On the issue of Star Wars. Until recently, though I knew about the project in question, Harmys despecialized versions of the Star Wars Trilogy is absolutely amazing. The work Harmy put in to establish a definitive, 4K transfer on all three despecialized versions was nothing short than a miracle. I have both the 4K77, 80 and 83 versions plus the despecialized versions. But Harmy did what Lucas should've done, created remarkable 4K transfers that look and sound incredible. If you do get a chance, hunt a copy down of the despecialized version on blu or 4K. You won't be disappointed. I've also heard that Project A34K are doing a new version of Alien 3, but this time improving the effects shots and audio changes. This will be called The Legacy Cut which will use both cuts, the Assembly and theatrical cut apparently. There's times when films desperately need readjusting and improvement when studios screw up with edits and subtractions to the films theatrical version. There's films out there that aren't definitive. One example would be Once Upon a Time in the West by Leone. I often ponder what Leone would've done with Once Upon, had he been able to rectify substantial elements within the film and bring the movie back to its original intended state. But very much doubt that will ever happen now. The balance between art and business is a highly fickle and contentious issue. Some 4K restorations have left me cold, especially Aliens, Once Upon a Time and The Godfather Trilogy more recently.
Thanks for letting me know about Harmys despecialised editions. I'm familiar with 4K77 projects and the other more famous despecialised blurays, but I hadn't heard about that one. I know a chap called Mike Verta had been working on a more or less 'personal' one, and his video on it was pretty incredible to watch. All I have at the moment are the 2006 DVDs where the it's an SD and very letterboxed version, so I'll take a look for Harmys, thanks! I was just reading the other day about the Legacy cut of Alien 3. You know I've only seen the film a couple times and the last time I watched it was at least 5 or 6 years ago, so I can't even really remember what I thought of it. It's another one that I need to re-visit before long, and particularly before that cut is finished! Like I mentioned with the great Arrow release of Waterworld, I wish we saw more releases with several cuts, (if they exist), so we get the best of all worlds and you can watch the one you love and remember, as well as another that might be the directors preferred cut or a changed version that might more objectively make the film a better one.
Hi Warren. A great video and you really expressed your thoughts well. A lot of complexities involved. Some concern what film elements remain and whether the director or cinematographer are still alive/available to oversee a reissue; others involve active filmmakers looking at it as an opportunity to tinker and provide a new edit; and others that involve rights ownership that has resulted in the studio/distributor making changes. Maybe also the “original” that we first saw wasn’t actually that as it was a copy from a copy….When I went to the BFI it was interesting to hear them talk about some of the decisions they have to make to try and preserve original intent when they are doing a 4K restoration as so much more information becomes visible which the casual viewer wouldn’t have seen before eg on Greenaway’s period film The Draughtsman’s Contract 4K scan it revealed a DC10 flying across the sky; on George Pal’s War of the Worlds it revealed lots more wires for the models than you would have originally seen. So some (well intentioned) practical decisions are having to be made on all these 4K issues which may or may not result in changes the audience approve of. As for actual edits, yes I like to know when watching a film if it’s a director cut etc or year of reissue…..Talking of artist’s rights, when I was over I did go and see some art at the Royal Academy and one piece was titled Oak Tree but the piece was a glass half full of water positioned on a high shelf. Beside was text of an interview with the artist. The reviewer argued that it wasn’t an oak tree; the artist defended that it was as he had an oak tree in mind when he created the piece, and it would remain an oak tree until he decided it was not. Ultimately I suppose the art can be one thing, but how you label it or describe it can be something else and only when those two things marry up are we satisfied
Hey Neil, I'm absolutely loving your in depth thoughts here, thank you so much! Whether a director is alive or not is a really interesting point that I didn't think about. As you say, is the cinematographer still around, or even anyone associated with the film to be able to suggest the original intentions of the film makes. Again, another absolute gem from your visit to the BFI. Amazing that a they discovered a plane flying in the background of The Draughtsman's Contract, (great film!). I'm guessing they digitally painted it out, but that is also something I've thought about at times, as we are so incredibly lucky to watch these old films in such crystal clear high quality these days, like The Cabinet of Dr Caligari for example, a film over 100 years old and available in 4K no less! The director Robert Wiene wouldn't have even been able to fathom 4K at the time, and I wonder if he left things in, like tiny mistakes or things not totally polished because they knew people wouldn't be able to see it. I imagine that happened an awful lot over the entire course of the 20th century, when no home video format even existed, let alone an ultra high quality one. And that brings up the question, do you leave everything in picture of the original, or not. That's really interesting to hear that they make as you say well intentioned decisions in the restorations to preserve what they best think was the intention, which might then actually result in alterations. I like the sound of that art piece a lot, I'll have to make my way there to check it out! I suppose I'd suggest, if at the time he made it he had an oak tree in mind, then an oak tree it will always remain, whether he changes his mind or not. Some more great food for thought 😄
@@goosesmovies Hi Warren. We need another pub chat, haha. Slightly off topic I know but it was interesting also to hear them talk about Chaplin movies. His movies were so popular in the early 1900s that copies of copies were made to increase distribution, meaning that when it came to doing 4K restorations some of the available film had scratches and marks etc embedded within the film as it was a copy. So those have to be removed digitally as well as all the other manual restoration. But yes, it’s staggering to see how crisp and new some of these 100 year old movies can now look when the right work is done.
@@neilsmoviechannel3199 Oh absolutely! I think this is a topic which could take 2 or even 3 pints to really get into the meat of things 😄 Incredible that copies of copies were needed to satisfy the demand! Restoration work is such an interesting area and something I really want to expland my knowledge on. Film as a medium is pretty astonishing. It's almost unbelievable that it's able to capture so much information, I think the latent potential is up to 8K with 35mm.
Interesting idea you had matey, really knowledgeable I guess it is up to the director as they created the movie although the writer and cinematographer etc should have a say. A lot of artificial Intelligence upscaling seems to be done on prints ready to release on ultra HD, haven't seen any although haven't heard great things about a lot of those
Thanks Tim, and thanks for sharing your thoughts! Interesting that you mention the writer and cinematographer. I think a fairly unique aspect of film, (and TV), is that the end product has required so many people's artistry and talents to be combined to make it happen. I think the aspect of the writer, which isn't something I thought about, is particularly interesting, because in many instances there is already some friction between writers and directors as to how a script is translated into a film. To alter something further, especially many years later, I wonder what a writer would think. Yes I think it's becoming more common, and I would guess surely must come down to AI being a cheaper tool to use then having people directly oversee things. Likewise I continue to hear divisive things about those releases.
@goosesmovies Think the producers want to have a say and meddle although they put the money up they aren't really adding anything artistically and seen examples of proficient directors making a movie with a bad script and it doesn't usually turn out a brilliant movie so think the director is important. Intelligent points you make though matey
Yes the Director/ Producer can do whatever they like its their content and its upto them. The audience can choose to like or not. Why should they bow down to the audience its upto them. As long as both the original and altered versions are available for people to enjoy.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts Matt! As you mention the producers here, I think that brings up another really interesting point which I only touched on regarding companies and censorship, but does the rights owner have the 'right', perhaps more in the moral sense, to alter a film even if it might go against an artists wishes? Star Wars is again a good example of this as I saw that there has been changes even to the special editions following Disney's acquisition of the films.
I think the director has a right to change his film whenever and however they like sometimes I don't like the changes for example the star wars films. What I don't like is other people changing or censoring a film without the directors permission or a piece of art.
Thanks for sharing your throughts Gary! When changes are made to older films, I think it's often very divisive, but I think as you say, most of us would agree that when company change or censors a film, it's much more clear cut that it should not be done.
On the issue of Star Wars.
Until recently, though I knew about the project in question, Harmys despecialized versions of the Star Wars Trilogy is absolutely amazing. The work Harmy put in to establish a definitive, 4K transfer on all three despecialized versions was nothing short than a miracle. I have both the 4K77, 80 and 83 versions plus the despecialized versions. But Harmy did what Lucas should've done, created remarkable 4K transfers that look and sound incredible. If you do get a chance, hunt a copy down of the despecialized version on blu or 4K. You won't be disappointed.
I've also heard that Project A34K are doing a new version of Alien 3, but this time improving the effects shots and audio changes. This will be called The Legacy Cut which will use both cuts, the Assembly and theatrical cut apparently. There's times when films desperately need readjusting and improvement when studios screw up with edits and subtractions to the films theatrical version. There's films out there that aren't definitive. One example would be Once Upon a Time in the West by Leone. I often ponder what Leone would've done with Once Upon, had he been able to rectify substantial elements within the film and bring the movie back to its original intended state. But very much doubt that will ever happen now. The balance between art and business is a highly fickle and contentious issue. Some 4K restorations have left me cold, especially Aliens, Once Upon a Time and The Godfather Trilogy more recently.
Thanks for letting me know about Harmys despecialised editions. I'm familiar with 4K77 projects and the other more famous despecialised blurays, but I hadn't heard about that one. I know a chap called Mike Verta had been working on a more or less 'personal' one, and his video on it was pretty incredible to watch. All I have at the moment are the 2006 DVDs where the it's an SD and very letterboxed version, so I'll take a look for Harmys, thanks! I was just reading the other day about the Legacy cut of Alien 3. You know I've only seen the film a couple times and the last time I watched it was at least 5 or 6 years ago, so I can't even really remember what I thought of it. It's another one that I need to re-visit before long, and particularly before that cut is finished! Like I mentioned with the great Arrow release of Waterworld, I wish we saw more releases with several cuts, (if they exist), so we get the best of all worlds and you can watch the one you love and remember, as well as another that might be the directors preferred cut or a changed version that might more objectively make the film a better one.
Hi Warren. A great video and you really expressed your thoughts well. A lot of complexities involved. Some concern what film elements remain and whether the director or cinematographer are still alive/available to oversee a reissue; others involve active filmmakers looking at it as an opportunity to tinker and provide a new edit; and others that involve rights ownership that has resulted in the studio/distributor making changes. Maybe also the “original” that we first saw wasn’t actually that as it was a copy from a copy….When I went to the BFI it was interesting to hear them talk about some of the decisions they have to make to try and preserve original intent when they are doing a 4K restoration as so much more information becomes visible which the casual viewer wouldn’t have seen before eg on Greenaway’s period film The Draughtsman’s Contract 4K scan it revealed a DC10 flying across the sky; on George Pal’s War of the Worlds it revealed lots more wires for the models than you would have originally seen. So some (well intentioned) practical decisions are having to be made on all these 4K issues which may or may not result in changes the audience approve of. As for actual edits, yes I like to know when watching a film if it’s a director cut etc or year of reissue…..Talking of artist’s rights, when I was over I did go and see some art at the Royal Academy and one piece was titled Oak Tree but the piece was a glass half full of water positioned on a high shelf. Beside was text of an interview with the artist. The reviewer argued that it wasn’t an oak tree; the artist defended that it was as he had an oak tree in mind when he created the piece, and it would remain an oak tree until he decided it was not. Ultimately I suppose the art can be one thing, but how you label it or describe it can be something else and only when those two things marry up are we satisfied
Hey Neil, I'm absolutely loving your in depth thoughts here, thank you so much! Whether a director is alive or not is a really interesting point that I didn't think about. As you say, is the cinematographer still around, or even anyone associated with the film to be able to suggest the original intentions of the film makes. Again, another absolute gem from your visit to the BFI. Amazing that a they discovered a plane flying in the background of The Draughtsman's Contract, (great film!). I'm guessing they digitally painted it out, but that is also something I've thought about at times, as we are so incredibly lucky to watch these old films in such crystal clear high quality these days, like The Cabinet of Dr Caligari for example, a film over 100 years old and available in 4K no less! The director Robert Wiene wouldn't have even been able to fathom 4K at the time, and I wonder if he left things in, like tiny mistakes or things not totally polished because they knew people wouldn't be able to see it. I imagine that happened an awful lot over the entire course of the 20th century, when no home video format even existed, let alone an ultra high quality one. And that brings up the question, do you leave everything in picture of the original, or not. That's really interesting to hear that they make as you say well intentioned decisions in the restorations to preserve what they best think was the intention, which might then actually result in alterations. I like the sound of that art piece a lot, I'll have to make my way there to check it out! I suppose I'd suggest, if at the time he made it he had an oak tree in mind, then an oak tree it will always remain, whether he changes his mind or not. Some more great food for thought 😄
@@goosesmovies Hi Warren. We need another pub chat, haha. Slightly off topic I know but it was interesting also to hear them talk about Chaplin movies. His movies were so popular in the early 1900s that copies of copies were made to increase distribution, meaning that when it came to doing 4K restorations some of the available film had scratches and marks etc embedded within the film as it was a copy. So those have to be removed digitally as well as all the other manual restoration. But yes, it’s staggering to see how crisp and new some of these 100 year old movies can now look when the right work is done.
@@neilsmoviechannel3199 Oh absolutely! I think this is a topic which could take 2 or even 3 pints to really get into the meat of things 😄 Incredible that copies of copies were needed to satisfy the demand! Restoration work is such an interesting area and something I really want to expland my knowledge on. Film as a medium is pretty astonishing. It's almost unbelievable that it's able to capture so much information, I think the latent potential is up to 8K with 35mm.
Interesting idea you had matey, really knowledgeable
I guess it is up to the director as they created the movie although the writer and cinematographer etc should have a say. A lot of artificial Intelligence upscaling seems to be done on prints ready to release on ultra HD, haven't seen any although haven't heard great things about a lot of those
Thanks Tim, and thanks for sharing your thoughts! Interesting that you mention the writer and cinematographer. I think a fairly unique aspect of film, (and TV), is that the end product has required so many people's artistry and talents to be combined to make it happen. I think the aspect of the writer, which isn't something I thought about, is particularly interesting, because in many instances there is already some friction between writers and directors as to how a script is translated into a film. To alter something further, especially many years later, I wonder what a writer would think.
Yes I think it's becoming more common, and I would guess surely must come down to AI being a cheaper tool to use then having people directly oversee things. Likewise I continue to hear divisive things about those releases.
@goosesmovies Think the producers want to have a say and meddle although they put the money up they aren't really adding anything artistically and seen examples of proficient directors making a movie with a bad script and it doesn't usually turn out a brilliant movie so think the director is important. Intelligent points you make though matey
Yes the Director/ Producer can do whatever they like its their content and its upto them. The audience can choose to like or not. Why should they bow down to the audience its upto them. As long as both the original and altered versions are available for people to enjoy.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts Matt! As you mention the producers here, I think that brings up another really interesting point which I only touched on regarding companies and censorship, but does the rights owner have the 'right', perhaps more in the moral sense, to alter a film even if it might go against an artists wishes? Star Wars is again a good example of this as I saw that there has been changes even to the special editions following Disney's acquisition of the films.
@@goosesmovies As long as all versions available for viewing then that should be sufficient 👍
I think the director has a right to change his film whenever and however they like sometimes I don't like the changes for example the star wars films. What I don't like is other people changing or censoring a film without the directors permission or a piece of art.
Thanks for sharing your throughts Gary! When changes are made to older films, I think it's often very divisive, but I think as you say, most of us would agree that when company change or censors a film, it's much more clear cut that it should not be done.