Midnight Cowboy (1969)

[CineSicko]

Originally Posted by Dailyan

Funny, that was my reaction to much of Criterion's disc.

Now... What's your problem exactly? Can you elaborate, or are you incapable? Is it because you're 100% positive that the constant (and sometimes extreme) teal in the image is an accurate recreation of how it displayed theatrically? If not, maybe park it on the sidelines for a spell.

[Stanis]

Recently got, and am happy, with the MGM disc for cheap. Teal, no thanks.

[Fat Phil]

The idea that movies should always exhibit pure whites is untenable. There are a multitude of other gradings filmmakers may choose to use in any given scene.

This is a frustrating argument because i'm still waiting for anyone in the "the Criterion is wrong" camp to provide evidence to support their theory. Seriously - anything would be welcome because at this point, the conversation is just spinning its wheels. If anything did come to light i'd be happy to re-evaluate but until then, I have to defer to the director, producer and DP. The fact that some people don't like the grading it isn't evidence of anything.

[Harryhausen AF]

Fed up of people defending this Criterion tealing crap. As someone who has seen the BD yes there is a blanket green tint just like in the screenshots. Cant believe that after getting a natural BD from MGM Criterion do this over again. The Criterion laserdisc is GREEN the original MGM was GREEN probably because of Criterion, the MGM special edition DVD and BD was the only time they did it right and now Criterion went back to the green for their BD. MGM should have remastered it themselves with the same color timing as before but more detail.

Do not give a damn what the director or whoever thinks. Whites should NOT BE GREEN and a movie from the 60s should look NATURAL. This is revisionist because you cant add a green tint by just shooting using a camera it is something that is added after just like with Matrix which has had a green tint added for every release since 2004. Praise the Lord the MGM BD is still easy to get for a better price than Criterion my preferred choice.

[CineSicko]

Originally Posted by Fat Phil

The idea that movies should always exhibit pure whites is untenable. There are a multitude of other gradings filmmakers may choose to use in any given scene.

I'll say this: If the heavy teal in the Criterion disc is accurate to the original look that Schlesinger wanted, then that's the only thing I don't like about MIDNIGHT COWBOY. There are moments where it looks a bit ridiculous.

[Fat Phil]

Originally Posted by CineSicko

I'll say this: If the heavy teal in the Criterion disc is accurate to the original look that Schlesinger wanted, then that's the only thing I don't like about MIDNIGHT COWBOY. There are moments where it looks a bit ridiculous.

Hey, I don't begrudge anyone their personal preference . I felt the Criterion looked fantastic but I could have happily lived with colour somewhere between the MGM and the Criterion as well . What irks me is when people state 'revisionism' as fact and don't back it up with anything.

[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.

[CineSicko]

Originally Posted by Fat Phil

What irks me is when people state 'revisionism' as fact and don't back it up with anything.

If the movie was initially shown with such an obnoxious blue/green look throughout it likely would have been talked about for decades. It's such a strong visual motif, and is laid on so thick for the Criterion release, that it probably would have been mentioned alongside REFLECTIONS IN A GOLDEN EYE and other movies that experimented with unnatural color schemes. As it stands I couldn't find anything online about it having a teal, blue, green or generally unusual look to it when released.

[baheidstu]

Originally Posted by Harryhausen AF

Do not give a damn what the director or whoever thinks. Whites should NOT BE GREEN and a movie from the 60s should look NATURAL. This is revisionist because you cant add a green tint by just shooting using a camera it is something that is added after just like with Matrix which has had a green tint added for every release since 2004. Praise the Lord the MGM BD is still easy to get for a better price than Criterion my preferred choice.

It's pretty f*cking arrogant for you to dismiss the efforts of the people who made the film because your ignorance extends to the point that you somehow think color timing on films is a new trend. There are a variety of factors that go into how a film look should look from film stocks, lenses, lighting, etc. and not all movies from the 60s, in fact very few of them, look "natural" which is a far newer trend than color timing.

Originally Posted by CineSicko

If the movie was initially shown with such an obnoxious blue/green look throughout it likely would have been talked about for decades. It's such a strong visual motif, and is laid on so thick for the Criterion release, that it probably would have been mentioned alongside REFLECTIONS IN A GOLDEN EYE and other movies that experimented with unnatural color schemes. As it stands I couldn't find anything online about it having a teal, blue, green or generally unusual look to it when released.

You need either your eyes checked or your TV recalibrated if you think Midnight Cowboy is anywhere comparable to Reflections in a Golden Eye.

[JoeBuck]

Originally Posted by baheidstu

It's pretty f*cking arrogant for you to dismiss the efforts of the people who made the film because your ignorance extends to the point that you somehow think color timing on films is a new trend. There are a variety of factors that go into how a film look should look from film stocks, lenses, lighting, etc. and not all movies from the 60s, in fact very few of them, look "natural" which is a far newer trend than color timing.



You need either your eyes checked or your TV recalibrated if you think Midnight Cowboy is anywhere comparable to Reflections in a Golden Eye.

Sometimes I feel like these people dont know what the term "blanket" means, because it sure as shit isnt on this disc and 90% of this release is spot on.

[Fat Phil]

Originally Posted by CineSicko

If the movie was initially shown with such an obnoxious blue/green look throughout it likely would have been talked about for decades. It's such a strong visual motif, and is laid on so thick for the Criterion release, that it probably would have been mentioned alongside REFLECTIONS IN A GOLDEN EYE and other movies that experimented with unnatural color schemes. As it stands I couldn't find anything online about it having a teal, blue, green or generally unusual look to it when released.

It really seems like some people here are watching a different transfer to me. Words like 'constant' or 'blanket' are being used to describe the teal. I'm seeing a varied and nuanced colour palette throughout the movie - changing from scene to scene.

[Show spoiler]

Look at those screenshots - they're freakin' gorgeous. Are people really not seeing variations? There's just no way this movie was graded with a 'blanket' anything.

[CineSicko]

Originally Posted by baheidstu

You need either your eyes checked or your TV recalibrated if you think Midnight Cowboy is anywhere comparable to Reflections in a Golden Eye.

Huston's film is obviously an extreme example of an unnatural color scheme done in post, but if MIDNIGHT COWBOY was always meant to look teal it would serve as a less intense example of a similar process done in the same era. Regardless, I'm confident that it would have been mentioned by film scholars over the years.

[CineSicko]

Originally Posted by Fat Phil

Are people really not seeing variations? There's just no way this movie was graded with a 'blanket' anything.

I never used the term "blanket" and I stated that the amount of teal varies throughout, but I stand by my assertion that it's prevalent in every shot of this release. I have to strain to see it in some of the screen caps you posted (and while I don't see it in the one of Joe I recall that scene having a vague teal hue). However, the once-white signs in that street shot are bluish, and that poodle has a bit of green going on.

Having done a lot of digital color correction I can assure you that you'd be hard-pressed to find a frame of the Criterion release that wouldn't look comparatively more natural with blue and green decreased.

[baheidstu]

Originally Posted by CineSicko

I never used the term "blanket" and I stated that the amount of teal varies throughout, but I stand by my assertion that it's prevalent in every shot of this release. I have to strain to see it in some of the screen caps you posted (and while I don't see it in the one of Joe I recall that scene having a vague teal hue). However, the once-white signs in that street shot are bluish, and that poodle has a bit of green going on.

Having done a lot of digital color correction I can assure you that you'd be hard-pressed to find a frame of the Criterion release that wouldn't look comparatively more natural with blue and green decreased.

Digital color correction on what? What film(s) have you worked on, or what label(s) have you worked for? Who says Midnight Cowboy is supposed to look "natural"?

[CineSicko]

Originally Posted by baheidstu

Digital color correction on what? What film(s) have you worked on, or what label(s) have you worked for?

No-no, I haven't worked on any films or with any label, just video work for a small production house, mostly on small-scale commercial content (e.g. TV commercials, instructional videos, etc.). Still, I know enough about digital color manipulation to know whereof I speak in regard to detecting a push of a given color, perhaps more than most people.

Originally Posted by baheidstu

Who says Midnight Cowboy is supposed to look "natural"?

No one, I suppose. Your point?

[RCRochester]

Originally Posted by Fat Phil

It really seems like some people here are watching a different transfer to me. Words like 'constant' or 'blanket' are being used to describe the teal. I'm seeing a varied and nuanced colour palette throughout the movie - changing from scene to scene.

[Show spoiler]

Look at those screenshots - they're freakin' gorgeous. Are people really not seeing variations? There's just no way this movie was graded with a 'blanket' anything.

Yeah, even if, IF, one were to bend over backwards and accommodate those who think that the scenes shot with the fluorescent lighting are "tealed", there is absolutely nothing in any of the other shots that even close to being as extreme as people are making it out to be.

[CineSicko]

Originally Posted by RCRochester

Yeah, even if, IF, one were to bend over backwards and accommodate those who think that the scenes shot with the fluorescent lighting are "tealed", there is absolutely nothing in any of the other shots that even close to being as extreme as people are making it out to be.

Have you... seen the disc?

[RCRochester]

Originally Posted by CineSicko

Have you... seen the disc?

Yes I have, unlike most of the screenshot warriors around here.

[English Patient]

The Criterion disc looks great. I've watched it twice. This is NOT one of those cases where there's any weirdly distracting "revisionist" color (like French Connection). I can't find anything to complain about regarding the color, and I was on the lookout for it because of all the talk on this forum. Fans of the film will be satisfied.

[Bates_Motel]

Originally Posted by Harryhausen AF

Fed up of people defending this Criterion tealing crap. As someone who has seen the BD yes there is a blanket green tint just like in the screenshots. Cant believe that after getting a natural BD from MGM Criterion do this over again. The Criterion laserdisc is GREEN the original MGM was GREEN probably because of Criterion, the MGM special edition DVD and BD was the only time they did it right and now Criterion went back to the green for their BD. MGM should have remastered it themselves with the same color timing as before but more detail.

Do not give a damn what the director or whoever thinks. Whites should NOT BE GREEN and a movie from the 60s should look NATURAL. This is revisionist because you cant add a green tint by just shooting using a camera it is something that is added after just like with Matrix which has had a green tint added for every release since 2004. Praise the Lord the MGM BD is still easy to get for a better price than Criterion my preferred choice.

While I agree to an extent, this is the most blatant misinformation I've seen lately.

Different film stocks produced different colors — some were more red, some were more green, some were more blue. In fact, all film stocks produced different types of images and were chosen accordingly by the director/DP depending on what sort of looks they wanted.

Furthermore, analog film could be 100% be timed to have more of a greenish hue.

Whether or not Midnight Cowboy is looked this way in 1969, I don't know. Neither do you. I do know that many of the screen caps floating around are incorrect and the film itself doesn't appear as teal as it does in the caps, but it is there in *some* scenes only.

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.