Night of the Living Dead (1968)

[RiFiFi1955]

Anyone else, going to attend this? I wonder how much. My birthday is November 2nd so this would make a great B-day present.

[I KEEL YOU]

Originally Posted by deepbreathsanddeath

"MoMA first acquired an original print in 1970 for its collection. Now, decades later, the Museum presents this important motion picture in its best possible state after a painstaking audio and image restoration."

3 paragraphs below:
"The Film Foundation is thrilled that George Romero’s groundbreaking film is being restored from the original camera negative and track."

I wonder if they have a print in addition to now using the original camera negative, or if this is another case of someone throwing the words "restoration" and "OCN" around for marketing purposes. Definitely keen to see if this is released in any event.

Yeah, I sure hope that the original negative is the source of the restoration.

A 2K restoration from the original negative > A 4K restoration from a print (or an 8K one for that matter)

[James_Younger_Gang]

Are we getting a blu ray release or not?

[GeoffOliver]

I was considering finally going for the Japanese release, but now I'll probably hold out for this to come out on disc. I would love to see Scream Factory release this and Dawn of the Dead...

It's surprisingly pretty difficult to find public domain films on Blu-ray. You would think with how easy it was to find them on VHS and DVD, we'd see more.

[MTRodaba2468]

As much as I enjoy the Japanese release, if this restoration gets a Blu-Ray release here, I'll be more than willing to check it out...

[GasmaskAvenger]

Screw Academy ratio, I want a widescreen transfer of the original NOTLD.

Those widescreen prints floating around indeed show image information not available in full frame prints.

The 4K transfer should be like the new Hershell Gordon Lewis set with several films shown in both aspect ratios.

[twozbar]

Originally Posted by I KEEL YOU

Yeah, I sure hope that the original negative is the source of the restoration.

A 2K restoration from the original negative > A 4K restoration from a print (or an 8K one for that matter)

MoMA was provided with the original 35mm negative and several prints as back-up. It was determined that the original negative was all that was needed for the restoration.

Originally Posted by GasmaskAvenger

Screw Academy ratio, I want a widescreen transfer of the original NOTLD.

Those widescreen prints floating around indeed show image information not available in full frame prints.

The original negative shows that Academy ratio is the proper framing for Night of the Living Dead.

[WaverBoy]

If a Blu-ray release of this restoration doesn't include the additional footage in an alternate cut, I'm going to be very disappointed. Unless the footage never actually turned up; was it ever confirmed for sure? I can't remember now whether George had actually seen the footage or if he was repeating what he had heard.

[mayorofsmpleton]

Originally Posted by Bates_Motel

100% false, spreading misinformation.

And no, TV movies aren't composed considering possible theatrical screenings, either.

Actually some TV movies from the 80s and 90s were shot with the thought that they may screen in theaters internationally. It's not very common but it's happened.

That said 4:3 NOTLD is fine by me.

[Trekkie313]

Originally Posted by WaverBoy

If a Blu-ray release of this restoration doesn't include the additional footage in an alternate cut, I'm going to be very disappointed. Unless the footage never actually turned up; was it ever confirmed for sure? I can't remember now whether George had actually seen the footage or if he was repeating what he had heard.

You mean the awful 30th Anniversary Edition with newly shot footage?

[JoeBuck]

Originally Posted by Trekkie313

You mean the awful 30th Anniversary Edition with newly shot footage?

No, there were reports that George Romero had stated that when they were digging up the materials for this restoration that they had found a scene in the basement that had been missing for ages and that they intended to restore it to this version.

[Brianruns10]

You know, I wouldn't be surprised if this new restoration ultimately lands on the door of the Criterion Collection. For a long time there have been fans lobbying hard for Criterion to do a definitive release of this film, and they've got pretty strong ties to the Film Foundation, having released no fewer than a half dozen of their restorations in the past few years.

[jlk5844]

I have no idea cause I wasn't there when the movie was shot, I don't want to make baseless claims, but it certainly is odd that Romero & co. wouldn't be thinking of widescreen when that's how movies were being shown. It's not like Romero never walked into a cinema before making Night of the Living Dead. He had to have known, but maybe he/they were just more comfortable shooting in academy because that was their background, or that ratio was simply his vision for the movie. It would be nice to see this in multiple aspect ratios, as long as there's no cropped heads or excess headroom. But whichever ratio it is, I'm fine with it.

The Happinet Blu-ray I have yet to purchase, so I might as well wait. I'm just concerned about those extras not being carried over, would be worth it for those. I don't see Arrow picking this up, doesn't really fit their wheelhouse, the type of films they release here in the U.S. I see this going to Criterion, and I'd be over the moon with that so long as they don't screw up the compression. I'd love if this were screening near me within the next month or two, but regardless I can't wait to finally own this classic on Blu-ray! It's been awhile since I've seen it.

[Jar Jar Stinks]

Originally Posted by twozbar

MoMA was provided with the original 35mm negative and several prints as back-up. It was determined that the original negative was all that was needed for the restoration.




The original negative shows that Academy ratio is the proper framing for Night of the Living Dead.

You seem very knowledgeable. Were you involved in this project?

[twozbar]

Originally Posted by Jar Jar Stinks

You seem very knowledgeable. Were you involved in this project?

Yes, I work together with Gary Streiner, one of the original Image Ten filmmakers, and person who spearheaded the MoMA acquisition and restoration.

Now that MoMA has made the official announcement, Gary is preparing additional information which will answer some of the questions pertaining to the film. I will post his comments here as soon as available.

[Killer Meteor]

Originally Posted by jlk5844

I have no idea cause I wasn't there when the movie was shot, I don't want to make baseless claims, but it certainly is odd that Romero & co. wouldn't be thinking of widescreen when that's how movies were being shown. It's not like Romero never walked into a cinema before making Night of the Living Dead. He had to have known, but maybe he/they were just more comfortable shooting in academy because that was their background, or that ratio was simply his vision for the movie. It would be nice to see this in multiple aspect ratios, as long as there's no cropped heads or excess headroom. But whichever ratio it is, I'm fine with it.

The Happinet Blu-ray I have yet to purchase, so I might as well wait. I'm just concerned about those extras not being carried over, would be worth it for those. I don't see Arrow picking this up, doesn't really fit their wheelhouse, the type of films they release here in the U.S. I see this going to Criterion, and I'd be over the moon with that so long as they don't screw up the compression. I'd love if this were screening near me within the next month or two, but regardless I can't wait to finally own this classic on Blu-ray! It's been awhile since I've seen it.

My suspicion is that Night's ratio depended on who was holding the camera at any given time.

[thatguamguy]

Originally Posted by GeoffOliver

It's surprisingly pretty difficult to find public domain films on Blu-ray. You would think with how easy it was to find them on VHS and DVD, we'd see more.

I gather that the problem is that distributors don't want to spend money to restore a public domain movie to Blu-ray quality and then have low-rent companies steal the transfer and release it because it's a public domain movie. There are few movies that are public domain that are financially worth the headache.

[Saucerful]

Originally Posted by thatguamguy

I gather that the problem is that distributors don't want to spend money to restore a public domain movie to Blu-ray quality and then have low-rent companies steal the transfer and release it because it's a public domain movie. There are few movies that are public domain that are financially worth the headache.

I've always wondered how that worked. Obviously they don't have to pay for the film itself, but are they allowed to just nick the transfer from another release like that? I always figured they were still required to license or produce their own transfer.

[bigbadwoppet]

Originally Posted by VideoPhonic

Sure, NOTLD has enough room that it's "showable" widescreen but it wasn't intended for it. Romero & Image Ten simply weren't thinking widescreen when making it. And just because a film is composed for 1.33:1, that doesn't mean it would stop a theater in '68 from showing it on a typical widescreen setup regardless of showability. Plus, not every 1.33:1 film is filled with extreme close ups or shots that would instantly deem it "unshowable."

When filmmakers aren't thinking widescreen, they don't leave headroom. You can compose for matted widescreen and protect for academy but not the other way around.

The fact that the negative is at 1.37:1 does not mean it was framed for that. Most movies are soft-matted, the whole frame exposed for tv showings.

The titles are clearly blocked for matting.

And it was filmed in 1967, not 1957! Romero must have been aware of the fact that everything was shown matted by then and to be aware means he must have composed accordingly. He may prefer it at academy (wouldn't be the only one) but I truly doubt he composed on purpose so it couldn't be shown theatrically. NOTLD would have never been shown on TV back then. It would have been deemed too scary and this is no case where cutting a few scenes would do the trick.

Also, as we can now seen on blu-ray, 1.37:1 does show quite a bit more than 1.33:1. The 4x3 transfers floating around do not show all horizontal image.

[mhb2862]

If the eventual release is open matte 1.37:1 and people want to watch it 1.66:1, just zoom in with your remote. Literally the same result as what you'd get in a theater in 1968 showing this movie widescreen. Release the disc open matte and everybody can watch the film how they want.