent basis. The tones appeared vivid and rich throughout the movie. Blacks also seemed deep and dense, while shadows were clear and smooth. A few �day for night� shots looked a bit thick, but the rest of the low-light scenes were fine. Though not quite up to �A�-level standards, the transfer of El Cid really satisfied. "

baracine

PatrickMcCart

baracine was booted mainly for making insults like posting pictures of rednecks as retorts to quotes.

RAH is a great authority on film. While I know some others who are well versed in film technology, he really does know his stuff. But his point is usually about films not looking correct, while they still look visually appealing. Most DVD enthusiasts want whatever looks best on a screen, but not necessarily the most faithful to the original intended presentation. At the same time, so-called experts rely on irrelevant "reference" material like production photos, prior video transfers (even VHS), or just by their definition of what "light cyan" should look like. Or there's callouts when the actual director or cinematographer supervise a transfer and the fans are the ones to say it's wrong. I'll usually go with whatever actual experts like RAH or the filmmakers say is correct before anyone else.

baracine

For the record, although I always try to entertain, I've never posted a picture of a redneck on the one and only time I was on the HTF (about Peter Pan Platinum Edition). I was expelled for posting a picture of tumbleweeds rolling across the prairies when no one could come up with a single valid counterargument after two days. I also posted screen caps of every DVD version of the film and even rare, original, signed animation cels I found on eBay for reference. And you might also remember that DVD Savant took my side in that debate (see: http://www.dvdtalk.com/dvdsavant/s2242pan.html )

It's just the contrary. RAH has proven time and time again (Peter Pan, Bram Stoker's Dracula and now El Cid) that he absolutely doesn't give a rat's patoot about what the original film looked like or is supposed to look like - as long as it looks pretty on the DVD screen and it makes the bells and whistles on his fabled home-viewing system go pop. I think the present version of El Cid is the absolute closest a SD transfer has ever come to perfection in the last few years as far as respect for original colour values and general quality of presentation are concerned. The more I look at it the more I think it's an astounding transfer. I was amazed by the beauty of the siege of Callahora scene but the coronation scene after that just floored me, and it keeps getting better and better, reaching a level of visual splendour and clarity not seen since the fabled DVD transfer of Ryan's Daughter.

And Patrick, I'm trying to be nice (as always) since you're one of the only ones on the HTF, unless I am mistaken, who has actually stood up to the Grand Poobah by saying that buyers shouldn't cancel their orders just on the basis of his judgement.

You wrote:

... which took real courage on your part, as it might very well have condemned you to exile to Guantanamo Bay, given the level of unidimensionality, ignorance, subservience and sycophantic butt-kissing on that thread.

After all, God forbid anyone should hamper the sales of RAH's official T-shirt...

(TM)

MBoyd

Oh sweet Jesus that's funny

Look I just use Robert Harris' recommendations as a piece of the whole puzzle so to speak. Everyone should do that.

Personally what I find more valuable than anything are just threads like this and opinions of forum members.

HTF hasn't been fun to visit for years. I pop into the HDM forum sometimes, but it can be painful.

Douglas R

That is a breathtaking overstatement of the picture quality of this DVD. Let me make it clear that I consider the transfer to be far better than any previous DVD version from other regions. The sound quality is superb and the extras are first rate. However the picture quality is certainly not as good as it should be. Even Samuel Bronston's son, who is on the commentary track, has commented on the picture quality and has praised Robert Harris's comments. The fact is that unfortunately Weinstein did not go to the extra expense involved in creating a transfer from 70mm. You only have to look at the DVD of Bronston's King of Kings, also filmed in Technirama, to see the difference in picture quality.

dollfins1

ordered the giftset from amazon last night. can't wait to get it!

baracine

I have already acknowledged the truly miraculous quality of the King of Kings transfer. There is always a choice to make about how much to filter out of the overwhelming amount of information that a picture of this quality carries so as not create aliasing and other artifacts. Filters have to be applied. As far as I'm concerned, this doesn't trouble me as much as if they had screwed around with the colours, which they didn't. The only spots I have a quibble with are two successive shots of Sophia Loren (the first as she tells Rodrigo she will learn to hate him, and the second one where she is introduced at court in mourning) where she is at a distance of between 30 to 70 feet of the camera and the expression on her face is not clearly visible.

I'd be very interested in seeing Bronston Jr.'s comments. Don't tease...

PatrickMcCart

RAH didn't say it was worth cancellation, either. Also, he has consistently said that Disney's "refurbishings" look pretty even while not maintaining color timing as seen in their original form. Which is 100% correct. Peter Pan and The Jungle Book look fantastic in their latest incarnations, despite not really going with how they looked in 1953 or 1967. I think PP and Bambi are the best of the 4K Ultra Resolution/DTS Digital Images remasters that Disney has released, even though they clearly aim for a more contemporary look and use artwork as the main basis instead of original 35mm dye-transfer reference prints. New production cels are not any sort of reference material by a long shot. If it didn't go in front of the camera or was around at the production time (like finalized color reference model sheets or written documentation), it's just not reference.

Criterion recently had a posting about their upcoming The Thief of Bagdad DVD. They screened an original 1940 dye-transfer print for reference and will use a film element that will allow them to make it look faithful to the 1940 release. They're also consulting Thelma Schoonmaker (former wife of one of the directors, the late Michael Powell) and Dennis Muren (specifically for advice on the special effects shots). Criterion is not always popular with their decisions to aim for either making films look as faithful as possible or consulting the filmmakers. Jack Cardiff supervised their The Red Shoes transfer, but many objected to the amber/red tones compared to the R2 DVD which "corrects" the image as if it were a defect. Similar complaints have been made over the near-reference quality The Wizard of Oz and Gone with the Wind 4K remasters (both of which have color timing based on original prints). There's not really an excuse for mediocrity except for not wanting to put the effort, time, and money into a project. The technology is there to make films look fantastic, whether they have great elements or less than optimal ones.

But I think a lot of the complainers haven't even seen the prints and go mainly on assumption. I took notes when I saw one of the '98 dye-transfer prints for Oz in 2004 and was surprised when I viewed the '99 DVD again. The colors were more pastel-like and contrast was too light. Amazingly, the '05 DVD ended up looking almost exactly like the dye-transfer except for completely removing the color fringing problems at splices (and other areas) and other minor flaws. But the '99 DVD was still excellent for its time. Even GWTW was pretty good in its first incarnation (despite its '99 re-issue prints being pretty lousy). Now we can get even closer thanks to newer technology. Consider how primitive Disney's early-90s "paintbox" system is compared to the MTI Correct and DTS Digital Images software.

But I think it's important for studios to use proper reference or at least get advice from the filmmakers when possible (which isn't possible for El Cid). So, it may not reflect what it looked like in 1961, but it's great on its own. I didn't stand up to anyone, just really agreed. It's not as good as it should have been. In terms of large-format films, my usual standard for "10" is MGM's Zulu for Technirama (and probably the new 2001: A Space Odyssey for 65mm) while "0" is Fox's Oklahoma! Todd-AO remaster. El Cid would be "8" on my scale. That's entirely without prior knowledge of what the reference quality would be, though.

Also, the only time I've totally disagreed with RAH's comments is on Universal's DVD for Hell's Angels. He mentioned a lot of problems that were totally non-existent on my disc, so I assume he got a bad screener or something. I'm not sure what became of the issue, but I posted a lot of screencaps to show how gorgeous it looked. I think it's unfair to call out anyone as a "shill" or "biased" over criticism, though. Unless I've been poorly informed (nobody's perfect), I won't spin anything related to film or DVD. I don't think RAH has any reason to be a shill.

baracine

The problem with RAH is he has severely impaired vision and he spends more time checking the wires in the back of his screen than he spends in front of it watching the actual film. We still have absolutely no evidence that he saw this DVD (El Cid) to the end.

Carcosa

This seems a bit too reminiscent of the Coppola DRACULA debate.

I was in agreement regarding the general assessment of the disc's visual quality but looking over the series of postings it seems to be a simple set up to ultimately bash Robert Harris.

-sigh-

baracine

On February 2, 2008, William Bronston posted this final message on the thread about his father's career: http://thedvdforums.com/forums/showt...=360578&page=5

I can only assume Bronston did this out of courtesy for RAH and that he hadn't had time to actually read the great man's extremely negative dismissal of the transfer, as he was still busy assessing the wonderful news of the discovery of the missing footage from Fall of the Roman Empire. Either way, all posts on the Bronston thread stopped abruptly after that, as would be expected.

With friends like these... (Exclusive footage of RAH at the DVD premiere of El Cid )

<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/J-o0Dyt2voI&rel=1"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/J-o0Dyt2voI&rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>

Robert Harris

To Mr. Racine:

While your opinions regarding home video releases should be as accepted as anyone's, your comments regarding my views seem to tend toward personal attack.

As I don't believe we have either met or spoken, I'm confused by your words and attitude.

While you're entitled to your opinions, I would request that you restrain yourself from doing a couple of things.

1. Please do not take my comments out of context.

2. Please do not post comments of your own and attribute them to me.

If you're going to quote me, please be kind enough to quote and to attribute my comments in quotes.

That's fair, surely.

You have posted that I have reported in a negative way about the digital screening of El Cid at the Silver.

I have no personal thoughts regarding the screening, as I was not in attendance.

You may have this confused with my comment regarding the apparent optical field anomaly in the 35mm transfer element, as derived from TLA.

I have now had the chance to view both discs, and my viewpoint has not changed.

I wish it were otherwise, as this is a film worth viewing in the highest possible quality. Until such time that it is, I would in no way dissuade anyone from making a purchase.

RAH

baracine

Dear Mr. Harris,

I feel honoured that you have taken the trouble to cross over to our forum to chastise me for my childish pranks. I am sorry if I have offended you and if my attacks against a remote public figure who should always be honoured for his magnificent restoration work on such films as Vertigo should appear to you as personal attacks. Although they were about your opinion, they were not addressed to you directly, since you were not a member of the present forum until today.

If it's any consolation to you, I assure you I will never feel free to express myself candidly in dvdtalk again and will always imagine Home Theater Forum has spies everywhere.

That is correct. You only quoted, without comment, a report from someone who was there. The inference that the projection problems at the AFI Silver Theater somehow confirmed your opinion on the faulty DVD transfer was entirely mine and in keeping with my disagreement with the fact that this transfer may be faulty to begin with. I made what's called a "Jesuistic" argument and I deserve to be corrected on it.

I am glad that your negative first impressions of the transfer have not kept you from seeing the DVD to the end. I guess I am more fortunate than most in not seeing a problem in this transfer to begin with and being able to enjoy this DVD time and time again without any such misgivings. Ignorance truly is bliss.

I apologize once again for my shortcomings.

Carcosa

Welcome to our forums Mr Robert Harris....we appreciate you stopping by. Since I don't really frequent any other forum than this, I do hope you will post here more often as I am interested in the comments of one who is active as a professional in the film restoration field.

Baracine is a regular poster here and is a man of strong opinions...and one whose postings are generally interesting to me. He certainly has ventured off into left field a couple of times IMHO. He has taken particular issue with YOUR opinions and has, again IMHO, made the some widely speculative statements regarding your motivations and some pretty pointed attacks on your opinions. I'm a bit at a loss for this animosity but its quite apparent. Just read thru some of the DRACULA forum threads back in the archives and it will be hard to miss.

This thread has been inactive for a few days now, I suspect primarily because most of the regulars saw the direction it was going and opted out of the repeat of the same Bram Stoker DRACULA discussion from last year.

I suspect it was a mistake for you to respond. It will simply fuel the fire that had pretty much nowhere to go.

Anyway, welcome and I look forward to future postings from you.

The Valeyard

only a dim bulb who believe in censorship would try to keep peoples from responding about things such as fires and america and moms apple pie! You sir, keep the corporate people in their cushy jobs with censorship!

This is common knowledge.