Charade (1963)

[Bluyoda]

I watched "Charade" last night.

The first shot really scared the heck out of me, but then it luckily got better, but there was one problem that popped up from time to time that saddened me a little.

It's an issue also spotted by the reviewer at highdefdigest.com:

There seems to be some damage to the material used, as right around the 34:23 mark, the picture can temporarily darken and move slightly on screen, almost like it were being compressed briefly, for a few frames. This error only appears in this one scene, one shot that was used interspersed with a few cut-aways, but it is distracting nonetheless.

I noticed several times during the film, not just once, and it almost looks like compression artifacts you normally find on VCDs.

I just checked and at 34:23 it seems more like a print issue.

I spotted it at least 3 times:

1. At 19:25 mark
2. The one at 59:32 is the longest and most distracting

to lazy to find the third one.

Wasn't this the BD that was taken off Amazon.com for a while due to an error????
(I guess that was "Days of Heaven" which I had zero issues
with.)
Please shed light on this if you can.

[Arkadin]

is this the same thread as the one I saw yesterday or the day before?
I'm confused because I know I saw this question posed.
is this a duplicate thread?
what's the deal?

[s00perd00per]

I saw the one highdef digest was referring to, which seems to be a problem with the film itself. The other ones you mentioned, I couldn't find anything wrong with my copy.

Edit: In the 59 minute mark, are you talking about the sort of blue flickering spots?

[KrugStillo]

Film has a tendancy to fade over time and that is probably what you are seeing. They most likely fixed it as good as they could without overdoing it. Sometimes older films will fade in and out and achieve the effect that you are experiencing. Unfortunately we may notice this with more films as time goes on because there is only so much a film can be digitally manipulated.

[pro-bassoonist]

There are no errors with the BD.

There are various color pulsations and a couple of stronger warps that obviously could not be effectively addressed, but these are inherited limitations.

Pro-B

[Bluyoda]

Originally Posted by Arkadin

is this the same thread as the one I saw yesterday or the day before?
I'm confused because I know I saw this question posed.
is this a duplicate thread?
what's the deal?

I had posted it in the Criterion thread without much response, so I decided to create a thread.

Originally Posted by s00perd00per

I saw the one highdef digest was referring to, which seems to be a problem with the film itself. The other ones you mentioned, I couldn't find anything wrong with my copy.

Edit: In the 59 minute mark, are you talking about the sort of blue flickering spots?

Yeah, that's it.

Did you also see the error at 19:..?

Look at her red coat at said time when she walks to the left of the screen.


Thanks for your replies, guys!
I appreciate it.

I was just worried that I might have a defective copy, because some of the issues do not appear to be due to the aged source elements.

[s00perd00per]

Originally Posted by Bluyoda

I had posted it in the Criterion thread without much response, so I decided to create a thread.



Yeah, that's it.

Did you also see the error at 19:..?

Look at her red coat at said time when she walks to the left of the screen.


Thanks for your replies, guys!
I appreciate it.

I was just worried that I might have a defective copy, because some of the issues do not appear to be due to the aged source elements.

I probably just didn't notice it. But like Pro-B said, they seem to be inherent to the material so it's all good.

[BarkingGhost]

I guess it now bothers me in that I expect perfection with Criterion Collection titles. I had hoped that a Criterion Collection title would go beyond merely accepting inherited anomalies short of missing footage--especially for $30.

[Arkadin]

Originally Posted by BarkingGhost

I guess it now bothers me in that I expect perfection with Criterion Collection titles. I had hoped that a Criterion Collection title would go beyond merely accepting inherited anomalies short of missing footage--especially for $30.

I don't get this. sorry.
so what do you expect Criterion to do about "inherited anomalies"?
are they supposed to raise the actors and director from the dead and reshoot the footage so that it can be properly incorporated into the negative?
I mean surely you realize that these "anomalies" could be do to damage that CANNOT be restored and/or repaired.
so "perfection" may not be obtainable, and in all likelihood corrections weren't possible or Criterion would have made them.
I really don't think Criterion said to themselves "oh look at all these issues that we can correct but are instead going to just ignore",
but apparently that is what you think happened.

[s00perd00per]

Originally Posted by BarkingGhost

I guess it now bothers me in that I expect perfection with Criterion Collection titles. I had hoped that a Criterion Collection title would go beyond merely accepting inherited anomalies short of missing footage--especially for $30.

No matter how much of a perfectionist Criterion or any studio for that matter that releases old films, they will always be limited by the technology and the film negatives that they are working with. Some damages will always be beyond repair, so I wouldn't really fault any studio for these issues.

[Blu Titan]

Originally Posted by Arkadin

I don't get this. sorry.
so what do you expect Criterion to do about "inherited anomalies"?
are they supposed to raise the actors and director from the dead and reshoot the footage so that it can be properly incorporated into the negative?
I mean surely you realize that these "anomalies" could be do to damage that CANNOT be restored and/or repaired.
so "perfection" may not be obtainable, and in all likelihood corrections weren't possible or Criterion would have made them.
I really don't think Criterion said to themselves "oh look at all these issues that we can correct but are instead going to just ignore",
but apparently that is what you think happened.

Good post. Criterion really pays attention to the original intention of the creators of the fims when restoring the material and some "issues" cannot be corrected or changed. I watched this movie a couple of months ago and thought it looked great. I do focus on enjoying the movies and not on looking for errors .

[Pyoko]

At 34:23 it looks like the film warps slightly twice, very briefly. At 59:32 there's a longer section with miscolouration of the film in the form of subtle blue/green spots:



But as has been mentioned these are problems with the original film (and without the proper tools and enough time, a fix may have ended up looking even worse.)

I can't see anything odd at 19:25 though.

[Bluyoda]

Originally Posted by Pyoko

At 34:23 it looks like the film warps slightly twice, very briefly. At 59:32 there's a longer section with miscolouration of the film in the form of subtle blue/green spots:



But as has been mentioned these are problems with the original film (and without the proper tools and enough time, a fix may have ended up looking even worse.)

I can't see anything odd at 19:25 though.

That's weird. So, maybe my copy is defective. I can see the all the other issues as described above, but the one at 19:25 is darn obvious to me.

I think people expect too much of Criterion.
While I think they generally do a good job at cleaning things up, I personally don't believe that it's the best that could be done.
I am no professional, but I have experience with After Effects, and know that hairs and scratches can be removed without degrading image quality, so I don't quite understand why there is still print damage in Seven Samurai or so.
It sure is hard work, as automatic removal techniques aren't as reliable as your own eyes, and removing those lines and scratches and whatnot frame by frame is a lot of work and would take months..., so I guess we can't expect perfection.

I was very pleased with Modern Times, but there were a few hairs that could have been removed without too much effort, and they didn't bother.

Again, please let me know if I am wrong, but that's what I think.

[Arkadin]

materials are provided to Criterion and they also do work with them.
There is no way I believe that Criterion saw a few hairs on the scan or negative or whatever they were looking at and just chose not to remove them.
That is patently absurd imo, and they are not that incompetent.
either they did not detect them for whatever reason or could not effectively remove them for whatever reason.

[Bluyoda]

Today, I watched Back to the Future with a friend of mine, and at some point I noticed the same artifact that occurred at 19:25 in Charade, and I knew that it hadn't been a problem before.

I immediately realized the origin of the problem:

A few days ago I had set my Pioneer to smooth, which means 60fps, and it appears to be introducing these odd issues, so I switched it off, and voila, no more problems.

I just checked Charade at said scene (19:25) and now it plays back just fine (in Advanced mode=72fps).

I can live with the other issues, but that one really bugged me, so I am happy to confirm that it was due to my TV setting.

Thanks for all the feedback.

[TheHighRoller]

Didn't Universal release their own transfer for Charade, seeing as it is in the public archive now?

[chazr]

Now I don't expect anyone to even see this post, but one thing that has always bugged me about the various video transfers of one of my favorite films is the dissolve to black at the end of the titles. This is exactly like the one at the end of the title sequence on the West Side Story transfer everyone was up in arms about.

That one was fixed but for archival purposes I want it to be known:

Back in the day, I saw Charade in the theater and I was really impressed with the imagery of the fade to white, then dark blobs appeared to fad in to produce a landscape in the snow. Cool. It now fades to black for a second and then goes white for that landscape fade in. If you have the video tools try to remove that black section, or use your imagination to see how it would look without it.

I know many will ask why Stanley Donen wouldn't have pointed this out but being from the old guard he was probably just grateful to have his film on video.

Perhaps the editor Jim Clark can confirm.

[Clark Kent]

There is a West Side Story thread found here, where your concerns will receive more attention.

https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread.php?t=176723

[Arkadin]

I'm not sure, but I think he is saying Charade has an error similar to West Side Story that causes the opening title sequence to be slightly incorrect as opposed to the original theatrical appearance.

[Clark Kent]

Originally Posted by Arkadin

I'm not sure, but I think he is saying Charade has an error similar to West Side Story that causes the opening title sequence to be slightly incorrect as opposed to the original theatrical appearance.

That is what I get for skimming his post. He mentioned a problem in West Side Story and figured he couldn't find that thread.