Midnight Cowboy (1969)

[CineSicko]

Originally Posted by Bates_Motel

The only FACT I know, besides what I just posted, is that the colors on the MGM were NOT correct. Yes, whites were generally whiter but the rest was pushed way too red, so comparing the Criterion to it offers absolutely no definitive proof that it is right or wrong.

How do you know the colors on the MGM weren't correct?

[Dailyan]

Originally Posted by CineSicko

How do you know the colors on the MGM weren't correct?

Have you... seen the disc?

[RCRochester]

Originally Posted by CineSicko

How do you know the colors on the MGM weren't correct?

Because the Criterion release was supervised by the guy who shot the film and I’ll trust him over you or any other Monday morning quarterback offering his two cents on the matter, especially those who haven’t even watched the disc.

[CineSicko]

Originally Posted by Dailyan

Have you... seen the disc?

Heh. Yeah, I own it. While I agree with the consensus that it's a bit pink, the question remains: How does Bates Motel know for a "fact" that it's inaccurate? Thanks for chiming in though, I guess, even if there was no force behind it.

[CineSicko]

Originally Posted by RCRochester

Because the Criterion release was supervised by the guy who shot the film and I’ll trust him over you or any other Monday morning quarterback offering his two cents on the matter, especially those who haven’t even watched the disc.

Don't blow a gasket. If you're so agitated by this discussion, remember there's an option: Take off. Oh, but hey, congratulations on your big purchase, guy. It's clear that you're defending it to the moon and back because it put a major crimp in your budget.

[Dailyan]

Originally Posted by CineSicko

Heh. Yeah, I own it. While I agree with the consensus that it's a bit pink, the question remains: How does Bates Motel know for a "fact" that it's inaccurate? Thanks for chiming in though, I guess, even if there was no force behind it.

Originally Posted by CineSicko

Don't blow a gasket. If you're so agitated by this discussion, remember there's an option: Take off. Oh, but hey, congratulations on your big purchase, guy. It's clear that you're defending it to the moon and back because it put a major crimp in your budget.

You know if you're going to come off as overly bold then at least have the decency to use multi-quote.

[CineSicko]

Originally Posted by Dailyan

You know if you're going to come off as overly bold then at least have the decency to use multi-quote.

Noted, geek.

[Shanghai Express]

This thread

[English Patient]

Originally Posted by ambient_indie

I'm probably not going to pick up Criterion's Midnight Cowboy release. It's one of my favorite movies and saw it projected in 35mm 5 years ago. I have the MGM, but I'm not supporting the heavy tealing of classic films. If this was the way it was originally intended there would be significant evidence to it. Just like the look of Moby Dick or other films made with a certain color effect.

There is no "heavy tealing." I've watched it twice. And I have the MGM disc to compare it to.

[CineSicko]

Originally Posted by English Patient

There is no "heavy tealing." I've watched it twice. And I have the MGM disc to compare it to.

Is that right?

http://caps-a-holic.com/c.php?go=1&a...118573&i=6&l=0

[AwkwardBoner]

Originally Posted by mrmikefern

This thread

[English Patient]

Originally Posted by CineSicko

Is that right?

http://caps-a-holic.com/c.php?go=1&a...118573&i=6&l=0

And there are about a thousand shots in the film where there ISN'T this tint, which would support MY argument. So no, there is no heavy tealing or blanket tealing or whatever permeating the entire film. And how does anyone know if the MGM disc was accurate in the first place? My point is that the panic over "tealing" is way, way, way overblown.

[JohnCarpenterFan]

Wow, this thread has descended into lunacy. No much wonder insiders are laughing at the absurd comments on this thread.

"Blanket this, blanket that" Sounds like we're on some sort of bedding forum. These are terms nobody uses in an unironic manner if they actually know what they're talking about. Seriously, I showed someone (who has been a professional colorist for decades) some of these "blanket" comments and they had no idea what any of them meant. I even asked someone on here years ago what they meant by "blanket tint" and I received several completely different definitions. Hilariously, none applied to the Blu-ray that was accused of having one.

This is just embarrassing. Knowing that professionals/insiders on other forums can read this and are mocking the site as a whole makes it even worse. As Bob Dylan said: "Don't criticize what you can't understand."

[RCRochester]

Originally Posted by CineSicko

Don't blow a gasket. If you're so agitated by this discussion, remember there's an option: Take off. Oh, but hey, congratulations on your big purchase, guy. It's clear that you're defending it to the moon and back because it put a major crimp in your budget.

Take off? I was on this thread discussing this release long before you stuck your nose in it and are now resorting to witless attempts at cheap shots, no doubt culled from the Code Red thread rock you normally reside under.

[Bates_Motel]

Originally Posted by CineSicko

How do you know the colors on the MGM weren't correct?

Look at it, for one.

I mean, people are quick to (incorrectly) scream "blanket teal!" of which there is no "blanket" anything on the Criterion, yet ignore the actual blanket magenta that covers the previous MGM release.

The Internet is rich.

[Shanghai Express]

Cackling at all the smugness and vitriol in this thread, even though there are two easily accessible Blu-ray editions of this film that suit each camp's preferences. The personal attacks, the willful ignorance of some, and the blind devotion and arrogance of others, really has no place here. I, like many others, enjoyed checking this thread for news and opinions on this release until it devolved into a silly little schoolgirl catfight. I assure you it's not that serious, not as long as there are multiple versions still available to choose from. Pages and pages of this mess, jeez.

[CineSicko]

Originally Posted by English Patient

And there are about a thousand shots in the film where there ISN'T this tint, which would support MY argument. So no, there is no heavy tealing or blanket tealing or whatever permeating the entire film.

I never said there was "heavy" or "blanket" tealing throughout the film, so I'm not sure why you're directing such a comment at me. Does anyone read around here?

Originally Posted by JohnCarpenterFan

Wow, this thread has descended into lunacy. No much wonder insiders are laughing at the absurd comments on this thread.

Funny that the guy with the THEY LIVE avatar is concerned about the image of this website. Seriously, what do you care what "insiders" think of blu-ray.com, Nada?

By the way, what do these insiders think of the occasionally extreme teal going on in this release? Wait, I already know your M.O., which is to present your opinion as fact and then bury any contrary viewpoints in the recesses of your mind, so I won't expect you to post anything that opposes your perspective on the subject. Forget it.

Originally Posted by RCRochester

Take off? I was on this thread discussing this release long before you stuck your nose in it and are now resorting to witless attempts at cheap shots, no doubt culled from the Code Red thread rock you normally reside under.

You are such a baby. Look at you. Don't call me "witless," for one thing, as you've proven yourself to be both humorless and, frankly, dim (not to mention an amusingly hostile nebbish). Secondly, I post in plenty of threads, not just the Code Red one, which I haven't posted in for quite some time. There are many rocks under which I lurk. Now, why don't you contribute something here apart from your opinion, like maybe some kind of evidence that the Criterion is a direct representation of the theatrical appearance? Go on, start digging. Maybe it'll help you burn off some of that negative energy.

Originally Posted by Bates_Motel

Look at it, for one.

You said you know for a "FACT" that the MGM color is wrong. Sounds to me like you don't know anything about the subject. Here: http://www.dictionary.com/browse/fact?s=t You're welcome.

[CineSicko]

Originally Posted by mrmikefern

Cackling at all the smugness and vitriol in this thread, even though there are two easily accessible Blu-ray editions of this film that suit each camp's preferences. The personal attacks, the willful ignorance of some, and the blind devotion and arrogance of others, really has no place here. I, like many others, enjoyed checking this thread for news and opinions on this release until it devolved into a silly little schoolgirl catfight. I assure you it's not that serious, not as long as there are multiple versions still available to choose from. Pages and pages of this mess, jeez.

Shaddap, hall monitor.

[Shanghai Express]

Originally Posted by CineSicko

Shaddap, hall monitor.

No. Like yourself, I'm actually on the anti-Criterion-edition side of things here, and that's just my personal opinion, but I like this forum enough to speak up when I think one of my favorite threads has been derailed. I'm not the most active poster here and mainly I just browse the threads silently but sometimes I do participate and when I do, I don't deserve to be told to shut up. This is a forum for enthusiasts...

[English Patient]

Originally Posted by CineSicko

I never said there was "heavy" or "blanket" tealing throughout the film, so I'm not sure why you're directing such a comment at me. Does anyone read around here?

Yeah, we do read. And I'm directing my comment at you and anyone else who seems to be concerned about the color timing, whether or not it's called "heavy tealing" or "blanket tealing or "occasionally extreme tealing." After reading some of the initial outrage about the screenshots, I was half-expecting the disc to have the look of a Michael Bay movie - but it didn't.

For what it's worth, the Criterion disc doesn't have the moments of print damage and dirt that the MGM has (like in the fantasy sequence where Joe and Ratso are running on the beach - the MGM disc has a little hair on the image). That alone should make it a worthy upgrade.