The Official Olive Films Thread

[chrisron]

Can't wait to get Invasion of the Body Snatchers. I love that movie. It will be the first Olive Blu-Ray in my collection.

[Dex Robinson]

Originally Posted by pro-bassoonist

Dex, the presentation is good, but nowhere near close to being what one would consider demo quality. There are limitations with the transfer that become quite obvious if one projects the film.

Pro-B

That's certainly a fair comment. I would qualify my remarks by saying that I meant near demo quality only in the sense of the film being what it it is: 50+ year old, relatively low budget Black and White. I didn't mean to suggest it would be standard, modern BD demo stuff.

COLOSSUS OF NEW YORK got a slightly higher video score here (4.0 stars VS. 3.5 stars). While it certainly is excellent, I didn't think it was quite as good (video wise) as TOO LATE BLUES.

I don't have a projector (sure wish I did...someday). For the record, I have 60" Sharp and view from 8'.

[Blu-Velvet]

Well I do have an HD projector and watched TOO LATE BLUES last weekend along with five friends, projected approximately 4' x 7' wide, and I'd still rank most of it as near-demo in the class of most Criterion titles. (Now if only it had Criterion's bonus features.) We watched the BFI Blu-ray of Cassavetes' SHADOWS immediately preceding, which also looked very good, but being an even lower-budget independent shot on 16mm couldn't compare to the crisp and polished look of TOO LATE BLUES. Some liked one movie better than the other, but all were impressed by the picture quality of both.

[JMK]

You all should keep in mind that these numerical scores are not "standardized" and all of us reviewers take many factors into account when we score. Therefore, a 4.0 for one film is not directly analogous to a 3.5 for another, or indeed even a 4.0 for another. Every case must be approached individually, based on a number of issues like age, source elements, etc. I personally would much prefer if people would concentrate more on the actual comments about the image rather than the numerical score.

[pro-bassoonist]

Originally Posted by Dex Robinson

That's certainly a fair comment. I would qualify my remarks by saying that I meant near demo quality only in the sense of the film being what it it is: 50+ year old, relatively low budget Black and White. I didn't mean to suggest it would be standard, modern BD demo stuff.

Absolutely, I agree, Dex. But I personally favor the logic Jeff has outlined below. Either way, it is definitely a disc worth owning

Pro-B

[Dex Robinson]

Just watched THE SPACE CHILDREN. I'm actually familiar with this movie having seen it run several times on the "Space" channel here in Canada...back when they ran classic sci-fi movies and not movies about mega-crocasauruses.

The quality was good but it certainly isn't up to THE COLOSSUS OF NEW YORK (which agrees with the review here). The issues look to be entirely related to the source material and not any digital tampering. The source is dirtier with it's share of flecks, specks and pieces of fuzz. Black levels are inconsistent with stretches of perfection followed scenes where the blacks are washed out to dark greys. There's an instance or two where the image jumped like the film slipped a sprocket. And you can see a few scenes that look to have come from a multi-generational source with a build up of grain and contrast.

If that seems harsh, don't be deterred! In my "DVD days", I specialized in 1950's science fiction. I've owned and seen every DVD from CATWOMEN OF THE MOON to DEVIL GIRLS FROM MARS and TEENAGERS FROM OUTER SPACE. And I bought the best quality Image releases from the Wade Williams prints. If top quality DVDs weren't available for some movies, I 'd pick up the Alpha releases for things like KILLERS FROM SPACE. It it was 50's sci-fi on a DVD, I probably owned it.

While THE SPACE CHILDREN may not fare well in comparison to some recent Olive B&W Blu-ray releases, it's still presents a very fine image when compared to what has been available to us before. I've tried to be honest pointing out the shortcomings of the image. But I can also honestly say that I've spent money on DVDs that cost a lot more and were nowhere near as good looking as THE SPACE CHILDREN.

[bluskies]

I just watched The Geisha Boy, a film I fondly remember from my youth. Normally, Jerry Lewis movies go for the slapstick whenever possible, and oftentimes the pratfalls and shennagins are not really not that funny now. However, The Geisha Boy is a movie with humor and heart, possibly more so than any other Lewis film, and I still liked it as much with this viewing. There is humanity provided in the first scene where we meet Gilbert Wooley (Lewis), aka The Great Wooley, a not-so-good stage magician. When he arrives in a taxi at the airport, the fare is 95 cents and he gives a dollar bill to the driver, telling him to keep the change. When the driver makes a crack, Wooley lets him know with sincerity that is his last dollar, and that he only agreed to entertain to be part of the USO in order to make a little money. With this one exchange, Lewis gets us on his side right away.

Through mishaps at the airport in Japan, Wooley accidentally makes a fool of an arrogant female movie star, which causes a little Japanse boy (played very touchingly by Robert Kazuyoshi Hirano) to laugh for the first time since his parents were killed in an accident. The boy's aunt (a radiant Nobu Atsumi McCarthy) brings the boy to Wooley's hotel room to thank him for making the boy smile again, and Wooley starts to lose his heart to both aunt and nephew.

Wooley's adventures in Japan are usually done with respect to Japanese culture, though I did feel a little embarassment when he imitates the language at a baseball game. Suzanne Pleshette makes her screen debut in this film. Also appearing are film veterans Barton MacLane and Sessue Hayakawa, the latter who gets to partake in a tribute from Bridge Over the River Kwai. (It should be noted that Lewis occasionally takes us out of the movie we are watching to give the audience a proverbial wink with some funny business.) And a star is born with Harry the Hare.

The Blu video is excellent. It is wonderfully clean and doesn't appear to have been manipulated. Picture is sharp.

Audio is 2.0 and very clear.

Like other Olive films, there are no extras.

I recommend this movie for its heart and humor.

[bluskies]

I have just started watching The Mountain and the Paramount VistaVision opening made me think of another Par movie I hope Olive will do on Blu...The Court Jester starring Danny Kaye.

[oildude]

Pro-B, I just noticed that the review links / cover art for The Spirit is Willing and Tales that Witness Madness are missing from the first post.

[pro-bassoonist]

Thank you for catching these, oildude. I am unsure what happened there, but I added them up again.

[bluskies]

Just watched The Mountain. An unusual film, and not in a good way. It's the story of two brothers who are mountain climbers. When a plane crashes at the top of a mountain, one brother (Robert Wagner) wants to go up to the crash site in order to steal jewelry, cameras, and other valuable items from the corpses. His brother (Spencer Tracy) tries to stop him, but ends up going along in order to protect his less experienced sibling in the climb.

Let's start with a major flaw of this movie, and you may have already picked it out from my synopsis above: Casting. Fifty-six year old Spencer Tracy and twenty-six year old Robert Wagner...brothers? They look more like father and son. Further casting problems: you know a film is in trouble when they cast William Demarest as a priest. Claire Trevor, who gets third billing, is wasted in a tiny role as a village woman with romantic plans for Tracy.

Flaw number two: Studio sets. Except for a handful of scenes with the stars outdoors, most of the scenes on the mountain with the stars are obviously studio sets, intercut with doubles on an actual mountain. And though they are supposed to be on top of a mountain with snow and freezing temperatures, you never see a fog breath.

Flaw number three: Characters. Robert Wagner plays possibly the most despicable character of all his film roles. He goes on and on about how he wants to get money to escape his life in the village. It is an unbelievable one-note character who annoys you so much you hope he will die as soon as possible in the movie.

The video quality is a mixed bag. It varies between HD quality shots and upgraded DVD video.

Audio is good

No extras.

Worth a look if you can rent this, but even as a classic film fan I find it hard to recommend it as a buy.

[Mr.Dig]

The Mountain was an unusal film,but in a very good way! Enjoyed it very much. The picture quality could have been better,but overall a good blu-ray release from Olive Films

[Monty70]

Originally Posted by Mr.Dig

The Mountain was an unusal film,but in a very good way! Enjoyed it very much. The picture quality could have been better,but overall a good blu-ray release from Olive Films

I second Mr. Dig's opinion of the film and BD.

[Atreyu]

Originally Posted by bluskies

I have just started watching The Mountain and the Paramount VistaVision opening made me think of another Par movie I hope Olive will do on Blu...The Court Jester starring Danny Kaye.

The Court Jester could be marvelous on blu if handled properly. "The pellet with the poision is in the vessle with the pestle, the flagon with the dragon holds the brew that is true."

[KilloWertz]

Originally Posted by Trekkie313

Lack of captions/subtitles is bullcrap...does it really cost that much? There should be a law requiring all home movie release to at least have them for the "hearing impaired or deaf" like myself.

I realize this is bringing back a two week old discussion, but I only just realized that no Olive release has subtitles after reading the latest reviews for High Noon and The Invasion of the Body Snatchers.

I agree with you. I'm not going to just shrug off the excuse that it costs money to add them, especially when their releases rarely cost less than $20. I know it costs money to add them, but subtitles are as important to a decent amount of people as the disc itself. It's a shame that I'll never be able to purchase any of their releases because of a lack of subtitles.

[The Duke]

Originally Posted by bluskies

I just watched The Geisha Boy,

[Show spoiler]a film I fondly remember from my youth. Normally, Jerry Lewis movies go for the slapstick whenever possible, and oftentimes the pratfalls and shennagins are not really not that funny now. However, The Geisha Boy is a movie with humor and heart, possibly more so than any other Lewis film, and I still liked it as much with this viewing. There is humanity provided in the first scene where we meet Gilbert Wooley (Lewis), aka The Great Wooley, a not-so-good stage magician. When he arrives in a taxi at the airport, the fare is 95 cents and he gives a dollar bill to the driver, telling him to keep the change. When the driver makes a crack, Wooley lets him know with sincerity that is his last dollar, and that he only agreed to entertain to be part of the USO in order to make a little money. With this one exchange, Lewis gets us on his side right away.

Through mishaps at the airport in Japan, Wooley accidentally makes a fool of an arrogant female movie star, which causes a little Japanse boy (played very touchingly by Robert Kazuyoshi Hirano) to laugh for the first time since his parents were killed in an accident. The boy's aunt (a radiant Nobu Atsumi McCarthy) brings the boy to Wooley's hotel room to thank him for making the boy smile again, and Wooley starts to lose his heart to both aunt and nephew.

Wooley's adventures in Japan are usually done with respect to Japanese culture, though I did feel a little embarassment when he imitates the language at a baseball game. Suzanne Pleshette makes her screen debut in this film. Also appearing are film veterans Barton MacLane and Sessue Hayakawa, the latter who gets to partake in a tribute from Bridge Over the River Kwai. (It should be noted that Lewis occasionally takes us out of the movie we are watching to give the audience a proverbial wink with some funny business.) And a star is born with Harry the Hare.

The Blu video is excellent. It is wonderfully clean and doesn't appear to have been manipulated. Picture is sharp.

Audio is 2.0 and very clear.

Like other Olive films, there are no extras.

I recommend this movie for its heart and humor.

Thanks for your impressions. I've never cared for Jerry Lewis's style of comedy, but you convinced me to add this to my ClassicFlix rental Q.

Originally Posted by bluskies

Just watched The Mountain. An unusual film, and not in a good way.

[Show spoiler] It's the story of two brothers who are mountain climbers. When a plane crashes at the top of a mountain, one brother (Robert Wagner) wants to go up to the crash site in order to steal jewelry, cameras, and other valuable items from the corpses. His brother (Spencer Tracy) tries to stop him, but ends up going along in order to protect his less experienced sibling in the climb.

Let's start with a major flaw of this movie, and you may have already picked it out from my synopsis above: Casting. Fifty-six year old Spencer Tracy and twenty-six year old Robert Wagner...brothers? They look more like father and son. Further casting problems: you know a film is in trouble when they cast William Demarest as a priest. Claire Trevor, who gets third billing, is wasted in a tiny role as a village woman with romantic plans for Tracy.

Flaw number two: Studio sets. Except for a handful of scenes with the stars outdoors, most of the scenes on the mountain with the stars are obviously studio sets, intercut with doubles on an actual mountain. And though they are supposed to be on top of a mountain with snow and freezing temperatures, you never see a fog breath.

Flaw number three: Characters. Robert Wagner plays possibly the most despicable character of all his film roles. He goes on and on about how he wants to get money to escape his life in the village. It is an unbelievable one-note character who annoys you so much you hope he will die as soon as possible in the movie.

The video quality is a mixed bag. It varies between HD quality shots and upgraded DVD video.

Audio is good

No extras.

Worth a look if you can rent this, but even as a classic film fan I find it hard to recommend it as a buy.

Well, I bought and am happy to have it in my collection. Yes, pairing Tracy & Wagner as brothers was pretty silly given their 30 years age difference, but I just thought of them as father & son during the movie, which is much more believable. Yes, of course they didn't lug movie cameras & crew up a mountain in 1956, but I thought the studio sets were reasonably realistic. Want to see phoney looking? Rent The Grey - I gave up at the scene where Liam Neeson was holding up a flame torch and all you see it a dozen beady eyes of wolves in the darkness.

And yes, The Mountain and most any pre-1970 movie can be easily rented at ClassicFlix.com. I use Netflix as my primary rental source, but keep a one-at-a-time rental at ClassicFlix for classics I feel are worth a watch but not necessarily a purchase - and Netflix is very poor at carrying classics on BD.

[whitesheik]

Originally Posted by bluskies

Just watched The Mountain. An unusual film, and not in a good way. It's the story of two brothers who are mountain climbers. When a plane crashes at the top of a mountain, one brother (Robert Wagner) wants to go up to the crash site in order to steal jewelry, cameras, and other valuable items from the corpses. His brother (Spencer Tracy) tries to stop him, but ends up going along in order to protect his less experienced sibling in the climb.

Let's start with a major flaw of this movie, and you may have already picked it out from my synopsis above: Casting. Fifty-six year old Spencer Tracy and twenty-six year old Robert Wagner...brothers? They look more like father and son. Further casting problems: you know a film is in trouble when they cast William Demarest as a priest. Claire Trevor, who gets third billing, is wasted in a tiny role as a village woman with romantic plans for Tracy.

Flaw number two: Studio sets. Except for a handful of scenes with the stars outdoors, most of the scenes on the mountain with the stars are obviously studio sets, intercut with doubles on an actual mountain. And though they are supposed to be on top of a mountain with snow and freezing temperatures, you never see a fog breath.

Flaw number three: Characters. Robert Wagner plays possibly the most despicable character of all his film roles. He goes on and on about how he wants to get money to escape his life in the village. It is an unbelievable one-note character who annoys you so much you hope he will die as soon as possible in the movie.

The video quality is a mixed bag. It varies between HD quality shots and upgraded DVD video.

Audio is good

No extras.

Worth a look if you can rent this, but even as a classic film fan I find it hard to recommend it as a buy.

The quality in terms of the transfer doesn't vary at all - how can it? The transfer is the transfer. It varies because of the opticals, rear projection, etc.

[whitesheik]

Originally Posted by Atreyu

The Court Jester could be marvelous on blu if handled properly. "The pellet with the poision is in the vessle with the pestle, the flagon with the dragon holds the brew that is true."

I hope they don't give it to Olive. I hope they bring Ron Smith back and let him go from the VistaVision negative - THAT would be spectacular. The IB Tech 35mm prints on Court Jester are spectacular, but this film has NEVER looked good on home video. Bring it on - just bring it on the right way.

[JoeDeM]

Originally Posted by whitesheik

I hope they don't give it to Olive. I hope they bring Ron Smith back and let him go from the VistaVision negative - THAT would be spectacular. The IB Tech 35mm prints on Court Jester are spectacular, but this film has NEVER looked good on home video. Bring it on - just bring it on the right way.

I would love to see this, it's one of my favorite movies.

[bluskies]

Originally Posted by whitesheik

The quality in terms of the transfer doesn't vary at all - how can it? The transfer is the transfer. It varies because of the opticals, rear projection, etc.

I phrased it badly. What I meant was that some shots looked better than others, owing to how the thing was photographed.