The Hallelujah Trail (1965)

[yellowcakeuf6]

Originally Posted by T. Warren Scollan

I've found the best way to try to figure out ahead of time what you're probably going to get is to check out the aspect ratio:

2.35/2.39/2.4 to 1 = anamorphic 35mm reduction print or in between element.
2.2/2.21 to 1 = 70mm print or 65mm in between element.
2.76 to 1 = a glorious anamorphic Ultra Panavision 70mm print or 65mm in between element.

What do you mean by "in between element"?

[SFMike]

Received my copy and I'm more than disappointed. Olive should be ashamed to release such a crappy transfer on blu-ray as the resolution only makes it look worse. Would have been better as a DVD or better yet not released in this condition at all. I found it unwatchable on a big screen. I will wait for reviews before buying another Olive release as this has made me lose faith in them. Pathetic.

[Paulo Elias]

Originally Posted by SFMike

Received my copy and I'm more than disappointed. Olive should be ashamed to release such a crappy transfer on blu-ray as the resolution only makes it look worse. Would have been better as a DVD or better yet not released in this condition at all. I found it unwatchable on a big screen. I will wait for reviews before buying another Olive release as this has made me lose faith in them. Pathetic.

Well, that about does it. Ordering this disc now is out of the question!

Why should Olive mess with a collector's catalogue title? I had already to endure buying the R2 DVD because the R1 was 4:3 letterbox flooded with compression artefacts. Still, the R2, albeit 16:9 anamorphic, is cropped to 2.35:1, thus destroying the movie original aspect ratio.

[DMRI2006]

Originally Posted by T. Warren Scollan

And it's not just Olive. Twilight time released a Blu-ray of "Solomon and Sheba" which was filmed in Technirama and released in Technirama Super 70 but their Blu-ray was taken from a anamorphic Panavision 35mm reduction print with a mono optical sound track. When I tried to query them about it, they played the "non-denial/denial" game. The same type of scan was done by Universal for the first "Airport" Blu-ray, originally filmed in Todd-AO!

At least none of those transfers were upscales! The real headline here is it's genuine, 100% standard-definition. This transfer is so poor it wouldn't even matter what the source or aspect ratio was.

I mean we've had DNR-doused transfers and "ruined" presentations of movies -- but this one deserves a special place in the Worst Format Releases of All-Time. The least Olive could have done is admit it was an upscale.

[yellowcakeuf6]

I'm out.

[gates70]

I collect Burt Lancaster movies and it pains me to say that I just cancelled this one. I usually don't listen to people that don't like a transfer but this seems like an overwhelming amount of people saying the same thing, so cancelled.

[T. Warren Scollan]

Originally Posted by yellowcakeuf6

What do you mean by "in between element"?

A film element which is in the various stages between the OCN (original camera negative) and a release print (the film used in the projection booth at your local theater). It might be an internegative, interpositive, work print, fine grain master, etc. Once they go to a smaller format, you can't really get what's lost. It's like making a CD recording from a 78rpm record; It won't really sound any better than the source material.

[cinerama]

Review over at dvdbeaver.com. Cropped on the sides and bottom compared to the R2 DVD - see post 222.

[Paulo Elias]

Thanks for the heads up. Gary Tooze is a reliable reviewer. It is noteworthy that this is a single-layered disc as reported. No wonder the picture quality is poor!

[RICKBONDOO7]

The Review is on DVD Beaver today. I never saw the film, But it looks Terrible to me. No sharpness and weak color. I have many Olive titles in my collection. I can't believe they would release something with poor picture quality like this.

[yellowcakeuf6]

Originally Posted by T. Warren Scollan

A film element which is in the various stages between the OCN (original camera negative) and a release print (the film used in the projection booth at your local theater). It might be an internegative, interpositive, work print, fine grain master, etc. Once they go to a smaller format, you can't really get what's lost. It's like making a CD recording from a 78rpm record; It won't really sound any better than the source material.

OK, any copy from the original negative up to just before the print master. Never heard that term before.

I just saw the DVD Beaver review, and it looks like his DVD screenshots. This is most likely it for this movie on physical home media. I may get it in the future, but it would have to be less than 10 bucks.

[MifuneFan]

Ouch yeah that's pretty bad. Olive didn't help anything by using a BD-25 with an anemic bitrate.

[uncledougie]

This is truly disgraceful not to put forth a better effort than this. It was delivered today but I’m not sure I can stomach watching it considering the early reviews. If the running time is accurate including Overture, Intermission and any Exit Music then the film has to somehow be at least 10 minutes short of complete, while at least the laserdisc was the complete roadshow release. Why bother releasing it at all if you’re not going to put forth the effort to get it as close to correct as possible? Would it do any good to write Olive to complain? Doubtful.

[noirjunkie]

That looks like an upscale, and a bad one at that. Pass.

[Dan_Shane]

Originally Posted by Tns49

The Blu-ray is a huge improvement over the DVD, but somewhat a disappointment. Its clearly not even close to the caliber that a Ultra-Panavision title should have been. The audio is in stereo (thank goodness the rear cover is wrong as it says Mono). It does sound fairly good, but again
far from the original 6 track sound.

I watched the disc straight through. Your assessment is pretty accurate, however even the stereo audio us faulty. At times the directional audio is on the wrong side of the screen, and the music score sometimes is too light in the right channel.

Better than the R1 DVD, but only barely.

[T. Warren Scollan]

Originally Posted by yellowcakeuf6

OK, any copy from the original negative up to just before the print master. Never heard that term before.

I just saw the DVD Beaver review, and it looks like his DVD screenshots. This is most likely it for this movie on physical home media. I may get it in the future, but it would have to be less than 10 bucks.

"In between element" was probably not a very good term; I just didn't know what else to use to cover all the different kinds of elements that follow the OCN and precede the final release prints.

[cinerama]

Watch a bit of it over the weekend. Picture quality is pretty bad. My DVD's look better than this. Nice to have the overture, intermission and exit music playing over a blank screen- at least they got that right. 2.0 Dolby Surround sounded fine - three front and surround speakers all active.

[T. Warren Scollan]

Yeah, but I'm betting they used a lot of digital audio tricks to fake it all from a mono optical track. That is the cheap way to go which is SOP for Olive. And I challenge Olive to get on here and say anything different!!!

[Dan_Shane]

Originally Posted by T. Warren Scollan

Yeah, but I'm betting they used a lot of digital audio tricks to fake it all from a mono optical track. That is the cheap way to go which is SOP for Olive. And I challenge Olive to get on here and say anything different!!!

I wouldn't be surprised. We watched the whole film, and the audio is sometimes emitted from a single channel when it should be centered. On at least one occasion the directional audio is incorrect. Not a perfect mix by any stretch.

[Number 6]

I waited years for this to come out on Blu-ray only to be disappointed. If this transfer was made using the best available elements then "The Hallelujah Trail" needs to be placed on the restoration list ASAP. Glad I kept my 2001 DVD of this film.