HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: mce@tc.fluke.COM (Brian McElhinney)
Newsgroups: rec.video.releases
Subject: The Ten Commandments, Lawrence of Arabia
Date: 7 Apr 92 20:50:40 GMT
Organization: Software of the Mist

Those of you thinking of buying The Ten Commandments might be
interested what THE PERFECT VISION has to say about the film-to-video
transfer.  I don't understand all the details (they started with a
1.66 separation, cropped to a 2.35 internegative, then cropped to
2.21).  But I am amazed by the result.  This very-wide-screen, very
popular, money-making movie, was transferred such that it cropped the
top, bottom, left, and right of each frame!

Amazing!  Makes a normal pan-and-scan seem, well, almost less than
incredibly stupid.

The good news is that Paramount is starting over, and plans to
re-issue tapes and discs in the correct aspect ratio.  No news on
when (or if this is old news; apologies if everyone already knows
this).

[Source: THE PERFECT VISION, Winter 91/92 issue, end of p53.]

This issue of THE PERFECT VISION also has an interesting interview
with Robert Harris (Lawrence of Arabia restoration), in part because
of his stories about David Lean.  According to Harris, Lean was shown
the first video transfer of Lawrence just before it was to start mass
production.  Lean walked out after the first ten minutes.  The studio
execs called Harris in a panic, because Lean had not said a word.
Lean called on another line, and succinctly explained: "I was just
shown this piece of shit."  Needless to say, the studio execs were
absolutely clueless.  This first attempt at a transfer did not involve
Harris, even though he repeatedly volunteered -- the second and final
transfer did.  For which I am *very* thankful.
 
 
Brian McElhinney       "The stupid are deaf to the truth; they hear, but think
mce@tc.fluke.com       that the wisdom applies to someone else."  --Heraclitus
Newsgroups: rec.video.releases
From: jonke@kong.gsfc.nasa.gov (Stephen Jonke)
Subject: Re: New Release Info (and a question) from the April LaserDisc Newsletter
Organization: NASA Goddard Space Flight Center
Distribution: na
Date: Mon, 6 Apr 92 21:25:33 GMT

In article <1992Apr5.033432.27498@tc.fluke.COM>, moriarty@tc.fluke.COM (Jeff Meyer) writes:
> 
> 
>  *  The Criterion edition of DR. STRANGEGLOVE will be shown in a mixture of
>     aspect ratios (accademy and 1.66:1), as per Kubric's instructions.  Does
>     anyone know if this is going to be CAV all the way through, or a CLV/CAV
>     combo? 
> 

Does anyone know why Kubrick wanted it done this way?  I also read that he
insisted that The Shining be pan&scan?  Why in the world would he insist
this????!!!!

Steve
From: moriarty@tc.fluke.COM (Jeff Meyer)
Newsgroups: rec.video.releases
Subject: Re: Cape Fear
Date: 6 Apr 92 19:17:05 GMT
Reply-To: moriarty@tc.fluke.COM (Jeff Meyer)
Distribution: na
Organization: The John Fluke Mfg. Co.  /a.k.a. The Gizmonics Institute/

According to an ad I saw in THE LASER DISC NEWSLETTER, CAPE FEAR is being
released in a letterboxed and P&S format.  While it could be that the film
was soft-matted, and the "letterboxed" format is actually matted, I seem to
remember being surprised by seeing that Scorcese shot CAPE FEAR in -- get
this -- CinemaScope!  (CinemaScope was eclipsed (until CAPE FEAR, totally)
years ago by Panavision.)

I am assuming that if Scorcese shot it with CinemaScope, it really was shot
wide-screen.  But I'll wait for the facts...

                           "Van Damme and Van Damme in 'Van Damme You All to
                            Hell!'"
                                           -- Tom Servo
---
                                        Moriarty, aka Jeff Meyer
INTERNET:     moriarty@tc.fluke.COM
Manual UUCP:  {uunet, uw-beaver, sun, microsoft}!fluke!moriarty
CREDO:        You gotta be Cruel to be Kind...
                 **>> Keep circulating the tapes <<**
From: jonke@kong.gsfc.nasa.gov (Stephen Jonke)
Newsgroups: rec.video.releases
Subject: Re: New Release Info (and a question) from the April LaserDisc Newsletter
Date: 8 Apr 92 13:45:15 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: NASA Goddard Space Flight Center

In article <1992Apr7.175733.19732@cbnewsi.cb.att.com>, kettyle@cbnewsi.cb.att.com (john.jr.kettyle) writes:
> 
> In article <1992Apr6.212533.9716@kong.gsfc.nasa.gov>, jonke@kong.gsfc.nasa.gov (Stephen Jonke) writes:
> > 
> > Does anyone know why Kubrick wanted it done this way?  I also read that he
> > insisted that The Shining be pan&scan?  Why in the world would he insist
> > this????!!!!
> > 
> > Steve
> 
> 
> I was under the impression that The Shining was matted and for the transfer
> they opened up the matte? Am I wrong about this?
> 
> John
> 

Could be -- I wasn't sure.  Both techinques are less then acceptable in my
book.  In both cases you aren't seeing the film the way it was intended to
be seen.  Just my opine, though.

Steve
From: moriarty@tc.fluke.COM (Jeff Meyer)
Newsgroups: rec.video.releases
Subject: Comments on Douglas Pratt's LASER VIDEO DISC COMPANION
Date: 6 Apr 92 02:16:48 GMT
Organization: The John Fluke Mfg. Co.  /a.k.a. The Gizmonics Institute/

After reading a large number of complimentary notes on the net about Douglas
Pratt's new updated LASER VIDEO DISC COMPANION -- a collection of laserdisc
reviews by Pratt, taken from issues of the LASER DISC NEWSLETTER -- I
ordered a copy for myself.  

I think it was worth it, but I have a few criticisms of the book:

 *  The people laying out this book need to get a better page layout
    program.  Sections are run together without page breaks; more
    importantly, it lacks the name of the first/last movie covered on the
    top of the left/right page -- something that is really important for a
    reference book of this type.  I appreciate that there are so many
    reviews in here, and don't have any problem with the small print and the
    three-column-per-page layout; but really, for a book of this price ($28
    softback) a bit better printing would be appreciated.

 *  OK, so maybe the problems mentioned above were because they were rushing
    to get it out, and organization was sacrificed so that they could shove
    in more reviews at the last minute.  Nope.  Though the copyright of this
    edition is 1992, the last issue of LDN that reviews were taken from is
    December, 1990.  With the number of re-issues, letterbox versions and
    special editions released in the last year, a few more months of info
    would have been greatly appreciated, especially since the book's layout
    didn't take that long.

 *  Finally, an opinionated warning to those who buy this book without
    reading several issues of LDN; while I get LDN for the technical reviews
    of laserdiscs, i.e. quality of transfer, print and audio tracks, Pratt
    usually spends as much or more space for each laserdisc reviewing the
    movie.  As a technical reviewer, he is adequate; as a film reviewer, he'd
    make a fine auto mechanic.  Obviously, your mileage may vary.
    (Actually, I get LDN mostly for laser release news these days -- for
    which it is excellent.)

Again, it was worth it for me to buy the book -- it's like having all my
pre-1991 LDNs bound up in one place -- but it could use a good deal of work.
A fair-to-good reference source, and very useful (along with an issue of THE
LASER VIDEO FILE).

                           "If you don't watch the violence, you'll never get
                            de-sensitized to it!"
---
                                        Moriarty, aka Jeff Meyer
INTERNET:     moriarty@tc.fluke.COM
Manual UUCP:  {uunet, uw-beaver, sun, microsoft}!fluke!moriarty
CREDO:        You gotta be Cruel to be Kind...
                 **>> Keep circulating the tapes <<**
Newsgroups: rec.video.releases
From: moriarty@tc.fluke.COM (Jeff Meyer)
Subject: Re: The Ten Commandments, Lawrence of Arabia
Reply-To: moriarty@tc.fluke.COM (Jeff Meyer)
Organization: The John Fluke Mfg. Co.  /a.k.a. The Gizmonics Institute/
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 1992 00:24:20 GMT

In <1992Apr7.205040.5198@tc.fluke.COM> mce@tc.fluke.COM (Brian McElhinney) writes:

>[Ten Commandments restoration print cropped reported in THE PERFECT VISION]
>
>The good news is that Paramount is starting over, and plans to
>re-issue tapes and discs in the correct aspect ratio.  No news on
>when (or if this is old news; apologies if everyone already knows
>this).

I'm very curious as to whether the new deluxe lbx TEN COMMANDMENTS LD coming
out this month from Paramount is transfered from this flawed print, or if it
is the corrected version that Paramount mentions in TPV article.  I have
some suspicion that it may be the latter; the deluxe TEN COMMANDMENTS LD was
supposed to have been released at Christmas, and it's delay may indicate
that they were going to wait for the corrected restoration.

[Anyway, I hope so -- I have it on pre-order at Tewksbury.  Hey, if you're
 going to get one DeMille picture, get the one where he goes over the top
 the most. :-) ]

>This issue of THE PERFECT VISION also has an interesting interview
>with Robert Harris (Lawrence of Arabia restoration), in part because
>of his stories about David Lean.  

I particularly like the stories of the execs asking Harris to talk to Lean
about a pan & scan version of Lawrence.  Lean's response: "Bugger them."

Actually, the most exciting thing about the Robert Harris interview (and it
is a lot of fun to read), is that he's planning a restoration of THE LION IN
WINTER, a film I've desperately wanted to see in it's correct aspect ratio.
According to Harris, the original negative of THE LION IN WINTER "has about
95% of its color."  I'm sure that if a restored print is done, a lbx version
of the film would be released from this print -- and THE LION IN WINTER is a
film I've *long* wanted in letterbox on laserdisc.

                           "Something stupid this way comes."
                                           --- Joel, MST3K
---
                                        Moriarty, aka Jeff Meyer
INTERNET:     moriarty@tc.fluke.COM
Manual UUCP:  {uunet, uw-beaver, sun, microsoft}!fluke!moriarty
CREDO:        You gotta be Cruel to be Kind...
                 **>> Keep circulating the tapes <<**
From: wlrc@uhura.neoucom.edu (William R. Cruce)
Newsgroups: rec.video.releases
Subject: Re: Classic LD's
Date: 9 Apr 92 20:19:13 GMT
Article-I.D.: uhura.1992Apr09.201913.28187
Organization: Northeastern Ohio Universities College of Medicine

In article <1992Apr9.173939.4399@athena.mit.edu> lmlidsky@athena.mit.edu (Lawrence M Lidsky) writes:
>of my favorite movies. Can anyone supply any information with respect to the
>quality of the presently available pressings of:

>a) THE MALTESE FALCON

There have been at least two releases of this -an earlier one by CBS/FOX
and a more recent one by MGM/UA.  The MGM one is reputed to be superior.
It has somewhat distorted sound (common for 1941 movies) and the print
quality varies.  There are spots where the film is scratched, dirty, or
grainy.  Overall contrast is low to moderate.  So not bad but could be
better.  List price is $35.  I think it is currently in print.

>b) THINGS TO COME.

Not currently available on LD (nor has it ever been).  I would love to
see it released.  It has been shown on American Movie Classics, though
the print was not the best.  Things from AMC seem to be slowly making
their way to LD (especially if they are in Ted Turner's vaults) so I
am keeping my fingers crossed.

-- 
BILL CRUCE, NE OHIO COLL OF MEDICINE----INTERNET: wlrc@uhura.neoucom.edu 
        Neurobiology Dept., P.O. Box 95, Rootstown, OH 44272
          "The only reason for time is so that everything
                     doesn't happen at once."
From: boyajian@ruby.enet.dec.com (The fox so cunning and free)
Newsgroups: rec.video.releases
Subject: Re: Heavy Metal - Release?
Date: 8 Apr 92 06:19:09 GMT
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation

In article <1992Apr7.175005.9191@ccu.umanitoba.ca>, ummorea0@ccu.umanitoba.ca (Gene Moreau) writes...

} Well it's been showed up here on Pay-TV a few times now, The first being
} about 6 years ago, so I don't think that it was leagal problems that
} held it back from being released. I have no idea what caused it to be
} held back though.

Yes, it *is* legal problems, but those problems only affect *video* release,
not pay-cable broadcasts.

} One thing, any version that I have seeen has some scenes cut out,
} specificly the ones where they two aliens are snorting the line of coke
} or what ever it was all over the ship.

Nyborg. "Great nyborg!"

I haven't watched any Cinemax broadcasts in recent years, as I had taped
the movie from the channel back in the early-to-mid-80's. That nyborg-
snorting scene is certainly in the version I have on tape. Whether it's
been cut out since, I can't say. Maybe it's just a Canadian thing.

-- 

	"Buster, this trip downriver has been truly special.
	 Downright Twainian in a Hitchcockian sort of way."


--- jayembee (Jerry Boyajian, DEC, "The Mill", Maynard, MA)

    boyajian@ruby.enet.dec.com
From: ac985@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Joel Tscherne)
Newsgroups: rec.video.releases
Subject: Re: Superman cartoons on LD
Date: 15 Apr 92 12:13:23 GMT
Article-I.D.: usenet.1992Apr15.121323.21452
Reply-To: ac985@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Joel Tscherne)
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)


In a previous article, andre@rurutu.wri.com (Andre Kuzniarek) says:

>In article <1992Apr14.200802.9408@nic.unh.edu> tcw@kepler.unh.edu (Timothy  
>C Webb) writes:
>>    I was just looking through my Columbia House Laser Disc Club (sorry,  
>CHLDC)
>> catalog and noticed a 60 minute laserdisc of Superman cartoons. Are  
>these the
>> old Max Fleisher cartoons? If anyone knows, please fill me in.
>
>A friend of mine has just such a disk, and it's beautiful. I would assume  
>the Columbia House disc is the same.

I wouldn't assume that.  If the Columbia disc is 60 minutes, then it
woudn't include all the cartoons as the VHS tape I have of all of them
lasts more than two hours.
-- 
          JOEL TSCHERNE - Internet: ac985@cleveland.Freenet.edu 
=============================================================================
             "We always earned our money the old-fashioned way: 
                  We beat people for it." --Paul Ellering
From: uwkeller@mcl.mcl.ucsb.edu (Kelvin)
Newsgroups: rec.video.releases
Subject: Robotech?
Keywords: Robotech
Date: 14 Apr 92 00:04:41 GMT

I knnow that a few of the Robotech Macross Saga episodes are out on video
now, does anyone know if Masters, of Next Generation are out, or when
they are due to be released? Please let me know if you have any info.

Thanx
 --William    uwkeller@mcl.ucsb.edu
Newsgroups: rec.video.releases
From: boyajian@ruby.enet.dec.com (The fox so cunning and free)
Subject: Re: Heavy Metal - Release?
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation
Date:  7 APR 92 04:19:08 EDT

In article <1992Apr6.203228.28650@col.hp.com>, smb@col.hp.com (Sam Bauer) writes...

} I have been waiting for Heavy Meatal to come out on disk for years.

Don't hold your breath.

} I heard that some legal issues have kept it back.

Yes, the same issues that have kept it from release on tape as well. When
the contracts were drawn up for the rights to the songs used on the
soundtrack, they didn't include video use (the movie was made prior to
the video market becoming a major force in movie marketing). So the
owners of the songs wanted to renegotiate the rights (for more money),
and that's caused the snag.

} I heard that Showtime (or was it Cinemax)

Cinemax.

} will be airing it this month.

Sorry, but it was last month. They show it every six to eight months,
usually two times each go-round.

} Does this mean that the legal problems are now ironed out?

No, because cable and broadcast rights are part of the standard contract
specifications. Video is *now*, but was not then.

-- 

	"Buster, this trip downriver has been truly special.
	 Downright Twainian in a Hitchcockian sort of way."


--- jayembee (Jerry Boyajian, DEC, "The Mill", Maynard, MA)

    boyajian@ruby.enet.dec.com
From: jonke@kong.gsfc.nasa.gov (Stephen Jonke)
Newsgroups: rec.video.releases
Subject: Re: New Release Info (and a question) from the April LaserDisc Newsletter
Date: 8 Apr 92 21:15:56 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: NASA Goddard Space Flight Center

In article <1992Apr8.061513.3767@engage.pko.dec.com>, boyajian@ruby.enet.dec.com (The fox so cunning and free) writes:
> 
> just as many
> directors have composed their films so that nothing significant would
> be lost when they were cropped for television.
> 

This idea sounds good when you first think about it, but when you put further
thought into you realize what an incredibly bad idea it is.  Namely, if
the director keeps the TV screen ratio in mind then what he/she is really
creating is a direct to video movie that is cropped when released in the
theater -- it never should have been released in the theater to start
with!

> Keep in mind that those of us who support letterboxing do so because we
> feel that it displays the film the way the director wanted it. If the
> director decides that for video, he wants it transferred full screen,
> then why should we second-guess that?
> 

When Kubrick goes in and starts re-editing the film he's creating a different
film.  What I want to see is the film as it was ORIGINALLY intended, NOT
how he sees things now -- people change with time, although his current
viewpoint may be interesting, we should at least be given the option
to see it as it originally was.

Steve
Newsgroups: rec.video.releases
From: kaplan@unamas.esd.sgi.com (Larry Kaplan)
Subject: Re: New Release Info (and a question) from the April LaserDisc Newsletter
Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc.
Distribution: na
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 92 17:45:23 GMT

In article <1992Apr07.141434.20562@uhura.neoucom.edu>, wlrc@uhura.neoucom.edu (William R. Cruce) writes:
|> In article <1992Apr6.212533.9716@kong.gsfc.nasa.gov> jonke@kong.gsfc.nasa.gov (Stephen Jonke) writes:
|> >Does anyone know why Kubrick wanted it done this way?  I also read that he
|> >insisted that The Shining be pan&scan?  Why in the world would he insist
|> >this????!!!!
|> 
|> Directors are not the perfect, god-like creatures we viewers sometimes
|> seem to think. Some of the best of them don't understand home-video and
|> especially laser disc.  I think we could begin to compile a list of
|> directors who should not be allowed near the mastering for laser disc.
|> At the top of the list I would put Kubrick and Friedkin, who also doesn't
|> believe in letterbox (EXORCIST, FRENCH CONNECTION, SORCERER).  
|> 

Now, this is truly ridiculous. We have argued the merits of letterboxing
for a while. Although most of you prefer it to pan & scan, and the fact
that most movies come out both ways gives you the choice, don't be
so close-minded as to ignore people's opinions.

Many of us can see both sides. Yes, letterboxing preserves the "proper"
aspect ratio. But it also sacrifices detail. Film resolution is many
times greater than television, and reducing the amount of pixels used
(by letterboxing) is a further reduction. Some directors obviously
prefer detail to wide screen. Kubrick and Friedkin are both director
who put a lot of detail in their movies. Given the choice, they chose
detail over letterboxing. You can't condemn them for their choice.

Some day, when television resolution and aspect ratios match film,
then we can stop this debate. Meanwhile, keep an open mind and be
wary of being so dogmatic.


-- 
  Larry Kaplan  (415)335-1584 Silicon Graphics, Mtn View, CA 94039 USA
Newsgroups: rec.video.releases
From: smb@col.hp.com (Sam Bauer)
Subject: Heavy Metal - Release?
Date: Mon, 6 Apr 1992 20:32:28 GMT
Organization: HP Colorado Springs Division

I have been waiting for Heavy Meatal to come out on disk for years.  I heard that 
some legal issues have kept it back.  I heard that Showtime (or was it Cinemax)
will be airing it this month.  Does this mean that the legal problems are now
ironed out?  Does anyone know if it will be released on any format soon?  If 
you have any info, please post.

Sam
From: davidv@sco.COM (Uncle David)
Newsgroups: rec.video.releases
Subject: Letterboxed edition of M*A*S*H available?
Date: Thu, 09 Apr 92 21:25:17 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: The Santa Cruz Operation, Inc.


well, one of my favorite films/tv series is M*A*S*H. so i ordered it
from Columbia House. what i got was a rather bad transfer of it:
no digital soundtrack, no cx encoding on the analogue track, and 
a fake stereo. in addition, the movie wasn't letterboxed, and i 
know the film was done in Panavision (says so in the opening 
credits). now, i don't know what possesed me to order the film 
knowing that it probably wasn't letterboxed, or had a digital 
soundtrack, but we all make mistakes (i thought the desciption
in the catalogue said LBX and digital stereo, otherwise i probably
wouldn't have ordered it). judging by the lack of CX encoding, and
lack of digital whatsoever, it looks like they did the transfer
at least 10 years ago. ick.

what i want to find is a letterboxed transfer of the movie, if at
all possible. is there a japanese import of the movie? is Criterion
planning a release? 
-- 
David Vangerov, Systems Analyst - Advanced Technologies, Information Services.
Voice: 408-425-7222, x4357 | Email: ...!uunet!sco!davidv | SCO would never say 
Fax:   408-427-5460        |        davidv@sco.com       | something this lame
 "I never can come up with these damn witty quotes. Got a better one for me?"
Newsgroups: rec.video.releases
From: tcw@kepler.unh.edu (Timothy C Webb)
Subject: Superman cartoons on LD
Summary: look...up in the sky...
Organization: University of New Hampshire  -  Durham, NH
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 1992 20:08:02 GMT

   I was just looking through my Columbia House Laser Disc Club (sorry, CHLDC)
catalog and noticed a 60 minute laserdisc of Superman cartoons. Are these the
old Max Fleisher cartoons? If anyone knows, please fill me in.

-- 
===============================================================================
|    Tim Webb                \      "I will think of                          |
|     tcw@kepler.unh.edu      \       something really good..."               |
===============================================================================
From: boyajian@ruby.enet.dec.com (The fox so cunning and free)
Newsgroups: rec.video.releases
Subject: Re: Classic LD's
Date: 10 Apr 92 13:37:37 GMT
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation

In article <1992Apr09.201913.28187@uhura.neoucom.edu>, wlrc@uhura.neoucom.edu (William R. Cruce) writes...

}} b) THINGS TO COME.

} Not currently available on LD (nor has it ever been).  I would love to
} see it released.  It has been shown on American Movie Classics, though
} the print was not the best.

I got one the Public Domain "Karte Classics" Beta tape of this and the print
was awful. Since the film *is* in the Public Domain, and thus is available
for anyone who wants to issue it on LD, I suspect (given that it's a classic
film) that there may not be any decent prints of it around that anyone can
find.

-- 

	"Buster, this trip downriver has been truly special.
	 Downright Twainian in a Hitchcockian sort of way."


--- jayembee (Jerry Boyajian, DEC, "The Mill", Maynard, MA)

    boyajian@ruby.enet.dec.com