You should check the stills I posted on the
"SB is coming to bluray" thread, I think it's natural for a movie to look better when it's released in a higher resoloution, you must have thought the Cinderella DVD had a dramatic change because you were watching the VHS for a long time and when you compare VHS to DVD you can tell the diffrence. I think this would be the case with all the other classics that will come on bluray, soon hopefully. I'm just really happy to hear that animation looks better when compared to live action in HD, when I heard about bluray I automaticaly imagined how beautiful movies like BATB and Aladdin would be in HD.
I really hope we get more animated classics on bluray between the much-hyped platinum releases. (Aladdin,TBC,Hercules..)
Think Sleeping Beauty will be the new Cinderella?
-
Jack Skellington
- Anniversary Edition
- Posts: 1230
- Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2007 10:07 am
- Location: Dubai
-
Disney Duster
- Ultimate Collector's Edition
- Posts: 14030
- Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2005 6:02 am
- Gender: Male
- Location: America
Sleeping Beauty Yet Another Drastic Disney "Restoration
Jack Skellinton, you have not been paying full attention to what we have been saying, or you didn't read everything, or perhaps you didn't fully understand.
We know the films should look drastically different picture wise. But why so much color wise, or brightness wise?
Anyway, Cinderella was restored once before the DVD, in 1992, for VHS and Laserdisc released in 1995. So, we've had a really good version to look at before the drastically different DVD, which was touted as looking "beyond it's original brilliance". I guess that's what new colors and too much brightness is!
I agree with EVERYTHING drfsupercenter is saying! Well said! If only you knew of people fixing Disney's restorations... Anyway, it's true we can't judge Sleeping Beauty until we see the final Blu-ray on our own TV's and computers.
We know the films should look drastically different picture wise. But why so much color wise, or brightness wise?
Anyway, Cinderella was restored once before the DVD, in 1992, for VHS and Laserdisc released in 1995. So, we've had a really good version to look at before the drastically different DVD, which was touted as looking "beyond it's original brilliance". I guess that's what new colors and too much brightness is!
I agree with EVERYTHING drfsupercenter is saying! Well said! If only you knew of people fixing Disney's restorations... Anyway, it's true we can't judge Sleeping Beauty until we see the final Blu-ray on our own TV's and computers.
-
Jack Skellington
- Anniversary Edition
- Posts: 1230
- Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2007 10:07 am
- Location: Dubai
LOL, yeah I didn't read everything in the thread, I wasn't wearing contacts when I was typing. 
I don't reckon that Disney are making the movies too bright or adding colour, in the case of blurays at least, I heard that they remaster the movie from the original work, so maybe they look more like what Walt inteded them to look like.
I don't reckon that Disney are making the movies too bright or adding colour, in the case of blurays at least, I heard that they remaster the movie from the original work, so maybe they look more like what Walt inteded them to look like.
-
PatrickvD
- Signature Collection
- Posts: 5207
- Joined: Fri Sep 19, 2003 11:34 am
- Location: The Netherlands
yeah Cinderella was off. It was definitely altered to look brighter and more colorful.
The same goes for Aladdin (to a degree) wich also had some enhancements in the animation. But it didn't bother me that much since the film was meant to be colorful and ultimately it just looked stunning.
And then there's Beauty and the Beast, wich I consider the biggest fiasco in terms of restorations ever. way, way, way too bright. I laugh everytime Belle says "come into the light", what does she mean, he's already IN the light thanks to the alterations. I hope that film looks the way I remember it when it comes to Blu-Ray.
The same goes for Aladdin (to a degree) wich also had some enhancements in the animation. But it didn't bother me that much since the film was meant to be colorful and ultimately it just looked stunning.
And then there's Beauty and the Beast, wich I consider the biggest fiasco in terms of restorations ever. way, way, way too bright. I laugh everytime Belle says "come into the light", what does she mean, he's already IN the light thanks to the alterations. I hope that film looks the way I remember it when it comes to Blu-Ray.
A few points:
Firstly Patrick, the directors of Beauty and the Beast seemed overjoyed with the DVD release. So you're either saying that they themselves are wrong, or they are simply mouthpieces of Disney Marketing. Do you consider that likely, or do you not think that perhaps, they really are happy with the Beauty and the Beast colours?
Secondly Disney Duster, 1992 is a lifetime away from the recent Cinderella restoration. Robert Harris, who is a profesional film restorer laments the fact that Vertigo was restored in the 1990's (I forgot the exact date) as if it was done today, it would undoubtely be done better and look far superior. And Vertigo was highly praised at the time of its restoration.
Digital technology has moved on so much since 1992 that all the older limitations have gone, and new techniques not only improved by invented. You know, over in the UK, they've invented a way to get the original colours out of dots on black and white film!
You can't assume the 1992 Cinderella was correct, just as you can't (in honesty) assume the 2005 Cinderella is correct. But I'm more than willing to assume the 2005 Cinderella is closer to the original.
Finally, as for Star Wars, I don't think that's a good comparison to make at all given Lucas and "vision". However, Lowry/DTS Images also did such restorations as The Wizard of Oz, Gone with the Wind, North by North West and many others. They also did Disney's Bambi and Lady and the Tramp.
Firstly Patrick, the directors of Beauty and the Beast seemed overjoyed with the DVD release. So you're either saying that they themselves are wrong, or they are simply mouthpieces of Disney Marketing. Do you consider that likely, or do you not think that perhaps, they really are happy with the Beauty and the Beast colours?
Secondly Disney Duster, 1992 is a lifetime away from the recent Cinderella restoration. Robert Harris, who is a profesional film restorer laments the fact that Vertigo was restored in the 1990's (I forgot the exact date) as if it was done today, it would undoubtely be done better and look far superior. And Vertigo was highly praised at the time of its restoration.
Digital technology has moved on so much since 1992 that all the older limitations have gone, and new techniques not only improved by invented. You know, over in the UK, they've invented a way to get the original colours out of dots on black and white film!
You can't assume the 1992 Cinderella was correct, just as you can't (in honesty) assume the 2005 Cinderella is correct. But I'm more than willing to assume the 2005 Cinderella is closer to the original.
Finally, as for Star Wars, I don't think that's a good comparison to make at all given Lucas and "vision". However, Lowry/DTS Images also did such restorations as The Wizard of Oz, Gone with the Wind, North by North West and many others. They also did Disney's Bambi and Lady and the Tramp.
Most of my Blu-ray collection some of my UK discs aren't on their database
-
Ariel'sprince
- Platinum Edition
- Posts: 3244
- Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2007 6:07 am
- Location: beyond the meadows of joy and the valley of contentment
- Contact:
-
drfsupercenter
- Anniversary Edition
- Posts: 1279
- Joined: Wed Mar 05, 2008 7:59 pm
- Location: Michigan, USA
- Contact:
And then there's Beauty and the Beast, wich I consider the biggest fiasco in terms of restorations ever. way, way, way too bright. I laugh everytime Belle says "come into the light", what does she mean, he's already IN the light thanks to the alterations. I hope that film looks the way I remember it when it comes to Blu-Ray.
I totally agree... though there are more problems other than the color. Lines like the "stuttering Beast" line were "fixed", etc. I compare Beauty and the Beast's SE to Star Wars' SEs.
The director of Star Wars was overjoyed with the DVD release of the original trilogy... that doesn't mean anything. Disney has also lied to the public on several occasions... Don Hahn, the producer of Beauty and the Beast, said that the OTV of The Lion King would still be available for the die-hard fans, and how wrong he was. What someone says and what actually happens are two totally separate things.Firstly Patrick, the directors of Beauty and the Beast seemed overjoyed with the DVD release.
As for Cinderella, it's not even the 1992 restoration I'm talking about... the 1995 one is the one I refer to (the Masterpiece version boasting that it was digitally restored)
Ssh, I'm totally NOT working on a project at the moment...I agree with EVERYTHING drfsupercenter is saying! Well said! If only you knew of people fixing Disney's restorations...
Howard Ashman:
He gave a mermaid her voice, a beast his soul, and Arabs something to complain about
Arabian Nights (Unedited)
Savages (Uncensored)
If it ain't OTV, it ain't worth anything!
-
Jack Skellington
- Anniversary Edition
- Posts: 1230
- Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2007 10:07 am
- Location: Dubai
LOL yeah, I remember when I had the video and it was darker and more mysterious, I hope the bluray will turn out as close as the original.PatrickvD wrote: And then there's Beauty and the Beast, wich I consider the biggest fiasco in terms of restorations ever. way, way, way too bright. I laugh everytime Belle says "come into the light", what does she mean, he's already IN the light thanks to the alterations. I hope that film looks the way I remember it when it comes to Blu-Ray.
-
gregmasciola
- Gold Classic Collection
- Posts: 125
- Joined: Sat May 17, 2008 11:26 pm
I thought the lines looked a bit thin, too. My main hope when they re-release Beauty & The Beast is that they dump that version that is about 1/3 sketches and 2/3 the actual movie. The DVD seemed way too compressed when I watched it (since they included 3 versions on 1 disc).yukitora wrote:It's like the lines are way to thin and crisp on the Imax version...
-
Old Fish Tale
- Anniversary Edition
- Posts: 1797
- Joined: Fri Jan 05, 2007 7:19 am
- Location: Portugal
-
Disney Duster
- Ultimate Collector's Edition
- Posts: 14030
- Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2005 6:02 am
- Gender: Male
- Location: America
Drastic Disney Restorations
drfsupercenter, I believe Cinderella's restoration started in 1992, for the 1995 VHS and laser disc release. One restoration started in 1992, and I can't think of another one in between that and 2005.
Netty, read what you said, and all I have to say is my book for the restoration that first began in 1992 (that came with the 1995 VHS and laser disc) said it was backed up by extensive research and discussions with the original artists "to respect and protect the integrity of the original masterpiece" and it look "as pristine as the day it premiered". Meanwhile, 2005's new technologies was said to make the film "sparkle like never before!" And I also remember stuff about "beyond it's original brillaince". There'a a big difference here, that sounds like the new restoration made the film look "newer" and different than how it was before. Not closer to the original.
And Beauty and the Beast needs fixing pronto. I do believe Disney has made corporate puppets. I also believe that even if they are happy with the way the film looks changed, they should make the original available in the highest quality releases for their fans, like Lucas, only even better and more respectful to the viewers. Maybe more limited "collector's" releases, but still available.
Netty, read what you said, and all I have to say is my book for the restoration that first began in 1992 (that came with the 1995 VHS and laser disc) said it was backed up by extensive research and discussions with the original artists "to respect and protect the integrity of the original masterpiece" and it look "as pristine as the day it premiered". Meanwhile, 2005's new technologies was said to make the film "sparkle like never before!" And I also remember stuff about "beyond it's original brillaince". There'a a big difference here, that sounds like the new restoration made the film look "newer" and different than how it was before. Not closer to the original.
And Beauty and the Beast needs fixing pronto. I do believe Disney has made corporate puppets. I also believe that even if they are happy with the way the film looks changed, they should make the original available in the highest quality releases for their fans, like Lucas, only even better and more respectful to the viewers. Maybe more limited "collector's" releases, but still available.
-
Ariel'sprince
- Platinum Edition
- Posts: 3244
- Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2007 6:07 am
- Location: beyond the meadows of joy and the valley of contentment
- Contact: