The Black Cauldron special edition?

[drfsupercenter]

See, how many times have I said that Disney's definition of "original" is not the same as most people's?

Sleeping Beauty had 4.0 surround, didn't it?

[Flanger-Hanger]

I believe Technirama films like Sleeping Beauty are like Todd-AO which actually do have 5.1 surround sound audio. 4.0 is for CinemaScope.

And though the new release will include a 7.1 track, there will be the original audio mix included as well. Just like Peter Pan, Cinderella and Snow White all had there mono mixes to go with their 5.1 remixes.

[Disney Duster]

I'm sorry, but your 'precious proof' is transparent and worthless.

Actually, ...

Well here's your precious proof:

...it was you're precious proof.

Anyway, the official web site called it the original aspect ratio, "the way Walt Disney envisioned it". Also, we have Grand Canyon and that means almost all the features from the old release, plus if you actually looked in the Sleeping Beauty Blu-ray thread you'd see the discs will be as packed as the releases for Snow White, Beauty and the Beast, and perhaps more so.

It just keeps getting more and more definitive! AHAhahahahahahah!!!!

So, does anyone think this Black Cauldron release will be on Blu-ray, and will try to be made as definitive as the fans want, without releasing everything ever about the film, like with Sleeping Beauty. They would never release everything ever about a film, just what's definitive for a home video release. I mean, I guess in the future we could see home video get so expansive they can include almost everything that people would be able to get through.

To me, definitive would really be, as I said, stuff like the whole entire film in pencil animation! And all the storyboards, etc.

[WaltDisneyFanBoy]

I loved the Black cauldron, as a kid. It's for sale in the netherlands, but it's verry hard to get a coppy of it

[Jack Skellington]

I hope it would come on Bluray, I try not to buy DVDs, coz I know I'll get them later on Bluray, so there's no point in getting the DVD.

[Escapay]

It just keeps getting more and more definitive! AHAhahahahahahah!!!!

I just love that somewhat-crazy "AHAhahaha..." bit.

Plus, if they wanted to make the Sleeping Beauty Blu-Ray be a be-all, end-all, truly definitive version, it'd include the following versions of the film:

1.33:1 Pencil Test Animation Aspect Ratio
1.33:1 Live-Action Reference Footage Aspect Ratio
2.55:1 Rough Pencil Animation Aspect Ratio
2.55:1 Clean-Up Pencil Animation Aspect Ratio
2.55:1 Animated Aspect Ratio
2.20:1 70mm Theatrical Aspect Ratio
2.35:1 35mm Theatrical Aspect Ratio
1.33:1 Pan&Scan VHS Aspect Ratio
1.33:1 Pan&Scan DVD Aspect Ratio
2.35:1 Laserdisc Aspect Ratio
2.35:1 DVD Aspect Ratio
2.55:1 Blu-Ray Aspect Ratio

And just for the sake of adding more versions, they could include a random bootleg film print someone found in a garage or something, or a botched-up print that ended up not being used. Would be cool if they included a complete unrestored reel of film for every Blu-Ray sold.

Plus, if Disney really wanted Sleeping Beauty filmed and projected in 2.55:1, he'd have gotten CinemaScope55 rather than Technirama. I guess Technirama was cheaper for the Mouse House, even if it came at a cost of losing picture on the edges.

Still, what annoys me is the sudden "2.55:1 is the OAR, 2.55:1 is the OAR!" declarations from Disney. It's one of the accepted aspect ratios for the film (the other two being 70mm 2.20:1 and 35mm 2.35:1), but it certainly is not the "original". The word original has become far overused (and in some cases misused) by Disney and others. Disney better be honest on the packaging (haha, yeah right!) and say it's the 2.55:1 Animated Aspect Ratio and not 2.55:1 Original Aspect Ratio.

So, does anyone think this Black Cauldron release will be on Blu-ray, and will try to be made as definitive as the fans want, without releasing everything ever about the film,

It never got its due on VHS, laserdisc, or DVD, and I doubt it will even for Blu-Ray. I wouldn't mind if it did, and it'd be a ****ing miracle if Disney does try and make a halfway-decent release. But judging by their track record for their 1943-1949 and 1970-1988 DACs, it's highly unlikely.

in the future we could see home video get so expansive they can include almost everything that people would be able to get through.

In the future, I plan on just taking a time machine and digital camcorder to the 1950s and recording the entire production process from start to finish without anyone noticing I'm there.

Albert

[quiden]

Ok, so here's a question for everyone who likes this movie. I only saw it once in the theater when it first came out, which was what? the early 80s?

Anyway, I've never watched it again and I remember not being all that thrilled with it at the time. I would have been in my early teens too.

What I want to know is, would you encourage me to watch this again with adult eyes? Do you think that I would enjoy it more now?

I DO like Lord of the Rings more now than I did when I was a kid, and I'm a big Sci Fi fan if that helps.

[Simba3]

I watched it for the first time a couple years ago. I personally think it is the worst of all the Disney Animated Classics. However, there are plenty of people here at UD that seem to really like it. I think if you're a big Disney fan you should give it another viewing and see what you think.

[blackcauldron85]

I would definitely encourage you to watch it...I'm also completely biased, though! I don't necessarily think watching it "with adult eyes" has much to do with it- I first saw it as a teenager, and our friend's kids (ages 11 & 13, I think) recently watched it, and they liked it (I'm not sure how much they liked it, but they did). Just have an open mind while watching it- the characters are great, and the animation is great..I enjoy the story, but I know that some people think that it's flawed. I'd say give it another shot!

[Disney Duster]

Thanks for laughing at my evil laugh, Albert.

But why did you include so many versions of Sleeping Beauty? The definitive versions of the film presentation would be the theatrical ratio, and the animated ratio. I think of the pencil test (and rough pencil and clean up, wonderful additions!) versions as only bonus features, not to be treated like the film presentation itself. And my word, a live-action reference version of the whole film (as much as possible) would be incredible, and I agree, for definitive on some format higher than Blu-ray, it would be good to include. Or actually maybe not good. Seeing the how close the live stuff is to the animated stuff may ruin some magic for some people. I also like the botched up print version. But there's never any mention of things like that, that Disney made, is there?

I guess even definitive could be subjective, as we could get into territory of, well since Sleeping Beauty's so much like Snow White and Cinderella, shouldn't those be on the disc too? They do have something to do with Sleeping Beauty. AHHHHH!!!

And I agree, it's probably not the way Walt wanted audiences to see the film, it's just the way that he happened to see it. They have so many people at Disney who would know this, how come they aren't speaking up, like at the El Capitan panel?

I agree, it should be the theatrical ratio, or that with the animated ratio. I would like both.

In the future, I plan on just taking a time machine and digital camcorder to the 1950s and recording the entire production process from start to finish without anyone noticing I'm there.

Haha, and yay! But, why the 50's? Only the 50's?

[Escapay]

But why did you include so many versions of Sleeping Beauty?

To be cheeky.

Also, can you imagine the proclamation by Disney? "TWELVE VERSIONS OF THE FILM!!! HOURS UPON HOURS OF BONUS FEATURES!!!" The ad executives would piss their pants in excitement at how that would grab a consumer.

The definitive versions of the film presentation would be the theatrical ratio, and the animated ratio.

And the bootleg-taped-with-a-camera-in-the-back-of-a-theatre ratio.

I think of the pencil test (and rough pencil and clean up, wonderful additions!) versions as only bonus features, not to be treated like the film presentation itself.

Me too, though that's a double-edged sword as it already means only a limited amount of that material is often presented. Sometimes there are scenes that I wish are presented in pencil test version but aren't on the DVD. Like in Beauty and the Beast, they've got the entire Transformation scene in pencil test, which is wonderful as it's a key moment in the film. But I'd have loved for them to have included the dungeon scene (mainly the "take me instead" and the "come into the light" segments), or even just an entire pencil-animation (or CGI previs) for the "Beauty and the Beast" ballroom dance.

And my word, a live-action reference version of the whole film (as much as possible) would be incredible, and I agree, for definitive on some format higher than Blu-ray, it would be good to include.

Especially if it came with the option to toggle between the live-action and the final animation, to always see that comparison between what was shot to inspire animators versus what the animators did. In Sin City: Extended Edition they have the entire green screen version as a bonus feature (alas, it's sped up by like...500% so it only takes like, 10 minutes to watch instead of a couple hours). I think that the HD-DVD for 300 includes that option as well as a bonus (to watch the entire film in its raw green screen form).

Or actually maybe not good. Seeing the how close the live stuff is to the animated stuff may ruin some magic for some people.

Eh, that's a price to pay. The very idea of a documentary that dissects every little detail of production ruins the magic for some people already (which is why some friends I know loathe bonus features and prefer to view the movie as the movie, without knowing how it was done).

I also like the botched up print version. But there's never any mention of things like that, that Disney made, is there?

Likely not, as it's botched up and probably not seen as worth anything.

Which is odd considering that in the restoration featurette for Gone With The Wind they mention how imperfect dye-transfer prints of the film were sent to smaller markets for theatrical release. In restoring the film, they would often uncover these imperfect prints and some would believe "hey, it's a dye-transfer print, this is how it was seen in 1939!" when that is not the case, as it's just a dye-transfer print that was done wrong (though they never said how). Still, the fact that they make a point to mention it in the featurette shows that there is some value to it, especially as a reference material for imperfections to look out for.

Still, a botched-up print version would be a great novelty (which is why I said it), but I doubt it'll be something Disney would consider. If they ever did consider it, it'd likely just be segments under a "Print Gag Reel" banner or something, with a few text cards explaining how prints are made and how things can happen that ruins a print.

They have so many people at Disney who would know this, how come they aren't speaking up, like at the El Capitan panel?

Because they're not a paid corporate mouthpiece trying to sell a new version of a movie to people who've seen it countless times before?

In the future, I plan on just taking a time machine and digital camcorder to the 1950s and recording the entire production process from start to finish without anyone noticing I'm there.

Haha, and yay! But, why the 50's? Only the 50's?

Because as far as I know, Sleeping Beautyi wasn't in production before or after the 1950s, and that's what I was referring to for in the future.


Alas, another reason to start growing that TARDIS.

albert

[Disney Duster]

Yea, 12 versions of the film would excite me at first. When I was younger and Snow White came out, I took the part where the mirror said you could "view the film in different ways" very literally, because honestly the different language versions isn't viewing it differently, but hearing it differently. So I thought that if I had it my way, I would make a black and white version and CGI version available on the DVD first disc, because I also didn't know how CGI was done back then, and probably assumed they just drew 2D and put it in the computer and some process made it 3D. I actually found out they do some hand-drawn animated stuff for the CGI features, but when I asked the person who told me about it, he didn't reply with any more info.

You know, someone's camera filming the screen in the theater back then might sound like a way to really get the theatrical experience, but did they even have color home video camcorders back then? And the quality would probably be so poor you don't really feel the experience.

I didn't watch BatB's work-in-progress version. I should have. Well, I can rent it again. I'm still hoping they make a way better DVD and Blu-ray with the original way it looked. And I've wanted to know for a while now, how do you feel about that? Yes, the thing was compressed or something on the DVD so we know it could be presented better, but what about the restoration thing, you know, the new colors, that even deathie mouse remarked on? You can't possibly believe the film originally looked like that. In fact...it's pretty much proven that it didn't. If you think about it, lower quality than DVD or not, if the film came out around the time of VHS, indeed VHS would still perfectly capture the right colors and look, because the film came out just like one year before it went onto VHS. It's not like Cinderella getting really old and warped from what it originally looked like, then getting put on VHS 40 years after it was made.

Huh. Sin City had the whole film in green screen, and they actually sped up the movie so you could watch the whole entire thing, just so fast it's done in minutes? And only 10 minutes? I know some DVD players have the option of speeding up the film so you can watch the whole thing in shorter amounts of time.

That Gone With the Wind thing was interesting, and yea, I guess the botched prints would be useful as examples of how the film shouldn't look.

I like, and would not mind, just seeing the botched Sleeping Beauty print in a few scenes in a Print Gag Reel. Just the scenes that are key, iconic, or popular, and the parts that are the most botched.

I dunno...I just can't believe that no one at the El Capitan premiere said "hold up, this wasn't the way Walt wanted everyone to see the movie!" Andras Deja was not there, right? I wonder if he would have said something. I hope so, I like him a lot. Or what about Floyd Norman, who worked on the film and is still alive (and on some bonus features of this release)? He was at the Academy screening, not the El Capitan, I think. Or maybe...Walt really did want the film to look this way, or there's something we don't know that the whole company does? Doubtful.

By the way, I hope every future DVD and Blu-ray gets the full animated ratio, because I want to see all the artwork. Yes, I know, the theatrical ratio is the primary necessity, I'm hoping some day we'll get both. I just would probably prefer the animated ratio, mainly for the fullscreen, or square films (don't know what ratio or word to call them). I mean, those films feel boxed in, after watching widescreen so much. I really would like to see the mice zoomed out a little bit, and see more of Cinderella's world.

Oh, you want to go to the 50's to film Sleeping Beauty's production, 'cause that's what we're talking about. But you'd also want to film all your favorite films' whole productions, wouldn't you?

[Escapay]

but did they even have color home video camcorders back then? And the quality would probably be so poor you don't really feel the experience.

Well, there was the 1995 theatrical re-release. But yeah, the quality would be really poor, so it wouldn't even be worth it as a novelty item (then again some Doctor Who DVDs include raw studio footage that's derived from varying sources - some look as good as the episodes themselves while others are of such poor a/v quality that its inclusion is rare and only on there because the fact that it survives at all is amazing). Maybe if only to hear the audience's reactions (if they're loud enough). They had that on the Sin City DVD as well: an audio track with the audience's reactions during the movie. You can hear the cheers, the gasps, the laughs, the applause, etc.

And I've wanted to know for a while now, how do you feel about that?

Like the OTV, the WiP was totally misrepresented on the DVD because of the IMAX-ization of the film. The new IMAX colors are growing on me, as it can be seen as a sort of George Lucas-esque revisionist thing that is filmmaker-approved. But I hope that when Disney revisits the title they do so properly and have IMAX in 1.66:1 on one disc, OTV in 1.85:1 on another, and WiP in 1.66:1 on a third (that's highly unlikely since Disney only does two-disc general releases). But knowing Disney, they'll screw it up again anyway.

Huh. Sin City had the whole film in green screen, and they actually sped up the movie so you could watch the whole entire thing, just so fast it's done in minutes? And only 10 minutes?

Yep. It's a really funny thing to watch, and unfortunately, they didn't speed up the audio. Instead it's played over music. I think it was made simply so that people could see how the film was shot versus how it looks once all the CGI sets and lighting was put in.

I dunno...I just can't believe that no one at the El Capitan premiere said "hold up, this wasn't the way Walt wanted everyone to see the movie!"

Perhaps they decided not to say anything because to many untrained eyes, 2.55:1 looks like 2.35:1 anyway, even if it's not. Plus, Disney can get away with most things if they simply make a statement of "Walt wanted it this way"...even if sometimes it isn't (and until someone from Disney addresses the whole "if Walt wanted 2.55:1, he'd have done it in CinemaScope55, otherwise the Technirama 70 ratio is the correct one!" issue, I still will believe that the 2.20:1 70mm theatrical issue is what was intended, even if there's additional image on the camera negatives.)

By the way, I hope every future DVD and Blu-ray gets the full animated ratio, because I want to see all the artwork. Yes, I know, the theatrical ratio is the primary necessity, I'm hoping some day we'll get both.

Me too. I generally prefer the theatrical one, but I wouldn't want that to come at the expense of the animation ratio for those who want it.

fullscreen, or square films (don't know what ratio or word to call them).

Academy Ratio.

Oh, you want to go to the 50's to film Sleeping Beauty's production, 'cause that's what we're talking about. But you'd also want to film all your favorite films' whole productions, wouldn't you?

Well yeah, obvioiusly! I just meant Sleeping Beauty when making the 1950s reference because that was what we were discussion. But believe me, if I could, I'd be all over time and space capturing the production process for stuff like The Ten Commandments, The Band Wagon, Somewhere in Time, When Harry Met Sally and The Notebook.

albert

[Flanger-Hanger]

Scpas, I seriously doubt Walt would have ever considered using CinemaScope 55 for the filming of Sleeping Beauty. Considering the fact that only 2 movies (Carousel and The King and I) used this method of filming and neither was even released with these prints (they just ended up using traditional 35mm CinemaScope). It is possible however, that since Sleeping Beauty's production stated in the mid 50s when CinemaScope was still using the 2.55:1 ratio and since Lady and the Tramp had this ratio as well, he might have just said "OK will continue using this shape". And then later realizing that Technirama actually could produce an even larger picture decided to make the switch in cameras.

This theory itself is most likely not true, now that I think of it because on the Disneyland TV show he comments on how even the background paintings had to be more detailed because of the larger picture (like the requests made for Lady and the Tramp's backgrounds).

I have no idea what I am saying here but I hope I'm making sense to someone.

However, when it comes to The Black Cauldron I seriously doubt that there could have been a mistake in what was drawn and what was photographed since it must have been painfully obvious by the mid 80s that 70mm films have a 2.20:1 ratio.

And I agree with you Scaps, 2.20:1 is Sleeping Beauty's OAR no matter how Disney spins it. It's a nice novelty to think that we are seeing more, but it should have not come at the cost of missing another OAR correct Disney release.

[Escapay]

Scaps, I seriously doubt Walt would have ever considered using CinemaScope 55 for the filming of Sleeping Beauty. Considering the fact that only 2 movies (Carousel and The King and I) used this method of filming and neither was even released with these prints (they just ended up using traditional 35mm CinemaScope). It is possible however, that since Sleeping Beauty's production stated in the mid 50s when CinemaScope was still using the 2.55:1 ratio and since Lady and the Tramp had this ratio as well, he might have just said "OK will continue using this shape". And then later realizing that Technirama actually could produce an even larger picture decided to make the switch in cameras.

Yeah, I confused CinemaScope with CinemaScope 55 (which uses larger format film). Most CinemaScope films will result in the 2.55:1 ratio without having to use the large format film (CS55 used 55mm film), but the addition of the optical soundtrack reduces it to 2.35:1. I forget the specifics that still resulted in a 2.55:1 ratio with the soundtrack intact, but even so, it's still a fact that by 1957, the 2.55:1 ratio was pretty much no longer used anyway. Fox discontinued it in favor of the concurrently-used and likely-cheaper 2.35:1. And Walt obviously would have known this (after all, he used CinemaScope on films like Lady and the Tramp, 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea, The Great Locomotive Chase, and Grand CanyonScope). So his decision to go with Technirama is either an economical one (with 2.55:1 no longer widely used, Walt wouldn't choose to make one film in the obsolete format), or an artistic one (filming horizontally yields a larger picture already, but I doubt the animators said "we want 2.55:1 when filming our work on the negatives, and it's okay if a little bit of it is cut off in the 70mm prints"). Even if it was an artistic one, the fact still remains: the film by itself without its soundtrack would be 2.55:1 on the Technirama negatives (depending on the frame area, as common Technirama ratios is 2.25:1, but when filmed with a frame area of 0.912x0.715, it will yield the 2.55:1 aspect ratio). But the audience isn't meant to watch a silent film negative. They're meant to watch a film print complete with a soundtrack, and the 70mm prints with soundtrack intact will always yield a final ratio is 2.20:1. And given that they knew they'd be projecting the 70mm version, not the Technirama negative, then 2.20:1 should be what's presented on the DVD, regardless if image from the negative is lost.

For example, Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs was shot in the Academy Ratio of 1.37:1, and 1.33:1 when you add the soundtrack. But what got shot onto the film is not the same as what was drawn. And people thought that theatrically matting the 60s/70s DACs was bad...








If I hear someone suddenly say, "Disney should now re-film the entire thing to include all that image!", I will just

Partly because it's likely that the majority of the cels have been sold or reused, and partly because that will be one expensive project that I doubt Disney would be interested in.

However, when it comes to The Black Cauldron I seriously doubt that there could have been a mistake in what was drawn and what was photographed since it must have been painfully obvious by the mid 80s that 70mm films have a 2.20:1 ratio.

Especially since by the mid 80s, 70mm films had all-but vanished and using it was an expensive artistic choice!

And I agree with you Scaps, 2.20:1 is Sleeping Beauty's OAR no matter how Disney spins it. It's a nice novelty to think that we are seeing more, but it should have not come at the cost of missing another OAR correct Disney release.

albert

[Ariel'sprince]

What? no Musical Masterpiece Edition to this?.

[Escapay]

What? No songs in the film to make it a redundant and pointless Musical Masterpiece Edition anyway?

What? They'll provide musical notes for the score and expect kids to whistle or hum along?

What? Even if they did, it'd still be a crappy edition of a movie that deserves much more?

What? Like, say, a two-disc DVD with the trailer, commentaries, a frank and candid documentary that looks at the good, bad, and ugly of its long and drawn-out production and box-office failure, a featurette about the Horned King in Tokyo Disneyland, extensive art galleries, and the infamous deleted scenes?

What? This joke is getting tiresome now?

albert

[Elladorine]

What? No songs in the film to make it a redundant and pointless Musical Masterpiece Edition anyway?

They could always write songs and add new animation (just like they did for The Thief and the Cobbler) if they're so gung-ho about all this "musical masterpiece" stuff.

Er, not that I'm trying to give Disney any dumb ideas they might actually consider marketable.

[Flanger-Hanger]

What? No songs in the film to make it a redundant and pointless Musical Masterpiece Edition anyway?

albert

I'd rather we get a Groovin' Jazz edition for The Black Cauldron anyway.

[pick]

NEWS NEWS NEWS NEWS NEWS!
Just read on a High-Def Digest forum that THE BLACK CAULDRON: SPECIAL EDITION is being advertised on the The Secret Of The Magic Gourd DVD!
Here's the link: http://forums.highdefdigest.com/blu-ray ... ost1376273