Silent Films on Blu

[syncguy]

Originally Posted by Stuart_Larkin

I want the silent versions of Ben-hur and The Ten Commandments on blu-ray.
The Silent version of Ben-hur is pretty much just as good as the Heston version.

When was silent Ben-Hur was made. I am waiting for the 1959 make on blu-ray.

[Suntory_Times]

Originally Posted by Stuart_Larkin

I want the silent versions of Ben-hur and The Ten Commandments on blu-ray.
The Silent version of Ben-hur is pretty much just as good as the Heston version.

I want Metropolis so badly. I needs its knows. In fact, I think i'll get out my dvd and watch it now.

[monkeyjb1988]

I'm hoping for silent films on Blu. I love Chaplin. I'm sure if they took care and restore the films, the Blu-Rays will rock with great picture and lossless sound...that made no sense whatsoever, did it?

Originally Posted by Maswov

Will that be released in 5.1 or 7.1

2.0 Dolby Digital.

Originally Posted by syncguy

7.1 I expect

Seriously, would they add a music track? A live orchestra plays music for silent movies?

I'm hoping any music will be loseless.

[Pyoko]

Originally Posted by syncguy

This shouldn't be an issue. The blu-ray transfer will fill the gaps by repeating frames and making 24fps from the original 16 or 18 fps.

It's not that simple. You could do that, but then you'd run into stuttering problems instead.

Imagine you had one second of 16 fps film, with 16 frames (a-p) like so:

abcd efgh ijkl mnop

To convert to 24 fps with simple frame repeating you would have to apply a 2:1 pulldown (displaying every other frame 2 times, and every other frame 1 time) and you'd end up with this:

aabc cdee fggh iijk klmm noop

That's 24 frames, i.e. 1 second of 24 fps film. Now most people already live with stuttering from 3:2 pulldown (conversion of 24p to 60p) because they don't have true 24p setups. But the bigger the difference between the number of times you repeat the different frames, the worse the stuttering is going to be. So a 2:1 pulldown like above will be worse than a 3:2 one.

And the above would be if you had a true 24p chain from player to final display. If you had a 60p setup like many do, you would then have to apply the usual 3:2 pulldown on top of that and you'd end up with this:

aaaa abbb cccc cdde eeee fffg gggg hhii iiij jjkk kkkl lmmm mmnn nooo oopp

Which is equivalent to a 5:3:5:2 pulldown. Now I'm not sure what it would look like, but I'm guessing it wouldn't be particularly pretty.

[Octavio]

Originally Posted by syncguy

When was silent Ben-Hur was made. I am waiting for the 1959 make on blu-ray.

A silent version of Ben-Hur starring Ramón Novarro in the leading role was released in 1925. As Stuart Larkin have pointed out, it's as good as Heston's version but it's silent, in B&W, in academy ratio. etc. That's why it ain't popular nowadays.
That version is included in the 4-disc edition of Ben-Hur as one of the supplements. I hope the BD includes it as well.

Originally Posted by monkeyjb1988

I'm hoping for silent films on Blu. I love Chaplin. I'm sure if they took care and restore the films, the Blu-Rays will rock with great picture and lossless sound...that made no sense whatsoever, did it? .

Chaplin himself HATED stereophonic tracks. I dunno what he would think about his movies being remastered in 7.1 He might return from death just to stop that!

A lossless mono track would be perfect IMO. The Chaplin Collection released by MK2 and Warner includes both flavors: Mono and 5.1.
I largely prefer the mono tracks, that's the way his movies were intended to be heard.

[syncguy]

Originally Posted by Pyoko

It's not that simple. You could do that, but then you'd run into stuttering problems instead.

Imagine you had one second of 16 fps film, with 16 frames (a-p) like so:

abcd efgh ijkl mnop

To convert to 24 fps with simple frame repeating you would have to apply a 2:1 pulldown (displaying every other frame 2 times, and every other frame 1 time) and you'd end up with this:

aabc cdee fggh iijk klmm noop

That's 24 frames, i.e. 1 second of 24 fps film. Now most people already live with stuttering from 3:2 pulldown (conversion of 24p to 60p) because they don't have true 24p setups. But the bigger the difference between the number of times you repeat the different frames, the worse the stuttering is going to be. So a 2:1 pulldown like above will be worse than a 3:2 one.

And the above would be if you had a true 24p chain from player to final display. If you had a 60p setup like many do, you would then have to apply the usual 3:2 pulldown on top of that and you'd end up with this:

aaaa abbb cccc cdde eeee fffg gggg hhii iiij jjkk kkkl lmmm mmnn nooo oopp

Which is equivalent to a 5:3:5:2 pulldown. Now I'm not sure what it would look like, but I'm guessing it wouldn't be particularly pretty.

Thanks. I fully understand the judder issue created by 3:2 pull down when converting 24fps to 30 fps. This has become an issue mainly because of the smoothness of 24fps and addition of 3:2 pull down changes this smoothness by adding judder.

However, in the case of 16 fps and 18fps the original already has jitter since it is not 24 fps. Therefore my guess is the judder introduced by inserting frames to 16 fps (insert one in every two) or 18 fps (insert one in every 3) would be far less intrusive than standard 3:2 pull down judder. Of course this has to be tested to find out the actual affect on people.

[syncguy]

Originally Posted by Octavio

A silent version of Ben-Hur starring Ramón Novarro in the leading role was released in 1925. As Stuart Larkin have pointed out, it's as good as Heston's version but it's silent, in B&W, in academy ratio. etc. That's why it ain't popular nowadays.
That version is included in the 4-disc edition of Ben-Hur as one of the supplements. I hope the BD includes it as well.

Thanks, I can see why it is not popular.

[repete66211]

Originally Posted by Nathan Arizona

I agree about The Passion of Joan of Arc being ideal for Blu Ray with all those intense close-up shots

That's the first silent movie that comes to mind when thinking of something that would benefit from Blu-ray.

[P@t_Mtl]

I would upgrade my DVD of Metropolis to BD if it were to be release

[repete66211]

Chaplin himself HATED stereophonic tracks...A lossless mono track would be perfect IMO...I largely prefer the mono tracks, that's the way his movies were intended to be heard.

What do you mean "intended to be heard"? If the movies are/were in mono that's because mono was the limit of current technology. Perhaps Limelight, Monsieur Verdoux and The Great Dictator would be fine in mono, but since the early movies didn't have a soundtrack I don't know how anyone could say how they were intended to be heard.

I think it would be interesting to find all of the music Chaplin composed to go along with many of his movies and record those for the movies' sountracks. I don't know how many of his movies he composed such a soundtrack for, but it would be interesting to see if researchers have a master list.

[Octavio]

Originally Posted by repete66211

What do you mean "intended to be heard"? If the movies are/were in mono that's because mono was the limit of current technology. Perhaps Limelight, Monsieur Verdoux and The Great Dictator would be fine in mono, but since the early movies didn't have a soundtrack I don't know how anyone could say how they were intended to be heard.

I think it would be interesting to find all of the music Chaplin composed to go along with many of his movies and record those for the movies' sountracks. I don't know how many of his movies he composed such a soundtrack for, but it would be interesting to see if researchers have a master list.

Didn't you read when I mentioned in my previous post that Chaplin Himself HATED stereophonic sound?
Yes, he HATED IT with a passion. He thought Cinemascope and sterephonic sound were mere gimmicks that actually distracted the audience from the movie itself.
There is a famous scene in "A King in New York"(1957) where he enters to a brand new movie-theatre in order to watch a film but he finds out that the movie was one of those new cinemascope films that had stereo sound. It's really funny how Chaplin shows his contempt about that kind of "new technology".
As you can guess, the scene ends with Chaplin walking out of the theatre, clearly annoyed because of what he just had seen and listened.
About his earlier films: in the 70's (when stereophonic sound was not anymore a novelty) Chaplin wrote original music compositions (like the theme song for The Circus), complete scores for his silent pictures and re-released them. Again he opted for keeping the movies in MONO. That was his decision. He never cared for stereo sound.
Any serious Chaplin fan knows about that.

Chaplin only shot one movie in color and widescreen but it was recorded in MONO. He even appears in a brief cameo in that movie whose title is 'The Countess from Hong Kong' (1967 --starring Sophia Loren and Marlon Brando). It was an utter failure both critically and at the box office. It was Chaplin's last film and IMO the only one that he shouldn't have made.

There is a wonderful documentary about Chaplin that is part of The Chaplin Collection. I recommend you to watch it and to rent MK2-Warner DVD's from each one of his feature films. Each DVD contains plenty of info about his movies and Chaplin himself.

[Al_The_Strange]

Originally Posted by beardmoen

Thought I would chime in for Metropolis. The Blu will feature the restored version.

http://www.cinematical.com/2008/07/0...ssing-footage/

It should be noted that the 'original' version that has been discovered is 25 minuted longer. I cannot find out if it is 25 minutes longer than the restored version from 2003 or from the cut version that most of us grew up with.

Ah yeah, I heard about that before. But it's been a year since this announcement, and I haven't seen any more news about it since. Anybody know what's going on with it?

"Metropolis" still stands as my favorite silent movie. BD with new footage would be sweet.

[repete66211]

Originally Posted by Octavio

Didn't you read when I mentioned in my previous post that Chaplin Himself HATED stereophonic sound?
Yes, he HATED IT with a passion. He thought Cinemascope and sterephonic sound were mere gimmicks that actually distracted the audience from the movie itself.
There is a famous scene in "A King in New York"(1957) where he enters to a brand new movie-theatre in order to watch a film but he finds out that the movie was one of those new cinemascope films that had stereo sound. It's really funny how Chaplin shows his contempt about that kind of "new technology".
As you can guess, the scene ends with Chaplin walking out of the theatre, clearly annoyed because of what he just had seen and listened.
About his earlier films: in the 70's (when stereophonic sound was not anymore a novelty) Chaplin wrote original music compositions (like the theme song for The Circus), complete scores for his silent pictures and re-released them. Again he opted for keeping the movies in MONO. That was his decision. He never cared for stereo sound.
Any serious Chaplin fan knows about that.

Chaplin only shot one movie in color and widescreen but it was recorded in MONO. He even appears in a brief cameo in that movie whose title is 'The Countess from Hong Kong' (1967 --starring Sophia Loren and Marlon Brando). It was an utter failure both critically and at the box office. It was Chaplin's last film and IMO the only one that he shouldn't have made.

There is a wonderful documentary about Chaplin that is part of The Chaplin Collection. I recommend you to watch it and to rent MK2-Warner DVD's from each one of his feature films. Each DVD contains plenty of info about his movies and Chaplin himself.

OK, so you meant how Chaplin himself wanted his movies to be heard. Personally, I don't see why silent movies should have any soundtrack other than mono, so I have no problem with that. However, I can't say I agree with Chaplin that things like stereo and Cinemascope were gimmicks. Like 3-D, they could be made gimmicky, but I think if used wisely such technologies can improve the movie experience.

I've seen quite a few Chaplin movies. I haven't seen A Countess from Hong Kong probably for the same reason it took me so long to see Limelight, M. Verdoux and The Great Dictator--I like his silents so much that I didn't want to hear his voice or see him as an old man. I know, it's sentimental, but I didn't want my love of early Chaplin to be spoiled by anything. As it is, I liked all three of them.

[Weirded Wonder]

Originally Posted by Al_The_Strange

Ah yeah, I heard about that before. But it's been a year since this announcement, and I haven't seen any more news about it since. Anybody know what's going on with it?

"Metropolis" still stands as my favorite silent movie. BD with new footage would be sweet.

I guess no news is good news. At least, I hope. I'm hoping they are taking their time with this as I am sure they are more than well aware of the importance of the lost footage.

[Octavio]

Originally Posted by repete66211

OK, so you meant how Chaplin himself wanted his movies to be heard. Personally, I don't see why silent movies should have any soundtrack other than mono, so I have no problem with that. However, I can't say I agree with Chaplin that things like stereo and Cinemascope were gimmicks. Like 3-D, they could be made gimmicky, but I think if used wisely such technologies can improve the movie experience.

I've seen quite a few Chaplin movies. I haven't seen A Countess from Hong Kong probably for the same reason it took me so long to see Limelight, M. Verdoux and The Great Dictator--I like his silents so much that I didn't want to hear his voice or see him as an old man. I know, it's sentimental, but I didn't want my love of early Chaplin to be spoiled by anything. As it is, I liked all three of them.

Yeah, I meant that, Chaplin himself wanted his movies to be heard in mono. I've tried to watch his films in 5.1 but honestly they sounds much better in the original mono.

Stereophonic (and now multichannel mixes) and cinemascope (or any other widescreen format) aren't or weren't gimmicks "per se", but have in mind that even when Chaplin can be considered one of the most innovative actors/directors ever; he started making movies back in 1914!
Obviously in the 50's his ideas about how films should be shot became what you may call "old-school" ideas. Old-school ideas perhaps, but he made wonderful films using them.

You won't really miss anything if you don't watch 'The Countess from Hong Kong'. I'd recommend it only for Chaplin completists or for those who wanna see the only Chaplin film financed by a big studio (Universal), The only with big names on its cast (Loren, Brando), his first and only film in color, his only film shot in widescreen and definitively his lesser work.

[franklinpross]

Originally Posted by koontz1973

Imagine all those people with great sound systems who will not buy these films for this reason. Be nice to see the early cinema on Blu, like Charlie Chaplin, Buster Keaton etc.

1+ Modern Times - -The Gold Rush

[wallendo]

Originally Posted by Pyoko

It's not that simple. You could do that, but then you'd run into stuttering problems instead.

Imagine you had one second of 16 fps film, with 16 frames (a-p) like so:

abcd efgh ijkl mnop

To convert to 24 fps with simple frame repeating you would have to apply a 2:1 pulldown (displaying every other frame 2 times, and every other frame 1 time) and you'd end up with this:

aabc cdee fggh iijk klmm noop

That's 24 frames, i.e. 1 second of 24 fps film. Now most people already live with stuttering from 3:2 pulldown (conversion of 24p to 60p) because they don't have true 24p setups. But the bigger the difference between the number of times you repeat the different frames, the worse the stuttering is going to be. So a 2:1 pulldown like above will be worse than a 3:2 one.

And the above would be if you had a true 24p chain from player to final display. If you had a 60p setup like many do, you would then have to apply the usual 3:2 pulldown on top of that and you'd end up with this:

aaaa abbb cccc cdde eeee fffg gggg hhii iiij jjkk kkkl lmmm mmnn nooo oopp

Which is equivalent to a 5:3:5:2 pulldown. Now I'm not sure what it would look like, but I'm guessing it wouldn't be particularly pretty.

For 16 fps, the easiest way to encode it would be to play it back at 15 fps and encode it at 1080i by doubling each frame. The slow-down might bother purists, but it would give the smoothest motion.

[rezpekt]

Originally Posted by beardmoen

I guess no news is good news. At least, I hope. I'm hoping they are taking their time with this as I am sure they are more than well aware of the importance of the lost footage.

There are news about Metropolis. The restoration will hopefully be finished by January next year in order to present it at Berlin Film Festival in February.

[Al_The_Strange]

Originally Posted by rezpekt

There are news about Metropolis. The restoration will hopefully be finished by January next year in order to present it at Berlin Film Festival in February.

Cool. Maybe the BD will be out next year.

[dougotte]

For silent films, the intended experience was to hear the soundtrack live in the theatre via an organ, piano, or sometimes even an orchestra. Therefore, there was originally no recorded soundtrack.

Thus, on BD, the experience most closely approximating the intended theatre experience would be a stereo soundtrack. IMO, this would be closest to hearing live musicians. I would even go so far as to agree to a surround track, as long as the surrounds had ambience similar to what you'd hear in a theatre.

Doug