El cid when?

[rondanto]

El Cid was released on blu ray 3 years ago in England. What is the problem with the U S ? Foreign countries get many of our U S Made movies before we do. Get a move on. Same is true with Lionsgate and its refusal to release "Jesus of Nazareth" in a restored complete blu ray edition.

[lobo81865]

Yesterday for both would work for me.

[Maggot]

I agree, this is such a classic Hollywood, grand spectacle of a movie and it's not out in the US? It's even one of Martin Scorsese's favorites. I have the Miriam Collection and this is a biggie for me that still awaits a US release.

[Pirate King]

I have also been waiting... and waiting............ and waiting

[yellowcakeuf6]

New scan from the original negative and presented in the 2.25:1 Super Technirama aspect ratio with remastered 6-track sound.
This will probably be in Weinstein hell for the foreseeable future.

[thornhill]

This is one of my most wanted of all time! I’ve actually never owned it.

[yellowcakeuf6]

Originally Posted by thornhill

This is one of my most wanted of all time! I’ve actually never owned it.

My hope is Criterion would re-release it. They did release it on Laserdisc.

[thornhill]

Originally Posted by yellowcakeuf6

My hope is Criterion would re-release it. They did release it on Laserdisc.

That would be amazing! The whole Miramax thing throws a bit of a wrench in things, but some of their titles have been making it out. I guess we’ll just have to keep crossing our fingers.

[yellowcakeuf6]

I watched the Restoration/Preservation feature on the DVD and the gentleman from Technicolor said the DVD was done from an internegative. He also said there were probably no original negatives (nitrate he claims) remaining to scan.
He did say there may be YCM Protection Masters made from the original negs, which could be used, but offered no reason why they were not used for the DVD.
So no original negatives would be a bit of a kick in the gut, and it isn't exactly clear why there aren't any since they are being used to transfer much older films.
The laserdisc says that a low contrast print was used for that transfer.

[iaragorn1]

What was used for the restoration that Scorsese oversaw? Was it the internegative? and what became of the work that he oversaw, you would think that would be good enough to release.

I saw the restoration and thought it looked pretty good. This movie screams for somebody like Arrow to release on blu.

This was restored by Miramax, so is that part of the hold up? and do they still have the rights?

I will never forget seeing this on the big screen but I wished it had at least an HD release.

[yellowcakeuf6]

Originally Posted by iaragorn1

What was used for the restoration that Scorsese oversaw? Was it the internegative? and what became of the work that he oversaw, you would think that would be good enough to release.

I saw the restoration and thought it looked pretty good. This movie screams for somebody like Arrow to release on blu.

This was restored by Miramax, so is that part of the hold up? and do they still have the rights?

I will never forget seeing this on the big screen but I wished it had at least an HD release.

I would think it was the internegative, because the brief resto doc on the DVD talks about it as, apparently, the main source available, but that was about 15 years ago.
Though the DVD gets bad marks from a lot of people, I thought the color looked very good, but that's about the most I can say.
The Weinsteins were a little late to the DVD party putting this out in 2008 more than a year after the launch of Blu-ray.
While I hope for a new scan of whatever the best elements now are, a new scan and the evolution of digital tools should bring huge improvements.

[erlinmeyer]

Only 970 Yen for region A which is currently less than $10
https://www.blu-ray.com/movies/El-Cid-Blu-ray/99208/

[yellowcakeuf6]

Originally Posted by erlinmeyer

Only 970 Yen for region A which is currently less than $10
https://www.blu-ray.com/movies/El-Cid-Blu-ray/99208/

Same transfer as the Koch Blu-ray?
That was basically a resolution upgrade over the DVD, but what's really needed is to start over with a new scan of the best film elements.

[CinemaScope]

Originally Posted by yellowcakeuf6

I would think it was the internegative, because the brief resto doc on the DVD talks about it as, apparently, the main source available, but that was about 15 years ago.
Though the DVD gets bad marks from a lot of people, I thought the color looked very good, but that's about the most I can say.
The Weinsteins were a little late to the DVD party putting this out in 2008 more than a year after the launch of Blu-ray.
While I hope for a new scan of whatever the best elements now are, a new scan and the evolution of digital tools should bring huge improvements.

Well I've read that it was a low-con print (& the same with Fall Of The Roman Empire). It's a crying shame that we don't have both of these films looking stunning in HD. I wonder who owns the films now & where the best film elements are (methinks a job for Martin Scorsese's Film Foundation).

[yellowcakeuf6]

Originally Posted by CinemaScope

Well I've read that it was a low-con print (& the same with Fall Of The Roman Empire). It's a crying shame that we don't have both of these films looking stunning in HD. I wonder who owns the films now & where the best film elements are (methinks a job for Martin Scorsese's Film Foundation).

I know that's what Criterion used for their Laserdisc release. In the Gerry Byrne interview on the DVD he mentions that an internegative was used to produce that DVD, but he also claims the original negative was nitrate. Is that correct? I thought nitrate film was no longer used beginning sometime in the 1950s.

[CinemaScope]

Originally Posted by yellowcakeuf6

I know that's what Criterion used for their Laserdisc release. In the Gerry Byrne interview on the DVD he mentions that an internegative was used to produce that DVD, but he also claims the original negative was nitrate. Is that correct? I thought nitrate film was no longer used beginning sometime in the 1950s.

There's no way it was nitrate, Kodak stopped using that in the early fifties. I've read on many occasions that it was a low-con print. An interneg. would have been made from an interpos. & that wouldn't be a bad source to go from if the original negs were a no go. But will it ever happen, a really great HD transfer for El Cid & The Fall Of The Roman Empire...

[yellowcakeuf6]

Originally Posted by CinemaScope

There's no way it was nitrate, Kodak stopped using that in the early fifties. I've read on many occasions that it was a low-con print. An interneg. would have been made from an interpos. & that wouldn't be a bad source to go from if the original negs were a no go. But will it ever happen, a really great HD transfer for El Cid & The Fall Of The Roman Empire...

Both should look spectacular!

[iaragorn1]

Originally Posted by Kino Lorber Insider

It's part of the same Samuel Bronston Productions package owned by Harvey Weinstein in perpetuity, other key titles are El Cid, The Fall of the Roman Empire and 55 Days at Peking.

This quote from the Kino Insider would seem to explain why El Cid is in purgatory