Pinocchio Platinum Edition Discussion Thread

[Rudy Matt]

Look, gang -- when Pinocchio was originally photographed, the image was littered with cel dust, cel scrawl, frame jitter, registration errors, etc. The film was shot by experts in their fields knowing these were going to be insurmountable issues, and yet they tried to minimize these as much as possible. Pinocchio was so dense and complicated in its staging and photography (including dark backgrounds that made the cel dust and cel scrawl stand out like stars on a moonless night) that there was no escaping the resulting image. Throw on top of that the grain structure of the 1939-1940 film stock, and you have the most revered animated film of all time existing in a somewhat "noisy" version ever since the film premiered in 1940.

From what I've seen so far, there have been extensive efforts to remove the cel dust and scrawl, to fix the registration errors, and other problems (Figaro, for example, no longer becomes transparent when he opens the star-lit window for Gepetto). This film isn't going to look like Sleeping Beauty because it wasn't made at the same time, it wasn't drawn with the same meticulous thin line style, and the backgrounds (while glorious) are of the same suggestive style seen in Snow White and previous Disney shorts -- look, Sleeping Beauty looks great, it is perfectly suited for Blu-Ray. The trick is for people to recognize that the Blu-Ray for Pinocchio should look as good as Pinocchio has a right to. Blu-Ray isn't going to magically transform the backgrounds of Pinocchio into the hyper-detailed busy backgrounds seen in Sleeping beauty. We're going to get the original art work in highdefinition.

I think that's enough. For others, they're going to complain that Pinocchio doesn't "look as good" as Sleeping Beauty. What they'll really be bitching about (although they won't know it), is that Pinocchio doesn't fill their widescreen TV and doesn't flatter their widescreen home theater systems the way Sleeping Beauty does.

Pinocchio is going to have a cleaner, sharper, more vibrant image than it has ever had -- all the dirt and dust and scrawl that plagued the original image will be removed. It will be the Pinocchio Walt and his crew wished they could have made. But it won't be wide-screen, and it won't have insanely detailed oil paintings by a very irreverent background artist.

[geniuswalt]

Look, gang -- when Pinocchio was originally photographed, the image was littered with cel dust, cel scrawl, frame jitter, registration errors, etc. The film was shot by experts in their fields knowing these were going to be insurmountable issues, and yet they tried to minimize these as much as possible. Pinocchio was so dense and complicated in its staging and photography (including dark backgrounds that made the cel dust and cel scrawl stand out like stars on a moonless night) that there was no escaping the resulting image. Throw on top of that the grain structure of the 1939-1940 film stock, and you have the most revered animated film of all time existing in a somewhat "noisy" version ever since the film premiered in 1940.

From what I've seen so far, there have been extensive efforts to remove the cel dust and scrawl, to fix the registration errors, and other problems (Figaro, for example, no longer becomes transparent when he opens the star-lit window for Gepetto). This film isn't going to look like Sleeping Beauty because it wasn't made at the same time, it wasn't drawn with the same meticulous thin line style, and the backgrounds (while glorious) are of the same suggestive style seen in Snow White and previous Disney shorts -- look, Sleeping Beauty looks great, it is perfectly suited for Blu-Ray. The trick is for people to recognize that the Blu-Ray for Pinocchio should look as good as Pinocchio has a right to. Blu-Ray isn't going to magically transform the backgrounds of Pinocchio into the hyper-detailed busy backgrounds seen in Sleeping beauty. We're going to get the original art work in highdefinition.

I think that's enough. For others, they're going to complain that Pinocchio doesn't "look as good" as Sleeping Beauty. What they'll really be bitching about (although they won't know it), is that Pinocchio doesn't fill their widescreen TV and doesn't flatter their widescreen home theater systems the way Sleeping Beauty does.

Pinocchio is going to have a cleaner, sharper, more vibrant image than it has ever had -- all the dirt and dust and scrawl that plagued the original image will be removed. It will be the Pinocchio Walt and his crew wished they could have made. But it won't be wide-screen, and it won't have insanely detailed oil paintings by a very irreverent background artist.

You're right on the money!

[Rudy Matt]

You're right on the money!

Of course I am! I'm Rudy Matt!

[KubrickFan]

I'm really anxious for this release. The trailer looked beautiful, and it's a sample of what Snow White and Fantasia probably will look like on Blu as well. Although Fantasia has a lot more problems image-wise than Pinocchio has.

[Jules]

Hey Rudy, I've noticed your posts are kinda eccentric, but really fun to read!

Yeah, I know. Dry post. But I really wanted to say that.

Oh, and thumbs up on the "horsepoo". makes a very nice alternative to "bullshit". I'm sick to death of that one.

[Rudy Matt]

Thanks, Julian. I walk a different path than many Disney fans -- I am a fan of WALT Disney, not the Disney company. Walt was a stone cold badass, a man seemingly without fear. He is to my mind the greatest American filmmaker of all time.

Others are all about the company, I could give a damn about High School Musical or tweener Disney channel crap, or even The Lion King (it was better when it was called Bambi and it didn't have Katzenberg/Dreamworks fart jokes and pop culture references).

I'm all about Walt. That's all you need to know about me.

That, and Blu-Ray kicks ass.

[Anton Ego]

I'm all about Walt. That's all you need to know about me.

That, and Blu-Ray kicks ass.

+1 on both counts. Mostly. I'm probably a little more generous with select post-Walt titles that I can enjoy without necessarily noticing how they suffer in comparison with Walt's work or deriding them on their own demerits. And although there's a huge amount of corporate-created crap in which I have zero interest, in this post-Eisner era I feel better about the company's prospects than I have in my adult life. Lasseter's not the second coming of Walt, but he's John Lasseter. He knows the films, he knows the parks (at least the grande dame). He loves stories more than franchises. He's a great animator, a gifted director, a creative storyteller, an artist and a craftsman who looks to push the envelope of his art and his craft. He's a driven perfectionist who'll sleep under his desk to get more work done and still young enough at heart to keep a marvelous imagination. Walt's studio won't ever be Walt's studio again, but it's not going anywhere either; if someone's got to run animation under Walt's name then I'm glad it's him. (Especially since he was repeatedly shafted by everything that was gone wrong at the studio: it's nice to SEE poetic justice once in a while.)

(Oh, and Lasseter thinks Blu-ray kicks ass too, so: +2 with proxy vote.)

OT: Nothing quite like Sleeping Beauty has been made before or since. Pinocchio won't be the same kind of HD pron, but it will be powerful and gorgeous beyond any of its home media releases to date. I can't wait. Last I saw the film I'd rented the '99 DVD and it looks so bad I wouldn't steal it.

[diego14_1992]

umm I wonder who will get this DVD first Brownpuppy or Lighthousemike
i hope we get scans and pictures soon!!

[Old Fish Tale]

Mike, please! He posts screencaps!

[geniuswalt]

Thanks, Julian. I walk a different path than many Disney fans -- I am a fan of WALT Disney, not the Disney company. Walt was a stone cold badass, a man seemingly without fear. He is to my mind the greatest American filmmaker of all time.

Others are all about the company, I could give a damn about High School Musical or tweener Disney channel crap, or even The Lion King (it was better when it was called Bambi and it didn't have Katzenberg/Dreamworks fart jokes and pop culture references).

I'm all about Walt. That's all you need to know about me.

That, and Blu-Ray kicks ass.

I couldn't agree more. I love Walt Disney. He quite simply was a genius to me. (I don't call myself like that by chance)

[Marky_198]

Pinocchio is going to have a cleaner, sharper, more vibrant image than it has ever had -- all the dirt and dust and scrawl that plagued the original image will be removed. It will be the Pinocchio Walt and his crew wished they could have made.

"The Pinocchio they wished they could have made". Because finally they found a way to make the flame pink!!!!!!! They've always dreamed of having a pink flame. And now they have the technology to remove the whole source of light, and the effect from the candle on the wall on the background and Pinocchio's face. Of course this whole atmoshpere lighting and flame in the earlier versions was a mistake and was never in the OTV.
On top of that they can finally make the image flat, remove all the depth and atmosphere and there you have it, the Pinocchio they always wanted.
Walt would be so proud of the pink flame and the removal of the lighting and depth and this wonderful "sequel-cartoonish-stickerbook-look"!

A = PINOCCHIO 1987 CAV Laserdisc [transfer used for 1985 VHS]
B = PINOCCHIO 1993 CAV Laserdisc [transfer used for 1999 DVD]
C = PINOCCHIO 2003 DVD

<a href="http://photobucket.com" target="_blank"><img src="http://i46.photobucket.com/albums/f112/ ... CHIO9A.jpg" border="0" alt="Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting"></a><BR>
<a href="http://photobucket.com" target="_blank"><img src="http://i46.photobucket.com/albums/f112/ ... CHIO9B.jpg" border="0" alt="Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting"></a><BR>
<a href="http://photobucket.com" target="_blank"><img src="http://i46.photobucket.com/albums/f112/ ... CHIO9C.jpg" border="0" alt="Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting"></a><BR>

[Jules]

Oh crappity. Here we go again.

I think I'm going to get a Ouiga Board, make contact Walt's spirit and get him to possess Marky if he says anything else about colours, depth or atmosphere today.

[Marky_198]

Oh crappity. Here we go again.

I think I'm going to get a Ouiga Board, make contact Walt's spirit and get him to possess Marky if he says anything else about colours, depth or atmosphere today.

How many times do I have to tell you it's not about colors, but about all the other things I mentioned?

Edit: I see you changed your post, so this makes this reply irrelevant

[Marky_198]

Instead of giving me reactions like that, why don't you tell me what you think of the removal of the lighting, the source of light and it's effect on the background and the pink flame and the flatness?

[Jules]

Instead of giving me reactions like that, why don't you tell me what you think of the removal of the lighting, the source of light and it's effect on the background and the pink flame and the flatness?

Honest reply? No, I don't like it. I personally prefer the two upper pics. However, the 2003 restoration was done by DTS Digital Images - a state-of-the-art restoration company - and I readily believe that they're experts and know/knew what they're doing.

The two upper pics are sourced from a VHS or laserdisc which showed a print of the film likely worn out, or if restored with 80s/90s technology, utilised a God-knows-how-many-generations-copied print of the film.

Until rock-hard proof that the lower pic is screwed up emerges, it remains the assumed correct colouring for the film.

See?

[ajmrowland]

Instead of giving me reactions like that, why don't you tell me what you think of the removal of the lighting, the source of light and it's effect on the background and the pink flame and the flatness?

Honest reply? No, I don't like it. I personally prefer the two upper pics. However, the 2003 restoration was done by DTS Digital Images - a state-of-the-art restoration company - and I readily believe that they're experts and know/knew what they're doing.

The two upper pics are sourced from a VHS or laserdisc which showed a print of the film likely worn out, or if restored with 80s/90s technology, utilised a God-knows-how-many-generations-copied print of the film.

Until rock-hard proof that the lower pic is screwed up emerges, it remains the assumed correct colouring for the film.

See?

So, basically what you're saying is that the film print used for the VHS/Laserdisc transfer wore out and became MORE colorful? In that case, we should petition all the studios to ditch the digital restoration process for something older!

No wait, worn out is often brighter, not more colorful, and a certain amount seems to be retained in the 2003 DVD release.

[singerguy04]

Maybe I havn't really been reading thoroughly enough, but I fail to see how any of these screen comparisons have anything to do with the new PE's restoration.

As far as I've always thought of restorations is that the company does the best they can do to restore back to a picture's original version. With animated film I've allways thought it was hard to compare still photos because the picture was never meant to be seen that way in the first place. Perhaps adding pink to the candle makes it look a bit more like a natural flame, but one thing is for sure... I'm not going to sit here and pretend like I know what it was that any of the creators wanted, or that I even have any means to know what they wanted. Comparing the restoration work to things of older and lower technology doesn't make nearly as much sense as those who actually work with the film and have the original piece of work with them.

[ajmrowland]

Maybe I havn't really been reading thoroughly enough, but I fail to see how any of these screen comparisons have anything to do with the new PE's restoration.

As far as I've always thought of restorations is that the company does the best they can do to restore back to a picture's original version. With animated film I've allways thought it was hard to compare still photos because the picture was never meant to be seen that way in the first place. Perhaps adding pink to the candle makes it look a bit more like a natural flame, but one thing is for sure... I'm not going to sit here and pretend like I know what it was that any of the creators wanted, or that I even have any means to know what they wanted. Comparing the restoration work to things of older and lower technology doesn't make nearly as much sense as those who actually work with the film and have the original piece of work with them.

Yeah. They even have the ARL.

[Chernabog_Rocks]

Thanks, Julian. I walk a different path than many Disney fans -- I am a fan of WALT Disney, not the Disney company. Walt was a stone cold badass, a man seemingly without fear. He is to my mind the greatest American filmmaker of all time.

Others are all about the company, I could give a damn about High School Musical or tweener Disney channel crap, or even The Lion King

Bit of a belated reply, but things aren't that black and white Rudy Matt I love HSM and some of the so called tweener Disney Channel crap, but at the same time I also love a lot of Walts work as well.

Just wanted to point out that your implying people either like Walts era or the new era which is rather silly, to say outright or imply

Moving on, I hate that bottom Pinocchio screencrap, the pink flame looks out of place and like it was done in Paint program. Personally, I think the two top ones are pretty good, the way the candles flame looks is much better than the bottom and it seems to give more warmth to the picture.

[magicalwands]

Screencap B in my opinion looks the best. Screencap A looks as if the it's on it's last viewing and it will explode if you force it to play again. On the other hand, I love grain, horrible audio, and dirt so I would love watching screencap A too.

I don't know what you guys are fighting about! All of you agreed on the same thing.