1st report on DVD...
Burbank74
by the press release....I took a gander at the new DVD....
The menus are very cute and clever - utlizing original art, graphics, footage,
stills and music. After the company logos there is an opening montage of the
boys with the opening music from THE MUSIC BOX playing over it, which frankly
brought tears to my eyes. When you go to start one of the films from the menu,
you are treated to a surprise motion graphic from the film. But keep your
finger on the volume control....there is a bit of a disparity between the
volume level on the menus and the actual films.
Okay....now for the bad news....I scanned through SONS OF THE DESERT. I was
quite happy and thrilled until I came to a point (beginning with the name tags
shown on the doors of there respective dwellings) that there is recreated Roach
music (clearly not the Beau Hunks) layed in as background. This generally seems
to be whenever there is silence or minimal dialogue going on. I sampled a few
more sections - and yes - it's over the wax eating scene and so on....there are
also some VERY clunky fade down and ups throughout....presumably for commercial
breaks for television.
From the brief sampling I did of the other films, they appear to be untampered
with for the most part (although further examination may prove otherwise.) All
have original opening titles except for COUNTY HOSPITAL which has Film Classics
reissue titles (surprising, since they broadcast it with original titles on AMC
all those years ago.) Also, the "Robert Halmi Inc." presents logo still appears
at the head of ANOTHER FINE MESS, but none of the others.
It would be really swell if someone passionate and knowledgeable was allowed to
assist in spot checking these for accuracy, completeness, best quality, etc.
before they go out on DVD.....(Randy?) I for one would gladly do it in a
heartbeat if allowed. For example...I'd love to make sure that they correct the
opening gag title sequence error at the begining of THE CHIMP (or get them to
replace this errored Film Classics opening with the original one.) How can we
get this kind of stuff accomplished without stepping on any toes or appearing
ungrateful? Any ideas?
Bill Coleman
there were any variant audio tracks on the Sons of the Desert?
Bill Coleman
-------------------
"Burbank74" <burb...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20030809135054...@mb-m01.aol.com...
Tommie Hicks, Jr.
so called LOST FILMS OF LAUREL AND HARDY series.
Tommie Hicks
Laughing Gravy
> assist in spot checking these for accuracy, completeness, best quality, etc.
> before they go out on DVD.....(Randy?) I for one would gladly do it in a
> heartbeat if allowed.
Goo-ooo-ooo-oood luck. I suggested the same thing to Artisan, and they
told me point-blank that they weren't interested in doing anything
that wasn't in-house.
greg o r y
was
> quite happy and thrilled until I came to a point (beginning with the name
tags
> shown on the doors of there respective dwellings) that there is recreated
Roach
> music (clearly not the Beau Hunks) layed in as background.
AGGGGGGGGGGHHHH!
WHY DO THESE PEOPLE EXIST? STOP TAMPERING!!! BAAAD HALLMARK!
BAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAD!!! HEY WHY NOT GET JIM CAREY TO OVERDUB THEIR VOICES WHILE
YOU'RE AT IT FOOLS!!!
OK--sorry about that.
> All
> have original opening titles except for COUNTY HOSPITAL which has Film
Classics
> reissue titles (surprising, since they broadcast it with original titles
on AMC
> all those years ago.)
So they're probably the same prints we had on video 15 yrs ago ala Nostalgia
Family Video? I hope someone gets a chance to compare these Hallmark DVDs
with the already-available European ones. Something tells me I'll soon be
kicking in money for a multi-region player. Five years waiting for this
series and they can't even get original prints--prints that have already
aired on AMC?
Jimmy Finlayson is squinting nastily somewhere.
One more bit of advice in case someone from Artisan/Hallmark actually lurks
here (as if they'd actually take five minutes to consult a group of fans):
HEY!!! PSSSST!!! SELL THE FILMS TO KINO--OR CRITERION--OR FREAKIN' GOODTIMES
VIDEO YOU INCOMPETENT A$$(*&(&(* !!!
OK--sorry about that...again.
Greg
Ike Man
I think at this point I have given up all hope of any corporate entity
ever doing right by these cinematic treasures, and instead am now
betting my money on the off chance that someone will successfully
develop a time machine that will allow me to view these films as they
were originally intended to be seen: in a 1930's movie house with
monochromic video and monophonic audio through megaphonic speakers.
Yair Solan
> > The menus are very cute and clever - utlizing original art, graphics, footage,
> stills and music. After the company logos there is an opening montage of the
> boys with the opening music from THE MUSIC BOX playing over it, which frankly
> brought tears to my eyes. When you go to start one of the films from the menu,
> you are treated to a surprise motion graphic from the film. But keep your
> finger on the volume control....there is a bit of a disparity between the
> volume level on the menus and the actual films.
It is kind of discouraging to hear about that music "filler". How is
the image quality of Sons of the Desert? From what I've read, it
sounds like it is markedly inferior to the prints used for the shorts.
And how are the DVD "extras"? Anything to get excited about?
As far as what I think Vol. 2 will contain (if there really will be a
Vol. 2), I HOPE it will consist of: Way Out West, Helpmates, Blotto,
Perfect Day, and Chase's The Pip From Pittsburgh. Something along
those lines. Perhaps this is wishful thinking.
Yair Solan
JVBGUY
>Just after reporting about the hopeful good news about future volumes
>indicated
>by the press release....I took a gander at the new DVD....
>
Is the DVD out already, or did you have access to a pre-release copy?
John B.
Laurel and Hardy Central (co-founder)
http://laurelandhardycentral.com
"I prefer Boysenberry more than any ordinary jam.
I'm a Citizens for Boysenberry Jam fan."
--- Paul Simon
JVBGUY
>It is kind of discouraging to hear about that music "filler". How is
>the image quality of Sons of the Desert? From what I've read, it
>sounds like it is markedly inferior to the prints used for the shorts.
>
>And how are the DVD "extras"? Anything to get excited about?
>
>As far as what I think Vol. 2 will contain (if there really will be a
>Vol. 2), I HOPE it will consist of: Way Out West, Helpmates, Blotto,
>Perfect Day, and Chase's The Pip From Pittsburgh. Something along
>those lines. Perhaps this is wishful thinking.
>
>Yair Solan
Yair, is that really you? Gee, you look swell. If I hadn't seen ya, I
wouldn't have believed ya!
Welcome back to the Internet!
Burbank74
The latter.
Bobster123
Fade ins/outs added for where there were supposedly commercial breaks.
Film Classics prints used as the source.
Looks like I have a good excuse for buying a multi-regional DVD player now. :)
Bobster123
>Is the DVD out already, or did you have access to a pre-release copy?
>
It gets released next Tuesday. You can pre-order it from deepdiscountdvd.com
for $10.63 and free shipping. Someone told me they pre-ordered the L&H
KochVision box set and it arrived the day it was released.
Tommie Hicks, Jr.
> I think at this point I have given up all hope of any corporate entity
> ever doing right by these cinematic treasures, and instead am now
> betting my money on the off chance that someone will successfully
> develop a time machine that will allow me to view these films as they
> were originally intended to be seen: in a 1930's movie house with
> monochromic video and monophonic audio through megaphonic speakers.
Thank God for my Blackhawk prints. It really frosts my ass that 25
years later they are still the best versions, unoriginal titles,
slugs, and all.
Tommie Hicks
gsstar83
print used in the syndicated "Laurel and Hardy show" broadcast in the
mid-1980's. These prints were usually nice quality from original
prints and negatives but often with recreated Roach music inserted
over the films that originally had no music. These same prints and the
show itself were later colorized. Lets hope these prints are not
edited as often the case was with the TV show.
Ike Man
Kinda makes you wonder about the term "digitally remastered", doesn't
it? I mean, that could mean just about anything, couldn't it? A film
or video "mastered" from analog to a "digital" medium could be called
"digitally remastered" just by virtue of the process even though the
term is understood to mean something else.
I fear this has joined the ranks of other meaningless phrases, like:
o By popular demand
o Satisfaction guaranteed
o Limited edition (for a limited time only)
o Bonus (materials, disc, etc.)
o Complete Collection
o Best of
o ...
Bobster123
>As far as what I think Vol. 2 will contain (if there really will be a
>Vol. 2), I HOPE it will consist of: Way Out West, Helpmates, Blotto,
>Perfect Day, and Chase's The Pip From Pittsburgh.
At least there wouldn't be any "filler" music in these, as they already have
it.
Laughing Gravy
> Thank God for my Blackhawk prints. It really frosts my ass that 25
> years later they are still the best versions, unoriginal titles,
> slugs, and all.
>
> Tommie Hicks
Do you really think these are better than the restored German DVD versions?
greg o r y
versions?
I'm still new around here (although I did post a few times several years
ago). Who here actually owns the German DVDs? Does anyone know the source of
the prints they used? Is there a L&H website somewhere that reviews them or
compares them to older VHS prints?
I'd rather have Hallmark use the Blackhawk stuff than the transfers that
were used for the 80's TV series (they seemed slightly better image-wise but
were full of quick fades, edits and "updated" music if I recall). I was
hoping that Hallmark would spend the time to do an extensive overhaul of the
entire Roach talkie catalog. I guess they see very little profit from this
venture?
-greg-
Artvan
> times several years ago). Who here actually owns the
> German DVDs?
The KirchGroup until recently owned the films but went bankrupt
earlier this year. The owners of the European rights are now anyone's
guess. Luckily the home video riights were sub-leased to Kinowelt in
Germany who, by default, is now the primary worldwide source for L&H
DVDs. A series of Dutch/Belgium DVDs will be released soon by
Universal, the primary distributors for the rest of Europe.
> Does anyone know the source of the prints they
> used? Is there a L&H website somewhere that reviews
> them or compares them to older VHS prints?
This does not completely answer your question but you can at least see
a list of all the German DVDs that are currently available at
"http://www.blotto.nl". There are no reviews. You have to go on faith
and the word of people that post frequently in this group that the
quality is the best you can attain.
> I'd rather have Hallmark use the Blackhawk stuff than
> the transfers that were used for the 80's TV series
I wouldn't. The prints on the L&H syndicated series come from much
improved souce material. The problem with the syndicated Laurel and
Hardy show was the attempt to modernize L&H with Ronnie Hazelhurst's
music and later colorization. This same superior source material was
later used on AMC sans music, colorization and fades for commercials.
I seem to recall reading somewhere (maybe the Kirchgroup website?)
that the source for the higher quality material now used by Kinowelt
and previously used on the syndicated Laurel and Hardy Show and AMC
were first generation studio work prints struck from the original
negatives found in the Roach Studio archives.
Matt Barry
lol. You are kidding right? Fade in and fade outs for commercials on a
DVD? Like they'd ever show that movie on TV anyways.
Well, if this is serious, I certainly won't be buying this. Obviously
this is an intentional slap in the face to the Laurel and Hardy fans,
if they went out of their way to ruin these films and *then* release
them. Geez, what an expensive waste. I guess if (for PR reasons) they
can't come right out and say to our faces that they don't care about
these films or the fans who would support a dignified DVD release,
this is the next best thing to that.
Matt
Ken Doyle
Might as well wait for the Digital Turbo Widescreen edition. ;-)
Ken D.
"Ike Man" <nob...@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:vbedjvssnq99j82vs...@4ax.com...
Ken Doyle
"Tommie Hicks, Jr." wrote:
> Thank God for my Blackhawk prints. It really frosts my ass that 25
> years later they are still the best versions, unoriginal titles,
> slugs, and all.
At least it looks like the DVD releases won't hurt the value of our 16mm
prints.
Ken D.
RFCSAC627N
Or the cost! ($10 vs. $200 plus)
Bobster123
Actually, $10 vs $1500, considering there's a feature, two three-reelers, and
two two-reelers involved. :)
Michael Agee
If anyone is interested, www.halroachstudios.com is going live today.
We will be posting all of the extant HRS contracts, agreements, memos,
etc. as we can, (hopefully) each tied to the film in question.
Since I originally transferred the material in the "new" L&H DVD
(almost TWENTY YEARS AGO--all analogue, absolutely NOT digital; the
technology simply didn't exist back then), it occurred to Rob Lewis
that I had some standing to comment on what I have seen. I will
discuss same after I watch it tomorrow--if anyone wants me to.
(Frankly, it's very hard for me to watch it. Not just because I see
every error I made in the exhaustion of not sleeping for sixteen weeks
to meet their timetable so long ago, but in the main because I know
the nitrate is sitting there in the old Technicolor building
decomposing, and a new high-def transfer could be done with ease. It
is amazing to me that we could re-do all the silents save the lost
"Hats Off"--with no money and, in most cases no material (it took
years to get what we got away from Hallmark despite a 1990 Federal
Court Order)--and they can't re-do a single L&H talkie (forget Charley
Chase--none of us will live long enough to see one of those issued,
other than "On The Wrong Trek") with today's technology from this
brilliant original material. We've practically gone broke doing
preservation and Hallmark bought RHI a few years ago for $330 million
dollars and they have so much money, they apparently don't even care
about what they bought.
And people wonder why the world is broken.
Please understand--all the Talkie masters issued throughout the world
came from those camera negative transfers I did from 1984-86. They
did NOT have music added and did NOT have commercial blacks. (The
former was done by one Rob Word in 1987 and was the subject of a
subsequent lawsuit, and the latter in the production of the syndicated
"Laurel and Hardy Show"--which edited my masters to make room for a
bunch of extraneous matter.) They have apparently lost the original
masters. (During the 1990 bankruptcy, a low-level employee
"liberated" over $500,000 worth of one inch masters from the lab, sent
them for recycling--and pocketed a lousy five grand for having
committed this grevious sin. I went to the Court to complain; nobody
cared.) Thankfully, a set of the original finished masters went to
Munich which the Germans have widely issued. (Unfortunately, I fear
all of my work tapes--several hundred original camera masters--the
best versions--, were "recycled".)
I transferred the "Topper" and "Topper Returns" "digital" masters they
just put out on DVD back in December of 1984--almost TWENTY years ago.
They are totally flat since they were intended for Colorization. I
did not use the camera negatives because they were in such a big hurry
for them and the Library of Congress could only get out the "Lavender"
pseudo fine grains in a hurry.
The attitude of contempt and indifference exhibited against this
incredible body of work--and I refer to the entire Hal Roach
Library--is the main reason why I was the only holder of copyrights
who filed a brief with the Supreme Court last year supporting the
overturning and cancelling of the egregious twenty year extension of
copyright purchased by the MPAA from the Congress in 1998--because,
unlike Trade Mark, there is no requirement that a copyright actually
be "used". (I.E.; If Coca Cola stopped using that trademark, in five
years it would be in the public domain and anyone could exploit it.
Copyright should be the same--use it, or lose it.) Our tax money is
used to send the Feds out to stop "piracy" of Charley Chase films,
while the perpetual copyright holder refuses to make ANY of them
available and won't even let those panting to buy obtain a copy. It's
just plain wrong.
(Anyone interested in reading the copyright briefs can find them by
searching "eldred v ashcroft", going to the commonlaw site link, and
clicking on the Supreme Court briefs section. I said it all there--no
reason to bore you with it here.)
(I would just add this thought in respone to the earlier postings:
The United States Supreme Court did bring themselves to make one
ruling in the public interest at the end of the last term--they ruled
against Nike Shoes in finding that "commercial" speech--the kind of
speech that entices buyers to buy, or potential supporters to
support--was NOT covered by the First Amendment. It is NOT "Free
Speech". It is fraud. And Nike, or any company that misleads with
commercial speech is liable to suit--class action suit.
("Digital" twenty year old analogue masters, anyone??)
Best to all of you. Life is sometimes full of tragedy. This is one
of those times.
Keep the faith.
Michael Agee
HRS
C 2003 Michael Agee
James Neibaur
halroac...@aol.com wrote on 8/20/03 2:19 AM:
> Best to all of you. Life is sometimes full of tragedy. This is one
> of those times.
Thanks for your interesting post, Mike. It really is a shame that good
material exists on so many great Roach films, and the current holder does
not care enough to make them available.
JN
StanInDrag
Good post Mike. Thanks. Such a sad state of affairs. Luckily we have
your Laurel and Hardy silent restorations and the Kirchgroup/Kinowelt
DVD's.
--Tony
Michael Agee
James--At some point (as our website develops), I intend to post the
entire hundred or so pages of computer print-out received from the
Library of Congress by my office in 1984 which listed every single
element they had on hand on the Roach Library. You can then see the
really incredible quantity of material--redundant to the super max--on
both TOPPER and TOPPER RETURNS, as well as the last L&H features (for
example, camera neg on SAPS AT SEA--which I used--and both the "long
European and "Streamliner" versions of CHUMP AT OXFORD, which I also
transferred and edited). RHI unexplainedly forced the Library to
disgorge ALL of these elements almost ten years ago, and--where, in
government care, they were each maintained and wound from head-to-toe
by the LOC staff every six months--they now sit in darkness, unwanted,
untouched by human hands, with no maintenance short of air
conditioning--and God-knows how they have survived (this negligance
quickly exacerbates decomposition). But on the TOPPER films, I
guarantee you excellent material--most likely the original camera
negatives--is extant, and could have been transferred for a just a
lousy few thousand dollars. I sure as hell would have used them if I
had been given the golden opportunity to give these classic comedies
back to the fans via DVD. (Come to think of it, on TOPPER RETURNS, I
did just that! Try comparing our digital DVD to their flat, eroded
"Digital" release. There's no comparison.)
One bright note--I just watched last night the test pressing on ROAD
SHOW, a very funny Hal Roach comedy feature from 1941, which is very
likely the last film the Old Man ever directed (he was almost fifty
when it came out which was considered "old" in 1941--but little did he
know his journey was only half done! This DVD should be out at the
end of the year. Watch at www.image-entertainment.com or our website
at www.halroachstudios.com for later precise info as to when it
actually becomes available. I know it's small consolation, but it's
SOMETHING. We also want to release a handful of the "Streamliners", as
well as the famous BBC Hal Roach Documentary from several years ago,
all as "bonus" discs in what is hoped to be the "final" set of our L&H
DVD's, which will add scenes and fix everything (omissions and
compromises) that has been driving me nuts about my previous
work--from main titles to the aforementioned missing shots here and
there--some of which are "missing" as well from the M-G-M cutting
continuities--which we also will be posting for your perusal. Our
policy is openness and "truth" and guarding YOUR right to know,
because this is not "private company business" after over sixty years;
it's all part of our shared national heritage and I believe we deserve
equal access to it.)
Best wishes to all of you.
Sincerely,
Michael Agee
HRS
James Neibaur
halroac...@aol.com wrote on 8/20/03 12:51 PM:
> James--At some point (as our website develops), I intend to post the
> entire hundred or so pages of computer print-out received from the
> Library of Congress by my office in 1984 which listed every single
> element they had on hand on the Roach Library. You can then see the
> really incredible quantity of material--redundant to the super max--on
> both TOPPER and TOPPER RETURNS, as well as the last L&H features (for
> example, camera neg on SAPS AT SEA--which I used--and both the "long
> European and "Streamliner" versions of CHUMP AT OXFORD, which I also
> transferred and edited). RHI unexplainedly forced the Library to
> disgorge ALL of these elements almost ten years ago, and--where, in
> government care, they were each maintained and wound from head-to-toe
> by the LOC staff every six months--they now sit in darkness, unwanted,
> untouched by human hands, with no maintenance short of air
> conditioning--and God-knows how they have survived (this negligance
> quickly exacerbates decomposition).
I will be most interested in the print-out as would the others in this
newsgroup. As heartening it is to know that good 35mm masters exist on the
Roach films, it is heartbreaking to realize they are being overlooked or
dismissed as insignificant by the current copyright holders.
Is there anything any of us can do, even at a smaller level?
JN
Steven Rodman
What about as a group? A "Laurel and Hardy Preservation Society?" Where is
SOTD in all this?
Would Criterion be interested in producing some limited edition remastered
DVD's under special license?
There must be a way -- either through Hallmark or around them -- to save
this material. Has anyone obtained the KirschGroup Masters? What would
something like that cost? Is Bill Gates a fan of the Boys?
I'd sign-up and contribute today if I thought we had a remote chance.
Steve Rodman
greg o r y
> SOTD in all this?
No kidding. But are we not re-enforcing Hallmark's shoddiness by purchasing
their DVDs? How can they justify spending the SLIGHTEST bit of money on the
films if they know we'll line up and buy anything they decide to crank out?
If Agee's prints from the mid-80s existed somewhere without the overdubbed
music and the commercial fades, and if Hallmark used THOSE--well then
honestly I'd be willing to settle for it. BUT--if Hallmark actually bothered
to do new digital transfers from 35-mm stock, then I'd vow to buy their
crappy greeting cards each and every day of the year for the rest of my
life.
And yes--I just left the door wide open for someone to throw out a quote
from "The Fixer Uppers".
-Greg-
Steve
that the R2 german PAL L&H discs are noticeably better than these new
R1 discs? will the danish upcoming universal discs be any different
than these two?
I love L&H. really want the best transfers possible.
would appreciate whatever advice you can give me.
thanks..
Artvan
> people saying that the R2 german PAL L&H discs are
> noticeably better than these new R1 discs?
The Hallmark releases R1 are not terrible. The European R2 releases
are better.
> I love L&H. really want the best transfers possible.
The European corporation (KirchGroup) that held the European rights to
the Hal Roach library went bankrupt earlier this year. Before that
happened, they took the time and effort to duplicate every nitrate
35mm negative and positive film element they could locate in US and
foreign archives and have done an admirable job of restoration.
Luckily for fans of "the boys" Kinowelt (Germany) and Universal
Benelux (the rest of Europe and Australia) leased the home video
rights pre-bankruptcy. By the end of 2003 all of the Laurel and Hardy
talkies will be out on DVD in Germany.
> will the danish upcoming universal discs be any
> different than these two?
Universal Benelux (the company that distributes to the rest of
Europe), tend to put a lot of useless extras on their DVDs. Sons of
the Desert has both the B&W version and the blurry colourized version.
Because they're cramming two features on one disk, the quality goes
down for everything. All four of Universal's DVDs get their share of
"BONUS" colourized films. Otherwise the B&W films use the same high
quality KirchGroup video masters.
Universal has a bit of catching up to do. Kinowelt in three years has
21 DVDs out (there will be 25 at the end of the year). In the same 3
year period, Univeral Benelux has only 4. If you can't wait--get the
German stuff.
Steve
p.s. just heard of reg 0 pal films from Stonevision UK - looks like
the British arm of Fox Studios... Anyone heard of these discs?
thanks!
Steve
post.. looks like the German DVDs are the way to go.
that being said, I am stepping back and taking another view of the
Hallmark disc.
1) let's face it, team. the average American does not have region
free players and have never heard of these German discs, and wouldn't
buy them from a non-english site anyhow...
2) the Average person would see this (Hallmark) disc and go "hey! i
remember seeing these on TV when I was young... only $11? why not?"..
and you know what they will see - the versions of this movies that
they saw on TV!
3) Without seeing better prints, these prints are not bad. only
slightly better than VHS, mind you - but still very watchable and - in
some cases - the picture is pretty good, actually. In other words,
without having anything to compare to I would rate this disc as a B-
(C+ if you are a real fuss budget) - but for old films a lot of people
don't expect more.
4) FOR THE MONEY, this is not a bad deal. Seriously, at least
Hallmark didn't charge $29.95 for this dics!! I saw some posts where
people wanted Criterion to do these. Don't make me laugh. Have you
seen their W.C. Fields discs? The bank dick was on par with the
Hallmark disc (but was more expensive and without any supplements!),
and their "6 classic W.C. Field shorts" had segments that were
actually worse than the Madacy version! and the liner notes were
written by a sports writer who admitted that he had not seen a lot of
W.C. Fields films, but feel "he is up there with Jerry
Seinfield".!!!!! So at least Hallmark didn't try to charge an arm
and a leg for this......and those other discs didn't have ANY
supplements! at least the Hallmark dics had SOMETHING! I really
think you have look at what is asked for a disc - and for $11 it
really isn't that bad.
Now before I am flamed to death, yes I know that DVD technology lends
itself to an INFINITELY superior transfer. But this wouldn't be the
only set of classics given mediocre treatment. Even Columbia's This
Girl Friday had a mediocre transfer - and don't even get me started on
Criterion's The Lady Eve, which to me was extremely disappointing..
I believe that nothing short of restoration work will change output
from Hallmark, and restoration ain't cheap. only those companies with
deep pockets and/or a deep love for the film would do this. And, as
stated numerous times before, I do not see a deep love for these films
from Hallmark. Even if we all poured our hearts on in letters to
them, do you really think they would do a major restoration? and if
they did, what kind of person do you think they would hire to do this
and what kind of job would they do?
Perhaps I am being too cyncial and pessimistic, but after reading
everything I am no longer hopeful that L&H films will ever be given
their proper treatment in the US. In fact, I am seeing a disturbring
trend where NO sound comedy classics are really being given their
proper respects. Heck, Bringing up Baby is not even out on DVD! W.C>
fields is poorly represented, and what is out there is mediocre at
best. Marx Brothers had luckluster discs put out by Image, and they
are now out of print with no discussion of them being reprinted! Even
the three stooges disc have gotten some pretty rotten reviews for
image quality. And if it wasn't for the intervention of the Chaplin
estate, i doubt his films would have looked this good. And where is
the Thin Man Series!! only #1 out by this time??? What is it about
classic comedies from the 30's and 40's that causes this situation?
why can companies like Image and Synpase produce a great transfer of
films like "The Hideous Sun Demon" but I can't get a great transfer of
"Sons of the Desert" or "It's a Gift"? Something is seriously wrong
here and with the influx of budget eurotrash and grade-b movies from
the 50's don't tell me it is just becuase the market isn't out there.
Have you seen Synapse's transfer of "The Head that Wouldn't die?" It
is so sharp and clear it makes me want to cry... and there is huge
market for this film??...
I wish I could help solve this problem but I just don't know what it
is or how to fix it.
I will write a letter to Hallmark, but in the meantime will save up my
money to buy the German discs....
thanks for letting me get this off my chest.
Steve
RFCSAC627N
>why can companies like Image and Synpase produce a great transfer of
>films like "The Hideous Sun Demon" but I can't get a great transfer of
>"Sons of the Desert" or "It's a Gift"?
Probably because there is still camera negative on DEMON and there isn't on
SONS, produced 25 years earlier.
Richard Carnahan
Steve
Richard,
Good point... then let me refer to a more meaningful example.. why
does Image's L&H Silents look so great while the Marx Brothers were so
mediocre? etc... my point is that the age of the film is really not
the issue. maybe the age of the film stock?
RFCSAC627N
>> >why can companies like Image and Synpase produce a great transfer of
>> >films like "The Hideous Sun Demon" but I can't get a great transfer of
>> >"Sons of the Desert" or "It's a Gift"?
>>
>> Probably because there is still camera negative on DEMON and there isn't
>on
>> SONS, produced 25 years earlier.
>>
>> Richard Carnahan
>
>Richard,
>Good point... then let me refer to a more meaningful example.. why
>does Image's L&H Silents look so great while the Marx Brothers were so
>mediocre? etc... my point is that the age of the film is really not
>the issue. maybe the age of the film stock?
>
Age of film stock isn't necessarily an issue. Nitrate prints from the teens
and twenties have been used for beautiful video transfers. But the age of the
transfer is important, as the Hallmark Laurel & Hardy DVD shows. And I
believe the Marx Brothers DVDs from Image used the old laserdisc transfers.
Ulrich Ruedel
"Steve" <sbe...@bigfoot.com> wrote
> Heck, Bringing up Baby is not even out on DVD!
Sure it is!
In Germany and France :)
Don't conclude that anything Kinowelt ever did is as great as the LHs
though-- BABY ("Leoparden küsst man nicht") is one of their first releases,
an old German TV transfer with remade titles, permanently subtitled scenes
filled in from another version, etc. Still, even back then in the early ages
of R2 DVD they tried their best and threw in an old German TV Hawks
interview for good measure.
I haven't seen the French release, but that said, it's in a series of box
sets that has great versions of KANE and SUSPICION.
Uli
Laughing Gravy
I have the French BRINGING UP BABY boxed set, and it's beautiful. The
film still has a few dings in it, but it looks great overall and has
plenty of extras -- in English!