DVDizzy Forum

Signature Edition #1!!!:
http://www.blu-ray.com/news/?id=18458

Oh good, so much support for physical releases! I'm really amazed it was number 1!

JeanGreyForever wrote:Although I don't want to open that can of worms, I'm not sure I believe that the brighter colors for BATB were the intended ones. I just find that difficult to swallow, considering that means that they messed up the colors 2/3 times on physical media (not counting VHS and laserdisc). Then again they messed up both tries at Cinderella, so maybe that is credible yet.

I'm not sure quite what you meant. VHS and Laserdisc were the first times Beauty and the Beast was on home video, if I'm right, and it is only since the Platinum Edition that the colors got brightened. In an interview that was in some thread on here somewhere, but I can't find, Don Hahn said that the original colors of Beauty and the Beast were supposed to be brighter, but when they put the movie from the computer to film, the film made the colors darker. So the original theatrical release, and VHS release, and the Laserdisc release all had darker colors. But then when the release to IMAX came, they had a chance to make sure the colors looked how they originally intended back on those computers, and make those bright colors be the ones seen in IMAX and DVD and Blu-ray.

Thanks JeanGreyForever for all the info. Unfortunately I think my computer has a problem because I can't see the images in those two links you gave me. But it sounds like Alice got over-brightened in every scene?

Massive yay for it being number 1 ! Good old Snow, still a favourite after all this time

Disney Duster wrote:Oh good, so much support for physical releases! I'm really amazed it was number 1!

JeanGreyForever wrote:Although I don't want to open that can of worms, I'm not sure I believe that the brighter colors for BATB were the intended ones. I just find that difficult to swallow, considering that means that they messed up the colors 2/3 times on physical media (not counting VHS and laserdisc). Then again they messed up both tries at Cinderella, so maybe that is credible yet.

I'm not sure quite what you meant. VHS and Laserdisc were the first times Beauty and the Beast was on home video, if I'm right, and it is only since the Platinum Edition that the colors got brightened. In an interview that was in some thread on here somewhere, but I can't find, Don Hahn said that the original colors of Beauty and the Beast were supposed to be brighter, but when they put the movie from the computer to film, the film made the colors darker. So the original theatrical release, and VHS release, and the Laserdisc release all had darker colors. But then when the release to IMAX came, they had a chance to make sure the colors looked how they originally intended back on those computers, and make those bright colors be the ones seen in IMAX and DVD and Blu-ray.

Thanks JeanGreyForever for all the info. Unfortunately I think my computer has a problem because I can't see the images in those two links you gave me. But it sounds like Alice got over-brightened in every scene?

The platinum colors were based off of the IMAX release and were overly saturated and bright. The diamond edition darkened the colors a little but it was still super bright. Then the 3D diamond edition came out which darkened the colors even more. It's still not like the original version, but it's probably the closest we'll ever get. I just find it hard to believe that BATB's original colors are what we are seeing now, because then why has it taken so long for Disney to release the film in its "true" form? Why not have made it look this way for its original IMAX release/platinum edition, or even the diamond edition, rather than waiting for the 3D diamond edition? Disney will say anything to save face at this point.

The two links I posted don't really have pictures. The first one is something I use whenever I want to check if a blu-ray is accurate or not to the film. The second one goes more in depth on Alice's changes, but it's pretty long so I wouldn't blame you for not skimming through it. Here's a link though to pictures of Alice since that was what you wanted.

http://www.dvdbeaver.com/film/DVDCompar ... rland_.htm

There's a few compare screenshots and you'll notice how saturated Alice is in the blu-ray ones compared to the earlier DVD ones.

I'd really like Fantasia and the uncut version. They celebrated the 75th anniversary last year and not DVD or Blu-Ray release. I really want Fantasia. First Disney movie I saw in a theater.

Nala wrote:I'd really like Fantasia and the uncut version. They celebrated the 75th anniversary last year and not DVD or Blu-Ray release. I really want Fantasia. First Disney movie I saw in a theater.

Hopefully it will be part of the signature line. It was almost a diamond edition, so it wouldn't surprise me if it makes it in (especially if Alice in Wonderland and Dumbo are joining).

Nala wrote:I'd really like Fantasia and the uncut version. They celebrated the 75th anniversary last year and not DVD or Blu-Ray release. I really want Fantasia. First Disney movie I saw in a theater.

For the sake of PC concerns, I can't ever see Disney releasing the uncut version of Fantasia. Your best bet, as with Song of the South, is that both finally end up in the public domain where they belong. Then hopefully a company like Kino or Criterion will finally do both film's justice on DVD/Blu-ray.

milojthatch wrote:

Nala wrote:

Your best bet, as with Song of the South, is that both finally end up in the public domain where they belong. Then hopefully a company like Kino or Criterion will finally do both film's justice on DVD/Blu-ray.

That will absolutely never happen. It's a pipe dream, but having both theatrical and family friendly versions for a future Signature edition would be a nice touch.

And Disney has a partnership with TCM, so they can just sublicense Song of the South to them.

I see, JeanGreyForever. Maybe they still are trying to get the colors they wanted, like the first time they accidentally went too dark, then they went too bright, so they have trouble getting the colors they want. But they could just be saving face, like you said. I really don't know. I guess the Signature Edition may finally tell us which colors are right.

As for Alice, her hair does look too bright in the recent Blu-ray pictures, but I have to say that shade of her hair is closest to the first DVD incarnation of the film in the pictures from that site, too, so while it looks too bright, maybe it actually is supposed to be fairly bright. But it does look like it needs to be fixed, so hopefully next time it is.

Disney Duster wrote:I see, JeanGreyForever. Maybe they still are trying to get the colors they wanted, like the first time they accidentally went too dark, then they went too bright, so they have trouble getting the colors they want. But they could just be saving face, like you said. I really don't know. I guess the Diamond Edition may finally tell us which colors are right.

As for Alice, her hair does look too bright in the recent Blu-ray pictures, but I have to say that shade of her hair is closest to the first DVD incarnation of the film in the pictures from that site, too, so while it looks too bright, maybe it actually is supposed to be fairly bright. But it does look like it needs to be fixed, so hopefully next time it is.

Yes I can agree with that. At this point, I'll accept whatever the new Signature Edition looks like for BATB.

A lot of the early DVDs for some of these movies were pretty inaccurate as well (even before the platinum line which had its own share of duds too). Probably the best proof for Alice is the same argument used for Cinderella's hair color. Cinderella's hair color in the merchandise is this bright canary yellow which wouldn't have existed back in 1950 for the original movie. Alice, released a year later, would be under the same situation. The original trailer for the film (included on the blu-ray) also shows a color palette more accurate to the 2nd and 3rd DVD screenshots (rather than the 1st DVD). Although old trailers often look faded anyway, so they aren't always the best to go by. I used to think Aladdin was off color-wise as well because of the trailer which isn't the case.

I'm going to throw a spanner in the works by saying that I really like the transfer for Alice in Wonderland, though I will admit it surprised me at first. I think it got the right contrast between clear, bright colours, while also keeping a sense of darkness (look at the backlit pictures of Alice peering over the log as an example; the 2004 DVD appears a bit too bright and pale for my liking compared to the Blu-Ray). In all honesty, of the big restorations (so ruling out hack jobs like The Sword in the Stone), I think that Cinderella is the only restoration that leaves me feeling somewhat uneasy, mainly due to possible DVNR more than colours. Frankly, Snow White and Sleeping Beauty look really gorgeous, as do Pinocchio and Fantasia. I hadn't noticed the issues with Tinkerbell's glow in Peter Pan, but I actually really liked the colour scheme of the newer restoration, even if it seemed "off" to some.

In any case, I don't think I'll be getting any Signature Editions. Partly that's because they don't seem to be releasing them in the UK, but also as I have little, if any, incentive to get them given that they're reusing the older transfers and skimping on bonus features.

JeanGreyForever wrote:Yes I can agree with that. At this point, I'll accept whatever the new Signature Edition looks like for BATB.

Oh, whoops, I meant to say "I guess the Signature Edition may finally tell us which colors are right." But you understood what I meant. Yea, when the Signature Edition comes out, I'll feel like that one is right...at least I think so right now.

JeanGreyForever wrote:A lot of the early DVDs for some of these movies were pretty inaccurate as well (even before the platinum line which had its own share of duds too). Probably the best proof for Alice is the same argument used for Cinderella's hair color. Cinderella's hair color in the merchandise is this bright canary yellow which wouldn't have existed back in 1950 for the original movie. Alice, released a year later, would be under the same situation. The original trailer for the film (included on the blu-ray) also shows a color palette more accurate to the 2nd and 3rd DVD screenshots (rather than the 1st DVD). Although old trailers often look faded anyway, so they aren't always the best to go by. I used to think Aladdin was off color-wise as well because of the trailer which isn't the case.

You don't think Disney could have had bright colors like Cinderella's and Alice's last restoration hair colors? I think they could have had those colors, just didn't use those colors. And yea, I sometimes go by how the original trailers look for how the films should look, too. Something that shocked me was Cinderella's original trailer looked a lot like the 2005 restoration. However, there are still many, many, many places where the film looks like they used too much DVNR or painting over or color changing, so I know the 2005 restoration still isn't completely how it should look. As for Alice, I am not sure what to think. I just don't know. If I had to pick...I would go with the 2nd and 3rd home video release looking colors. They just look more like how it should be to me.

Wonderlicious wrote:I'm going to throw a spanner in the works by saying that I really like the transfer for Alice in Wonderland, though I will admit it surprised me at first. I think it got the right contrast between clear, bright colours, while also keeping a sense of darkness (look at the backlit pictures of Alice peering over the log as an example; the 2004 DVD appears a bit too bright and pale for my liking compared to the Blu-Ray). In all honesty, of the big restorations (so ruling out hack jobs like The Sword in the Stone), I think that Cinderella is the only restoration that leaves me feeling somewhat uneasy, mainly due to possible DVNR more than colours. Frankly, Snow White and Sleeping Beauty look really gorgeous, as do Pinocchio and Fantasia. I hadn't noticed the issues with Tinkerbell's glow in Peter Pan, but I actually really liked the colour scheme of the newer restoration, even if it seemed "off" to some.

In any case, I don't think I'll be getting any Signature Editions. Partly that's because they don't seem to be releasing them in the UK, but also as I have little, if any, incentive to get them given that they're reusing the older transfers and skimping on bonus features.

Hmm, maybe you're right, about Alice's colors being right and Cinderella's problems being just DVNR. Not sure though because her dress goes from silver to blue in a few shots and it makes no sense. If the Signature Editions do happen to use some more correct-looking transfers, or for the love of God better bonus features, I hope you will get them.

Disney Duster wrote:Hmm, maybe you're right, abut Alice's colors being right and Cinderella's problems being just DVNR. Not sure though because her dress goes from silver to blue in a few shots and it makes no sense. If the Signature Editions do happen to use some more correct-looking transfers, or for the love of God better bonus features, I hope you will get them.

That's why I said "mainly due". And yep, hopefully I will feel the need to buy them. Mind you, I'd essentially be buying the same movie for the fourth or fifth time.

Wonderlicious wrote:That's why I said "mainly due". And yep, hopefully I will feel the need to buy them. Mind you, I'd essentially be buying the same movie for the fourth or fifth time.

Oh, yea I agree. But re-buying my favorite movies is never tiresome for me as long as they have something new. They are my favorite movies, after all. Of course all I really want is the best-looking version of the films, either by how good the definition and detail is or how it should look because all the right colors and detail are present.

What baffles me is that to this day disney keeps rereleasing the same thing instead of giving us Black Cauldron...Melody time or even Disney Treasures. ....looking at sale figures they might swing and miss..but from a creative point of view its just plain lazy

In the case of The Black Cauldron, I think it's because the film is not as popular as Snow White and Beauty and the Beast, for example. I, myself, saw it only once, and frankly, I did not care for it as much. It's the only DAC I'm missing from my collection.

As for the Walt Disney Treasures, I agree with you. I, too would like to see the series restored in HD, and, if possible, in a new collectible packaging.

A new Beauty and the Beast read-along storybook is getting released on January 31, 2017. The "Read-Along Storybook and CD" books are indicators of upcoming home video re-releases. There's no other read-along storybook planned for a classic WDAS title in-between so I believe this means that the Signature Collection will be an annual series instead of a biannual like before.

^ Wow, what a gorgeous picture.

Sotiris wrote:There's no other read-along storybook planned for a classic WDAS title in-between so I believe this means that the Signature Collection will be an annual series instead of a biannual like before.

Interesting. I can't imagine Disney suddenly segregating their Walt and post-Walt films (then again, they often do that with their second-tier titles anyway), but it would definitely make sense for Beauty and the Beast to not be under the "Walt Disney Signature Collection" banner, but under some other title that would still give us a disappointing, stripped-down single disc in the fall.

Albert

aww Beast looks so woobie...