Ask questions to The Digital Bits team (Bill Hunt, Jeff Kleist et.al.)

[Braktastic]

Originally Posted by Jeff Kleist

I'm not familiar with it because I don't have the disc myself. Can you elaborate? I got it on excellent authority a few months back that the director was very very happy with it

Friedkin is very happy with the results achieved for the Blu-ray Disc as he indicates on the disc's color timing featurette; however those results were were born of changes he made designed give the film a pastel look akin to that of Moby Dick (1956). Unfortunately, I do not believe the featurette covers how he feels about some of the side effects of this process, particularly the color-bleeding evident in these screen shots:

http://www.hundland.org/hd/f/f.htm#french1

I am anxious to compare the BD to the DVD and make up my own mind. The point of my posting however was to elaborate on this so people are aware that there is more to this than your typical 'This doesn't look Discovery HD so it must be crap PQ' whining.

[Jeff Kleist]

Everything I've been told during the production and remastering is that he was fully involved and fully approves, so any tradeoff I guess he feels is worth it

It's good that people are informed of what they're buying, but I can't wait to see it based on those shots

[Torsten Kaiser TLE]

Originally Posted by Paul Arnette

Friedkin is very happy with the results achieved for the Blu-ray Disc as he indicates on the disc's color timing featurette; however those results were were born of changes he made designed give the film a pastel look akin to that of Moby Dick (1956). Unfortunately, I do not believe the featurette covers how he feels about some of the side effects of this process, particularly the color-bleeding evident in these screen shots:

http://www.hundland.org/hd/f/f.htm#french1

I am anxious to compare the BD to the DVD and make up my own mind. The point of my posting however was to elaborate on this so people are aware that there is more to this than your typical 'This doesn't look Discovery HD so it must be crap PQ' whining.

FC has always been extremely complicated because of the way it was lit, the cameras used, stock choices and the limited choices in stocks available at the time, in the first place. Photochemical processing is also an issue; therefore the film's original appearance cannot be compared with modern, advanced stock capabilities and HD deliveries at all. However, Friedkin's choices here, on the digital master, are making quite dramatic changes to the film's appearance for at least 2 reasons:

1 -- the color re-timing (on a color correction console such as DaVinci, not in any way related photochemically) of FC clearly attempted to replicate the "effects" of very modern way of filmmaking - i.e. a very harsh, burned out in white, crushed in black kind of look. You can see it in the very first shot: blown out windows, even walls of buildings. This was not the case on the original 35mm release, nor is it on the negative. The problem with these changes is, that the stock does not hold this kind of change, also for reason number

2 -- the transfer master was heavily de-grained, and, and this is a little bizarre, very apparently re-grained with a digital grain sample pattern (sharp, dark grain) in order to give a) at least some "natural appearance" back and b) a sharper look. However, the grain is, as one can see in shots like this, which does reflect the actual Blu-ray image pretty well http://www.hundland.org/hd/f/thefrenchconnection4.jpg - very artificial, digital looking - in effect, it is just noise, with the underlying detail very much corrupted. Another grab ilustrates the loss in detail and replacement with artifacts: http://www.hundland.org/hd/f/thefrenchconnection7.jpg
The jacket is a maze with artifacts, as well as apparent bitdepth problems such as on the face of Roy Scheider and the cigarette. There are parts of the movie which are very tough to stomach. Ironically, FCII, which was not touch in this way (as Friedkin had no hand in it) looks largely just fine. So, I am wondering about Friedkin's choices here - it is clearly more a Redux than restoring the original.

[Logan00]

Does anyone know if Pixar is still doing a sequel to The Incredibles?

[Jeff Kleist]

Easy, Cars is a gigantic merchandise cash cow for Disney. HUGE. It's also John Lassetter's baby, he's a complete car nut. (Watching him and Hayao Miyazaki play with his unique 2-wheel car in the Pixar lobby is a treat)

Incredibles 2 is in conceptual stages, but Brad Bird isn't even thinking about it until he finishes his live action movie. Then he'll decide what to do with it.

[Michael.Schinke]

Originally Posted by Torsten Kaiser TLE

FC has always been extremely complicated because of the way it was lit, the cameras used, stock choices and the limited choices in stocks available at the time, in the first place. Photochemical processing is also an issue; therefore the film's original appearance cannot be compared with modern, advanced stock capabilities and HD deliveries at all. However, Friedkin's choices here, on the digital master, are making quite dramatic changes to the film's appearance for at least 2 reasons:

1 -- the color re-timing (on a color correction console such as DaVinci, not in any way related photochemically) of FC clearly attempted to replicate the "effects" of very modern way of filmmaking - i.e. a very harsh, burned out in white, crushed in black kind of look. You can see it in the very first shot: blown out windows, even walls of buildings. This was not the case on the original 35mm release, nor is it on the negative. The problem with these changes is, that the stock does not hold this kind of change, also for reason number

2 -- the transfer master was heavily de-grained, and, and this is a little bizarre, very apparently re-grained with a digital grain sample pattern (sharp, dark grain) in order to give a) at least some "natural appearance" back and b) a sharper look. However, the grain is, as one can see in shots like this, which does reflect the actual Blu-ray image pretty well http://www.hundland.org/hd/f/thefrenchconnection4.jpg - very artificial, digital looking - in effect, it is just noise, with the underlying detail very much corrupted. Another grab ilustrates the loss in detail and replacement with artifacts: http://www.hundland.org/hd/f/thefrenchconnection7.jpg
The jacket is a maze with artifacts, as well as apparent bitdepth problems such as on the face of Roy Scheider and the cigarette. There are parts of the movie which are very tough to stomach. Ironically, FCII, which was not touch in this way (as Friedkin had no hand in it) looks largely just fine. So, I am wondering about Friedkin's choices here - it is clearly more a Redux than restoring the original.

IN these cases the questions is less a matter of what things were done then a matter of, "Why?" they were done. Is there any stated reason why WF would want to affect the changes he did?

[disneyboi81]

Incredibles 2 is in conceptual stages, but Brad Bird isn't even thinking about it until he finishes his live action movie. Then he'll decide what to do with it.

Woo hoo!! I really hope this gets some fire behind it. Incredibles is my favorite Pixar film. No capes!!

[hollywoodguy]

Originally Posted by Michael.Schinke

IN these cases the questions is less a matter of what things were done then a matter of, "Why?" they were done. Is there any stated reason why WF would want to affect the changes he did?

Because he wasn't able to achieve the look he wanted to at the time due to technical limitations?

I have not seen a more enthusiastic endorsement of a Blu-ray disc as the filmmaker's definitive version of a movie than Friedkin's introduction on D1 of this set.

[jw]

Yea I thought the sequel to Cars was a go, although their may be some voice changes for Doc and Fillmore due to Newman's and Carlin's passing. I am psyched, by far one of my favorite Disney Pixar Films

Not sure if that's official as it was on an unofficial blog posted back in 2007

[Michael.Schinke]

Originally Posted by hollywoodguy

Because he wasn't able to achieve the look he wanted to at the time due to technical limitations?

I have not seen a more enthusiastic endorsement of a Blu-ray disc as the filmmaker's definitive version of a movie than Friedkin's introduction on D1 of this set.

If this is the case then we are going to have that old Lucas-ian argument about preservation vs directors original intent rear it's ugly head again. Me personally, I care not for change unless it renders the film impotent by comparison. But there are those that feel the original release is pure and should, if not remain untainted, be preserved in it's original version to offer film goers a choice. I agree on that level, but I still believe that all art is fluid.

[coolmilo]

Hello Jeff,

Is there a chance that "Children of Men" will be released on Blu-ray in 2009?

[woodlandwolf]

Jeff,

What are the chances of seeing the Chevy Chase Vacation films on blu? And if thay would happen, could there be a chance of a new Christmas Vacation edition or most likey no for that title.

Thanks,

Woodlandwolf

[Jeff Kleist]

I'd say Children of men will likey be out this year

Vacation movies will come eventually, but I doubt whatever is done to Christmas vacation will help much, even the de-DNRing

[woodlandwolf]

Thanks for getting back and cant wait for the Vacation films.

Now I have read and heard different things about Song of the South. I like to know what you have to say and think on why we wont ever see Song of the South on video. And also why is the film out over seas.

Thanks,

Woodlandwolf

[Jeff Kleist]

Song of the South has not been out overseas in almost a decade, then only on VHS and LD, and was never released on DVD despite what bootleggers would like you to think, not even in EuroDisney

Many powerful executives are needlessly afraid that the film is racist, and will make Disney look bad despite assurances from nearly every national african-american organization that that simply won't happen. I have a copy of the HK laserdisc that I have transferred to DVD (no I'm not making copies), and most of the misconceptions are simply based from ignorance

[woodlandwolf]

Thank you for that, I always thought it was on DVD. I used to work for Disney Shopping and that was one of our biggest request. I wish they would released it with there Walt Disney Treasures line. Sine they give a warning on some Mickey Mouse, Goofy shorts about content and history they should do it for Song of the South and make it a L.E. But I guess that is just a dream.

When do you think that Disney will start realseing more of there classics for animation and live action on blu. I remember for DVD they did the Limited Issues series and then later on we got most of there stuff. Is that same thing for the Planitium Series?


And I have been wondering for some time on why the studios realsed different versions fo the same title. I mean for DVD we get: Fullscreen, Widescreen, The Single Disk, 2-Disc, and maybe a unrated. Does that hurt them in sales and eat way to much self space for stores.

Thanks,

Woodlandwolf

[jd213]

According to a sourced statement on Wikipedia, it's in the public domain in Japan. If that's true, then what would be holding back a Japanese DVD release?

[Grubert]

Originally Posted by hollywoodguy

Because he wasn't able to achieve the look he wanted to at the time due to technical limitations?

That's the same rationale Ray Harryhausen had for colorizing his films for Blu-ray. But he was nice enough to give us the choice of whether to see the revised version or the original. Same thing with Ridley Scott and Blade Runner.

I wouldn't have bought a color-only version of the Harryhausen films.

I have not seen a more enthusiastic endorsement of a Blu-ray disc as the filmmaker's definitive version of a movie than Friedkin's introduction on D1 of this set.

If it is because it makes it easier to replace walkie-talkies with telephones (different movie I know ) then that's not a good reason.

The look and color palette of French Connection is integral to its status as a major film. Would people have appreciated FC as much if it had looked like Diamonds Are Forever in the first place?

[Jeff Kleist]

According to a sourced statement on Wikipedia, it's in the public domain in Japan. If that's true, then what would be holding back a Japanese DVD release?

It's not

And I have been wondering for some time on why the studios realsed different versions fo the same title. I mean for DVD we get: Fullscreen, Widescreen, The Single Disk, 2-Disc, and maybe a unrated. Does that hurt them in sales and eat way to much self space for stores.

There are stores that won't carry unrated stuff as a rule, and people who won't buy it

Typically everything but the widescreen boils out after a month or 2, never to be seen again in most stores. They might keep a copy or 2 of the 2disc around

[Slec]

Originally Posted by Jeff Kleist

It's not

Wikipedia is wrong

imagine that..... I remember having to take off for wikipedia citations as a TA in college.