"Club Penton" - Ask questions to Hollywood insider "Penton-Man"

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Dennis M

Farid, Penton is looking to see if the sand will need a bit of green tint in it first.

Added: Sorry, I couldn't help myself.

You know, I haven’t spoken much to that ‘green’ subject directly, out of respect to P.J. because he has a good heart and is a Director to be respected. I feel he has always had his fans in best interest and in the end, for people who have already made more money than they could probably spend in their lifetime, it all comes down to your legacy, and for a filmmaker, that means how you will be remembered by your fans long after you stop making motion pictures.

This whole online green tint controversy with FOTR has left a rather bad taste in my mouth. I just wonder if PJ is being handcuffed by *the machine* in not personally offering a response, or at least, having an associate who was directly involved in the color grading, respond to this online controversy.

For some perspective as to why I feel this way, a little history lesson is in order, the significance of which should not be discounted. Back when the second film in the trilogy was being shown in cinemas, one guy and I emphasize the word ONE

had a reservation with some other digital intermediate color grading choices made for that particular motion picture. Now, granted this individual was somewhat adept at recognizing picture quality nuances given his affiliated work/profession but, he was by no means a digital colorist, cinematographer, etc. nor a member of any Guild associated with filmmaking. He was posting on a rather obscure message board on the internet and his query was presented more as a concerned cinephile and hobbyist….like most folks here. Hell, nobody on that message board even knew him from Adam…so to speak. I know him now, and I consider him a fine fellow.

Anyway, this one hobbyist’s query prompted a filmmaker directly involved in the post production process of TTT and who identified himself as speaking about the topic after consulting with both PJ and Andrew L., to extensively address the concerns of this hobbyist with an online response.

So now, here we are, nearly a decade later, and we have hundreds (if not thousands?) wondering what the heck is up with the green tint ………..and not a word from PJ….much less from one of his colleagues who was physically present in the DI suite and whom really are the only ones that folks can trust as to addressing the nuances of the process….rather than vague third-party statements.

I can sympathize with peoples’ frustrations on this matter. It really does make one wonder.

[sharkshark]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

and running like hell with the camera!

I’m impressed shark, as I don't think many folks know that . No wonder you're a bigtime reviewer for the Toronto Internation Film Festival.

Speaking of, just found out I was re-accredited for 2011.

BOOYA.

Yes , Arnold and Richter (the manufacturers of Arriflex cameras) built a brand new camera for Das Boot of which proved to be an elegant hand-held solution for the time. That camera, combined with a uniques gyro-stabilized attachment, allowed Jost Vacano, BVK, to make it all happen. B.T.W., at that time in filmmaking, at least in Germany, most all cinematographers operated their own cameras (i.e. were also the ‘camera operator’).

Was unaware of those details, very cool...

My only nerdiness about DB was that it was the sub used in RAIDERS...

Just going through extras on GOMORAH, yet another film you should check out (stop typing and actually watch some of those Blu discs you talk about all the time... )

[JimSD]

Penton, I'm surprised they let Horner get back on his bike today:

http://video.bicycling.com/video/Chr...-Stage-7-Crash

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by JimSD

Penton, I'm surprised they let Horner get back on his bike today: http://video.bicycling.com/video/Chr...-Stage-7-Crash

I don’t get to watch each stage until late in the evening after getting back home from work, so I won’t check out your video until much later. But thanks for the link though . So far, I love this year’s tour and the American teams are doing sensational!

I see you’ve changed your avatar yet again . Hey sharkshark, did you know that a diver can grab onto the back portion of the shell of Jim’s sea turtle and those suckers are so strong that they can effortlessly give you a ride for a few meters. I’ve done that more than once on dives in the Caribbean.

Anyway, another day another dollar, have a good weekend folks. ‘tube of the day, for where I'll be early tomorrow mornin…

YouTube - ‪Blue Crush - Cruel Summer‬‏

[MerrickG]

Penton,

I know how much you love soccer and I am sure you are look forward to seeing Hope Solo put Marta in her place.

[rickah88]

Originally Posted by merrick97

Penton,

I know how much you love soccer and I am sure you are look forward to seeing Hope Solo put Marta in her place.

Not to be overly rude, but I'd love to put one in Hope Solo's net....while wearing 3D glasses!

[JimSD]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

I see you’ve changed your avatar yet again . Hey sharkshark, did you know that a diver can grab onto the back portion of the shell of Jim’s sea turtle and those suckers are so strong that they can effortlessly give you a ride for a few meters. I’ve done that more than once on dives in the Caribbean.

Not allowed to touch'em in Hawaii, but sounds like fun.

[ole geezer]

Originally Posted by worth

Colour can actually be used in a way that reveals something about the characters and helps tell the story. I don't get that with 3D. I'd compare 3D more to surround sound or widescreen...

Just for the sake of discussion and clarification, I sure wish you could give an example of what you're talking about. It sounds to me like you're saying color perhaps as a tool... is more important than picture and sound.

I just don't see how that's possible.

[ole geezer]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

All I’m at liberty to say is that a Blu-ray commiserating the 50th Anniversary of 'Lawrence' will “eventually” happen….as I think I alluded to here, with a pic as a visual aid…

https://forum.blu-ray.com/4132465-post16384.html

The exact street date will be somewhat based upon the possible presence of any other likewise ‘high-profile’ offerings from competitors.

I'm keeping my fingers crossed that before I leave this earth, financial circumstances permit Sony to consider converted 'Lawrence' to 3D a la "Titanic"...a theatrical 3D release followed by a Blu-ray 3D disc.

[Doctorossi]

Originally Posted by ole geezer

I'm keeping my fingers crossed that before I leave this earth, financial circumstances permit Sony to consider converted 'Lawrence' to 3D a la "Titanic"...a theatrical 3D release followed by a Blu-ray 3D disc.

I must say I do hope you're joking.

[ole geezer]

Originally Posted by Doctorossi

I must say I do hope you're joking.

What's good for the goose (Titanic), ain't good for the gander (Lawrence}?

What am I missing???

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/new...e-first-206301

[Doctorossi]

Originally Posted by ole geezer

What's good for the goose (Titanic), ain't good for the gander (Lawrence}?

1) Who says it's good for the goose?

2) Lawrence of Arabia is not Titanic, in that it's, you know... good.

To put it more plainly, I have no interest in 3D added (very) after the fact to movies designed without it and, rather, find it a bit of an affront to those films' aesthetics. To my taste, it's in the same category as colorizing the black-and-white or "formatted to fit your screen". That is a category I do not visit.

But hey... whatever floats and then spectacularly sinks your boat, I guess.

[ole geezer]

Originally Posted by Doctorossi

1) Who says it's good for the goose?

Hey...it's James Cameron's goose. I love this man and the way he tends to thinks outside the envelope and his passion for entertaining his audience.

2) Lawrence of Arabia is not Titanic, in that it's, you know... good.

Do I detect a certain sense of artistic imbalance creeping into the conversation.

To put it more plainly, I have no interest in 3D added (very) after the fact to movies designed without it and, rather, find it a bit of an affront to those films' aesthetics. To my taste, it's in the same category as colorizing the black-and-white or "formatted to fit your screen". That is a category I do not visit.

...and that's fine for people who share your view. You'll always have an original 2D version to fall back on. But, what about people that want to see a modernized version of a favorite film as in what's being done with Titanic??? How 'bout a little elbow room for some viewers that are fatigued with the same ole...same ole 50 year ole version. I have Lawrence on my HD DVR and have watched it numerous times so only a slight increase in resolution on a 2D Blu ray ain't gonna float this boat. Now, add some depth to this movie and maybe even I will be hooting and hollering for more... much like that audience that JC previewed parts of Titanic for.

Also did you read my link? Cameron talks about a whole new generation of movie goers that have never seen his film on a large screen. He also mentions new markets for 3D that have sprung up over the past several years.

But hey... whatever floats and then spectacularly sinks your boat, I guess.

Well...you gotta spend money to make money, BUT, you had better understand and have a "feeling" for what your audience wants. No one is better at this than Mr Cameron. Follow his lead with other classic titles. Indiana Jones movies in 3D...on the BIG screen. C'mon, tell me that doesn't get your juices flowing...

It breaks my heart to see ole classics like The Big Country selling for peanuts...not to mention that the transfer is flawed (horizontally stretched) and no one cares or gives a hoot. Sad.

[blu2]

Originally Posted by ole geezer

Do I detect a certain sense of artistic imbalance creeping into the conversation.

I'd be all for a 3D version of LoA at such time as David Lean approves the project.

[Doctorossi]

Originally Posted by ole geezer

Hey...it's James Cameron's goose.

Titanic is indeed James Cameron's goose. Lawrence is David Lean's goose and David Lean is no longer with us.

Originally Posted by ole geezer

Do I detect a certain sense of artistic imbalance creeping into the conversation.

Can you elaborate on this? I don't know what you mean.

Originally Posted by ole geezer

...and that's fine for people who share your view. You'll always have an original 2D version to fall back on. But, what about people that want to see a modernized version of a favorite film as in what's being done with Titanic???

I just don't see how slapping someone else's artistic vision on top of one of my favorite artworks could make it more appealing. Lawrence of Arabia is what it is and it is what it was designed to be.

How do you feel about colorization?

Originally Posted by ole geezer

Indiana Jones movies in 3D...on the BIG screen. C'mon, tell me that doesn't get your juices flowing...

I'm not saying this to further the debate, but with absolute honesty, it doesn't.

Despite its essential 2D nature, there are depth cues in the Indiana Jones movies, just as there are in all 2D movies. The perspective of the audience vis-a-vis the story that is elected in every framing choice and every editing decision is the larger part of the storytelling value of the film medium, for me. To come along later and (re)define all of those values after the fact, especially when it's done by someone else because the director is dead, for me, not only doesn't enhance the movie, it absolutely detracts from it. It transforms it into a different movie, with a different message. For all I know, someone's interpretion (or another's) of Lawrence of Arabia 3D might have an interesting message, although it also might not. What I do know is that that message, by necessity, absolutely cannot be the same message that is Lawrence of Arabia. Lawrence of Arabia, I like.

Originally Posted by ole geezer

It breaks my heart to see ole classics like The Big Country selling for peanuts...not to mention that the transfer is flawed (horizontally stretched) and no one cares or gives a hoot. Sad.

Again, I kid you not... as I write this, I'm in the middle of a break from watching my The Big Country Blu-ray (which I was pleased as punch to acquire for such a low price!). I'm about an hour in and I haven't noticed any objectionable stretch so far.

[rickah88]

Originally Posted by blu2

I'd be all for a 3D version of LoA at such time as David Lean approves the project.

Well I'm thinking that won't be happening at all, ever. Unless Mr. Lean left some sort of visionary note behind after his passing to approve a 3D makeover of LoA.
How about a pristine BD release of LoA first, then 10 years later let the debate ensue about a potential 3D version.

[Doctorossi]

Just to follow up, now that I've finished watching The Big Country...

I detected no horizontal stretching and was quite pleased with the transfer.

ole geezer, you might want to take a look at your settings; I don't know what you're seeing.

[ole geezer]

Originally Posted by blu2

I'd be all for a 3D version of LoA at such time as David Lean approves the project.

Originally Posted by Doctorossi

Titanic is indeed James Cameron's goose. Lawrence is David Lean's goose and David Lean is no longer with us.

I thought Sony owns the rights to this title. Seems to me...they do the deciding...like it or not.

Can you elaborate on this? I don't know what you mean.

Sufficient to say... BOTH LoA and Titanic rate highly on many movie goers...'that's a hell-of-a-movie' list. Which is more artistic?? Which one made a grown man cry like a little girl??? Does it really matter.

I just don't see how slapping someone else's artistic vision on top of one of my favorite artworks could make it more appealing. Lawrence of Arabia is what it is and it is what it was designed to be.

Look....making movies is a business. If Sony decides one day that LoA merits a "new look" that might be more entertaining to today's movie goers...what's wrong with that?? The original will always be readily available.

How do you feel about colorization?

I don't mean to come off as flippant but I just finished re-watching Stanley Kramer's Inherit the Wind and, I confess that given today's technology, I'd love to see this film in color, but, of course, that's an impossibility.

I'm not saying this to further the debate, but with absolute honesty, it doesn't.

Despite its essential 2D nature, there are depth cues in the Indiana Jones movies, just as there are in all 2D movies. The perspective of the audience vis-a-vis the story that is elected in every framing choice and every editing decision is the larger part of the storytelling value of the film medium, for me. To come along later and (re)define all of those values after the fact, especially when it's done by someone else because the director is dead, for me, not only doesn't enhance the movie, it absolutely detracts from it. It transforms it into a different movie, with a different message. For all I know, someone's interpretion (or another's) of Lawrence of Arabia 3D might have an interesting message, although it also might not. What I do know is that that message, by necessity, absolutely cannot be the same message that is Lawrence of Arabia. Lawrence of Arabia, I like.

I understand your concerns...I think. But, I think that creating an image that is more life like would tend to enhance the movie going experience rather than detract from it. That's what 3D does best and merely adding perceived depth to the screen would not necessarily change the movies "message" per se.

Again, I kid you not... as I write this, I'm in the middle of a break from watching my The Big Country Blu-ray (which I was pleased as punch to acquire for such a low price!). I'm about an hour in and I haven't noticed any objectionable stretch so far.

It's really subtle...gotta go. Talk about it later.

Got some time now. I just checked the review on this web-site and noticed this update:

Update 7/7/11: Noted film archivist and restorer Robert Harris has been in touch with me and is investigating what appears to be a slight anamorphic stretching on this transfer due to incorrect digital manipulation to remove anamorphosis.

https://www.blu-ray.com/movies/The-B.../21691/#Review

I can see this stretching effect on the reviewer's screen grabs.

[sharkshark]

Originally Posted by JimSD

Not allowed to touch'em in Hawaii, but sounds like fun.

Not allowed to touch 'em in the Caribbean either (almost anywhere you dive it'll be a national park), but the P-man occasionally doesn't abide the man's rules...

[Penton-Man]

^ While on bareboat charter in open water....miles away from any 'state park'.
Good rule to know though. Is there a similar rule with regards to whale sharks?