Lawrence of Arabia (1962)

[arcadeforest]

Just ordered this through Amazon - I'm one of the few who has not seen this film, really looking forward to giving this a watch.

[meremortal]

Just noticed zahinn is only nineteen years old, so it's not entirely out of the ordinary for immature kids to call a historic movie free of jump cuts as "boring as hell." Yes, this has great replay value and is an incredible movie that transcends generations.

[Gremal]

Originally Posted by meremortal

Just noticed zahinn is only nineteen years old, so it's not entirely out of the ordinary for immature kids to call a historic movie free of jump cuts as "boring as hell." Yes, this has great replay value and is an incredible movie that transcends generations.

True but I was in my 20s before I really appreciated it.

[zahinn]

Originally Posted by meremortal

Just noticed zahinn is only nineteen years old, so it's not entirely out of the ordinary for immature kids to call a historic movie free of jump cuts as "boring as hell." Yes, this has great replay value and is an incredible movie that transcends generations.

[Ray_Rogers]

Earlier today my posting time zone, location on the left, I finally bit the bullet and bought the 50th Anniversary Gift Set from Amazon Marketplace.
TEN years since I last owned this wonderful film. I used to own the first DVD release with the pseudo-burlap or canvas type cover. I sold that one because I heard a rumor it was going to be released some time after 2003. Sold it that year, everytime I went into any local used places they always had the SuperBit priced out of my allowable price ranging. It's literally one of my all time favorite films. Even back in 2001 I thought the first DVD release was stunning since one of my friends had it on one of those double VHS. But another one of my friends in the 1990s. their parents had a Laserdisc player and they had The Criterion Collection Laserdisc release. I fell in love with the movie first watching it in 1994 after seeing Stargate already a few times. That's why I always connect Lawrence of Arabia with Stargate, only because both films take place largely in the desert and with military aspect. Stargate is a fun romp while Lawrence of Arabia is a pure epic.
I'm also glad about rebuying this before my 34th birthday. Sure on the Marketplace listing it said it was repackaged or put back together, but I went for the bit pricier one which didn't mention any flaws with packaging. It'll get here on Friday the 8th and I didn't want to wait for Amazon to have it in stock. Even made a resolution last year ever since I read about Lawrence of Arabia to buy the best set as possible at the best pricing. In November and December even told myself in February I'm buying it. Those 10 years have paid off and what really clinched it was seeing the remaster at a midnight showing, a bit after the re-release in cinemas.
Another reason why I chose to buy the gift set is also because having a moderately sized film score and soundtrack collection on CD was icing on the proverbial cake. No need to make a custom edition! Except it would've been nice if there were a thick booklet but we get that 56 page book. Another clincher since I love extra features is that exclusive bonus disc. This film literally deserves the top-notch quality it received.
The only way I'd ever repurchase Lawrence of Arabia on optical disc again would be on Holographic Versatile Disc, way off in the future. From my repurchases from VHS and DVD of David Lean features, The Bridge on the River Kwai was already taken care of. Since Lawrence of Arabia has finally been rebought on Blu-ray and I'll get it this Friday, only other Lean film to rebuy which I can immediately remember owning is Doctor Zhivago. To me the film is well deserved purchasing with the digibook release. Same as I've done for The Bridge on the River Kwai.

All said and done, took me long enough to rebuy this film and very happy I waited to buy it on Blu-ray! Yes I am very stoked about owning it again. Now I laugh at SuperBit and glad I passed over that release of it. TEN YEARS!


Apologies for the long post. I don't make these very often about a film which I really love.

EDIT: I hope I made the correct decision is buying the Marketplace release which mentioned only "Item may come repackaged. Missing shrink-wrap, activation codes for bonus online content may be missing or expired." So I assume it's exactly similar to the one released in stores, just without the shrinkwrap.

EDIT EDIT: This film is also extremely highly recommended from me so even the 2-Disc is worthwhile. But for those who absolutely and implicitly rank it as one of their all-time favorites? They'd get the Gift Set.

[Ray_Rogers]

Got it! Looks damn good on my ASUS IPS monitor. Though I wish it were 32" instead of 23". Also need of some cleaning.

[al9011]

Here's mine

[zahinn]

Originally Posted by al9011

Here's mine

So many people showing off their frames is really tempting me to buy the Collectors edition

[ObiWanShinobi]

Watched this for the first time last night. LOVED it and can honestly say that T.E. Lawrence is one of my new favorite characters in film.

Such an epic, beautifully shot film. Also, there is a not SINGLE woman in this film is there? No female extras er anything...or did my eyes deceive me?

[dougotte]

Originally Posted by ObiWanShinobi

Watched this for the first time last night. LOVED it and can honestly say that T.E. Lawrence is one of my new favorite characters in film.

Such an epic, beautifully shot film. Also, there is a not SINGLE woman in this film is there? No female extras er anything...or did my eyes deceive me?

During the feast provided by Anthony Quinn, there's a brief shot of some women and children, but no dialogue.

[garyrc]

Originally Posted by ObiWanShinobi

... Also, there is a not SINGLE woman in this film is there? No female extras er anything...or did my eyes deceive me?

In about 1968, a student showed me a 70 mm film frame that his friend the projectionist had snipped (for shame!). It was a long shot (very distant) of a cliff with some women dressed in black standing on top of it. I was quite surprised, because I did not recall seeing that shot when I saw the film 6 years before. When I finally get around to running the whole Blu-ray, I will watch for it. Anybody see it on the BD?

[Bluyoda]

Originally Posted by ObiWanShinobi

Watched this for the first time last night. LOVED it and can honestly say that T.E. Lawrence is one of my new favorite characters in film.

Such an epic, beautifully shot film. Also, there is a not SINGLE woman in this film is there? No female extras er anything...or did my eyes deceive me?

As noted above, and amongst the slaughter the Turks committed, after they themselves were killed by the Arabs.


The BD is great, but I am sure it could look better.

There are some distracting compression-related artifacts, that pop up frequently enough. I think it's called macroblocking.
Also, the occasional vertical lines in the middle can be quite jarring, and sometimes there is an unsightly yellow tint.
Furthermore, grain at times is unusually heavy for a 70mm film IMO.
There is some edge enhancement too.

I hope there will be a better transfer down the line.

I give it a 4/5. I am happier with the recent Casablanca restoration.

Audio was good for the most part. In one scene there is some distortion.
I think it was when Lawrence and the other Arabs are storming towards the Turks.

The film is amazing, and beautifully shot. It's incredibly epic, and David Lean always focused on the mind of men. Fantastic!

Does really everyone find this a reference quality BD?

[retablo]

Originally Posted by Bluyoda

As noted above, and amongst the slaughter the Turks committed, after they themselves were killed by the Arabs.


The BD is great, but I am sure it could look better.

There are some distracting compression-related artifacts, that pop up frequently enough. I think it's called macroblocking.
Also, the occasional vertical lines in the middle can be quite jarring, and sometimes there is an unsightly yellow tint.
Furthermore, grain at times is unusually heavy for a 70mm film IMO.
There is some edge enhancement too.

I hope there will be a better transfer down the line.

I give it a 4/5. I am happier with the recent Casablanca restoration.

Audio was good for the most part. In one scene there is some distortion.
I think it was when Lawrence and the other Arabs are storming towards the Turks.

The film is amazing, and beautifully shot. It's incredibly epic, and David Lean always focused on the mind of men. Fantastic!

Does really everyone find this a reference quality BD?

You're sure? You worked on the numerous restorations, so you know the state of the negative and the limitations that brings?

Yes, this is reference quality, and like I said, the film has already been through several restorations. Anything that could be fixes has been fixed. From a master perspective, it cannot look any better. Will a 4K disc with h.265 compression help? Possibly. But I saw absolutely nothing wrong with the current disc, nor did most (or any) of the reviewers, so perhaps its your system.

[Bluyoda]

Originally Posted by retablo

You're sure? You worked on the numerous restorations, so you know the state of the negative and the limitations that brings?

Yes, this is reference quality, and like I said, the film has already been through several restorations. Anything that could be fixes has been fixed. From a master perspective, it cannot look any better. Will a 4K disc with h.265 compression help? Possibly. But I saw absolutely nothing wrong with the current disc, nor did most (or any) of the reviewers, so perhaps its your system.

I am pretty sure. The compression-related artifacts could certainly be avoided, I think.

The yellow tint could be color corrected, even though it would require some serious work, but it could be done.

I use Photoshop a lot, and took a course in After Effects, but most of all I devour all kinds of bonus features, and I just need to remember the amazing restoration work they did on "The Red Shoes". Yeah, I am sure they could have done a better job. It's god, but not perfect, especially the first third.
The beginning is incredible, but once he goes to the dessert the problems start popping up.

I trust my own eyes, and ears.

Reviewers also gave the original Casablanca release 5/5, and oh, big surprise, they did another restoration, and it looks considerably better in very way.

Nothing is perfect, so there is always room for improvement.
You honestly don't think so?

You are dealing in absolutes, and must therefore be a Sith.

If it were my system, how come other films don't suffer similar artifacts?

I am just extremely sensitive to any visual anomalies, I am afraid.

I wish I didn't see the problems, but I do.

Anyways, it's a great disc, but it could be better.

[retablo]

Originally Posted by Bluyoda

I am pretty sure. The compression-related artifacts could certainly be avoided, I think.

The yellow tint could be color corrected, even though it would require some serious work, but it could be done.

I use Photoshop a lot, and took a course in After Effects, but most of all I devour all kinds of bonus features, and I just need to remember the amazing restoration work they did on "The Red Shoes". Yeah, I am sure they could have done a better job. It's god, but not perfect, especially the first third.
The beginning is incredible, but once he goes to the dessert the problems start popping up.

I trust my own eyes, and ears.

Reviewers also gave the original Casablanca release 5/5, and oh, big surprise, they did another restoration, and it looks considerably better in very way.

Nothing is perfect, so there is always room for improvement.
You honestly don't think so?

You are dealing in absolutes, and must therefore be a Sith.

If it were my system, how come other films don't suffer similar artifacts?

I am just extremely sensitive to any visual anomalies, I am afraid.

I wish I didn't see the problems, but I do.

Anyways, it's a great disc, but it could be better.

I don't think there is any room for improvement, no. And I think if there was, it would've been addressed not only on the 1989 restoration but the 2 years of work they did for the 2012 blu-ray.

And the original Patton got 5 for PQ as well, but that means nothing. It was an older time, and we know better now. So trying to compare a 4 year old review to something now isn't really any measure of standards that can be added to argument.

And The Red Shoes is a completely different film - shot differently, in a different era, with different film stocks, not to mention the negatives were stored differently. Again, yo can't compare one restoration to another, because they will all yield varying results depending on all of the above.

[Bluyoda]

Originally Posted by retablo

I don't think there is any room for improvement, no. And I think if there was, it would've been addressed not only on the 1989 restoration but the 2 years of work they did for the 2012 blu-ray.

And the original Patton got 5 for PQ as well, but that means nothing. It was an older time, and we know better now. So trying to compare a 4 year old review to something now isn't really any measure of standards that can be added to argument.

And The Red Shoes is a completely different film - shot differently, in a different era, with different film stocks, not to mention the negatives were stored differently. Again, yo can't compare one restoration to another, because they will all yield varying results depending on all of the above.

Fine, that's your opinion. I have mine.

Just to show my point. This is my original review of Casablanca. Mine was the only one, that mentioned the weak black levels, the DNR, etc.:

https://www.blu-ray.com/movies/Casab...5/#UserReviews

Just saying.

That means nothing? I never saw Patton, but I heard it had lots of DNR.
It means the reviewers didn't know what they were talking about IMHO.
How by the beard of Zeus can that not be an argument here?
Of course, every film is shot differently, but Lawrence was shot on 70mm, so it should look much better than even the best 35mm films, otherwise, what's the point of shooting in that format?

Since everything is relative, surely you know that this transfer isn't the absolute best it could be?

We know better now? I have to disagree with you to some extent.
While many of us have come acquainted with the usual villains, such as EE, DNR, bandings, and so on, some are more sensitive to it than others.

The Three Amigos got 4,5/5 for PQ, and that was in 2011!!!!
That film is processed to death, has nasty DNR all over the place, etc..

I prefer making up my own opinion.
We will just have to agree to disagree, I guess.
Nothing wrong with that.

It's not PE baffling (the hype), but I am still surprised no one is even the least bit let-down by it.

Anyways, cheers.

[Early Memphis]

Originally Posted by retablo

I don't think there is any room for improvement, no.

Originally Posted by Bluyoda

Since everything is relative, surely you know that this transfer isn't the absolute best it could be?

There is always room for improvement. No room for improvement is a pretty strong absolute statement for one who just admitted in his previous post that the coming 4K version "might" be better.

Of course, realistically, one eventually reaches such minor improvements as to be virtually unnoticeable - especially if one actually watches and takes in the movie and not the technology. Who knows what the future may bring? This is the best the film looks today and the best it has ever looked on home video. Enjoy it while you can - your eyes and ears are deteriorating with each passing year. Will it pay to wait for the next gen? Maybe if you're only five.

[Bluyoda]

Thank you.

That's what I call a realist.

[shovelware69]

The minor EE is the only thing that bothers me, especially after the amount of comments and reviewers giving Sony the reach-a-round on the transfer.

I'm not even watching it on a large screen and it's fairly obvious. Much like the DNR in Jaws, that people seem reluctant to admit.

[arcadeforest]

Originally Posted by dougotte

During the feast provided by Anthony Quinn, there's a brief shot of some women and children, but no dialogue.

Also there is the scene where Lawrence and his arab army are marching on Damacus and they come across a village decimated by the Turks - there are at least two dead women in one shot - pretty amazing a film of this size and scope to have almost no women in the film. I guess not when you look at the subject matter of the movie but I wonder if you would see this in a film made today.