Which King Kong?
Mark Edmonds
I am sure there is no question here but any comments are welcome.
Is the best version of KK the Criterion CAV version or is the 60th
Anniversary version worth getting?
Are any of the "strong" cut scenes available on laser as well?
Thanks,
--
Mark Edmonds
Ned Snell
I have the Criterion CLV, which is pretty good, although the commentary is
not what it could be, and even wrong, in places.
Though I have not seen it, I have read that the 60th anniversary version is
better, because the restored scenes are from a 35mm negative (rather than
the 16mm used in the Criterion).
The restored scenes are the same in both versions. I don't know what you
mean by "strong" but the restored scenes are mostly the big Kong head
chomping on people, and also Kong undressing Fay.
Mark Edmonds <mm...@mmje.demon.co.uk> wrote in article
<+vqi1BAh...@mmje.demon.co.uk>...
Mark Edmonds
In article <01bc1cdb$4a7f3f00$af9bf0cd@!nsnell>, Ned Snell
<nsn...@cul.com> writes
Ned,
Thanks for the info. The "strong" scenes I was referring to I think come
in the sequence when Kong goes on the rampage through the indian
village. I saw a couple of clips in a documentary once including a close
up of Kong stomping and grinding on a native. It did seem quite gruesome
for 1933! If these scenes are in both the Criterion and 60th anniv
versions then it boils down to whether having a CAV disc is better than
having one sourced from a 35mm neg.
If anyone can help tidy up these loose ends the please do so! This is
going to be my next disc and I really need to make a well informed
purchase given the options available.
Many thanks,
--
Mark Edmonds
Michael J Wall
Ginkoojin wrote:
>
> Well, I've owned both of those discs, and although the 60th anniversary
> version is pretty good (without the jarring differences in quality that
> the Criterion has, regarding the previously deleted footage), I feel the
> definitive version of the movie is the Image Entertainment King Kong/Son
> of Kong double-LD set that came out a few years ago (and may now be
> out-of-print!).... by comparison, the 60th anniversary version is a
> little dark. But, if it's the only only alternative to the Criterion that
> you have, I'd say don't let that small difference stop you from picking it
> up.
Hello Group,
I have the CAV Criterian version and the King Kong/Son of Kong dual
disc. Hands down winner is the King Kong/Son of Kong version. I saw
things in that version that I never saw in King Kong before. It is
Gorgeous!!!! I heard that Turner found a real clean copy of the movie
in Europe or something and remastered it from that. I think someone
told me the Criterian version was made from numerous copys. Although
the Criterian copy is good, it doesn't hold a candle to the dual disc
set.
Mike
Ginkoojin
Brian Hendrickson
I have to agree. I'm lucky enough to own both the Criterion CAV version
and the Kong/Son Of Kong double feature. If you can afford it, (or can
find them in the cut out bin,) get the Criterion for the Supplimentary
section and the Image Disc for the film itself. (Besides, as far as I
know that's the only way to get Son Of Kong on laser)
Brian
Nikita Edenhofer
Hallo King Kong Fans
I have three versions of King Kong. The Criterion CAV, the colorised LD
from Image and the german PAL version. The german Pal-Version is the best
version in Picture and Audio.
Nik
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nikita Edenhofer Tel. : 0241 / 8089421
Klinik fuer Nuklearmedizin Fax : 0241 / 8888242
Pauwelsstrasse 30 e-mail : ne...@nuk-gate.nukmed.rwth-aachen.de
52057 Aachen
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cableditor
Sorry for being so late.
I too have both the 60th anniversary and Criterion CAV versions. The
Turner version has subtler edits between the restored scenes (most notable
in the sound) but the best thing about the Criterion (apart from being
able to freeze frame) is that it is framed better (underscanned?
overscanned?...whatever) so that there is more picture information on all
four sides. The Turner version might have a cleaner picture, but I find
myself preferring the Criterion nonetheless.
-- Mickey
GEMZpro
I have both these versions plus the colorized, which I find interesting.
They did a pretty good job on this one!!
dav...@earthlink.net
GEMZpro wrote:
>
> I have both these versions plus the colorized, which I find interesting.
> They did a pretty good job on this one!!
I hope you're not referring to the colorized version. I am not a total
purist when it comes to colorization...for example, I thought that MARCH
OF THE WOODEN SOLDIERS was done pretty well, and OK, if they want to
colorize the old B&W "Gilligan's Island" episodes, that's fine. But the
KING KONG colorization was a tragedy...they took those beautiful glass
paintings in the jungle and shaded them all the same ugly shade of green
with no sense for mood or variation....it was as if some child had come
along with one crayon and colored the whole thing. This one should not
have been vandalized to begin with, but since the inevitable had to
happen, it's too bad it couldn't have been done by someone with a small
degree of artistic taste or talent.
Thank goodness that this "progress" in computer technology seems to be
disappearing.
"All you can take with you is that
which you have given away."
- IT'S A WONDERFUL LIFE