NitrateVille.com

Hard to rip a blu-ray, Nick.

Personally, I'm waiting for the day they strip that awful "As Time Goes By" number off of "Casablanca" and replace it with some Lady Gaga. After all, some people like it, so they're all the same, right?

Doug Sulpy wrote:Hard to rip a blu-ray, Nick.

Personally, I'm waiting for the day they strip that awful "As Time Goes By" number off of "Casablanca" and replace it with some Lady Gaga. After all, some people like it, so they're all the same, right?

Oh, quit with the spurious arguments. There's one significant difference between talkies and silent films, and I believe that everyone here knows what it is.

I finally got my package after my order was mistakenly shipped to Santa Fe and then forwarded to me in Maine.

Absolutely gorgeous product. The restoration is superb, and the documentary was fascinating.

I can't play Bluray so the flaw didn't bother me at all. As some have mentioned, the film in color is wondrous and many more details can be noticed.

That said, I have to say I did not like the score by Air.

Rodney wrote:

Doug Sulpy wrote:Hard to rip a blu-ray, Nick.

Personally, I'm waiting for the day they strip that awful "As Time Goes By" number off of "Casablanca" and replace it with some Lady Gaga. After all, some people like it, so they're all the same, right?

Oh, quit with the spurious arguments. There's one significant difference between talkies and silent films, and I believe that everyone here knows what it is.

If you don't understand my point, all you need to say is "I don't understand your point," and I will be happy to explain.

Serge Bromberg talks about the restoration on WNYC's Leonard Lopate Show:

http://www.wnyc.org/shows/lopate/2012/a ... r-travels/" target="_blank" target="_blank

Doug Sulpy wrote:

Rodney wrote:

Doug Sulpy wrote:Hard to rip a blu-ray, Nick.

Personally, I'm waiting for the day they strip that awful "As Time Goes By" number off of "Casablanca" and replace it with some Lady Gaga. After all, some people like it, so they're all the same, right?

Oh, quit with the spurious arguments. There's one significant difference between talkies and silent films, and I believe that everyone here knows what it is.

If you don't understand my point, all you need to say is "I don't understand your point," and I will be happy to explain.

I perfectly well understand your point, but you don't seem to understand mine. Casablanca has an original soundtrack and a score that are part of the artistic work. A Trip to the Moon doesn't. It's a silent film. In fact, in Melies' theater, it was very likely run with narration and no music, so just turn down the volume, and you're half-way to an authentic experience. Read the narration out loud, and you're being more accurate than any recording could be.

Many people like the Air score. It brought considerable interest and attention to an obscure but extremely work-intensive release, and many people find it effective. It was a choice by those who ponied up the considerable expense of doing the restoration, whose opinion matters more than Internet gripers like us. And they are very happy with it. You can express your displeasure, I don't mind that at all; but don't pretend it's like adding Lady Gaga to Casablanca. It's nothing of the sort.

Actually, you did miss my point, though that's my fault for not making it clear.

So let's take "Casablanca" and Lady Gaga out of the equation and use, say, "The Gold Rush." Now, imagine someone decides to take... oh, I don't know, modern country and use THAT as a score. They put it out. Some people like it (naturally, those inclined to like modern country). Meanwhile, the original score for "The Gold Rush" is not offered as an option, and the explanation is given that it's perfectly acceptable to use modern country in place of it because, after all, some people like it.

But that doesn't make the two equal, and it doesn't make the use of the modern score "right."

In fact, I'm reasonably sure that people here, given the choice, would not choose "modern" scores on their silent films. And understandably so. Why go through all the time and trouble and expense to restore a film to the way it originally looked, and then utterly ignore the musical accompaniment that one would have heard at the time? That's like doing a 4K restoration of a classic film (say, um, "Casablanca"), and then lopping the top and bottom off to make it "widescreen" for "contemporary audiences."

What's next? A square dance score for "The Hunchback of Notre Dame" because some people (probably French) like square dances? Bah.

That's all I was trying to say.

Doug Sulpy wrote:Actually, you did miss my point, though that's my fault for not making it clear.

So let's take "Casablanca" and Lady Gaga out of the equation and use, say, "The Gold Rush." Now, imagine someone decides to take... oh, I don't know, modern country and use THAT as a score. They put it out. Some people like it (naturally, those inclined to like modern country). Meanwhile, the original score for "The Gold Rush" is not offered as an option, and the explanation is given that it's perfectly acceptable to use modern country in place of it because, after all, some people like it.

But that doesn't make the two equal, and it doesn't make the use of the modern score "right."

In fact, I'm reasonably sure that people here, given the choice, would not choose "modern" scores on their silent films. And understandably so. Why go through all the time and trouble and expense to restore a film to the way it originally looked, and then utterly ignore the musical accompaniment that one would have heard at the time? That's like doing a 4K restoration of a classic film (say, um, "Casablanca"), and then lopping the top and bottom off to make it "widescreen" for "contemporary audiences."

What's next? A square dance score for "The Hunchback of Notre Dame" because some people (probably French) like square dances? Bah.

That's all I was trying to say.

And I was perhaps overly brusque, for which I apologize... but I still say that adding a soundtrack to a film that never had one is not comparable to changing the soundtrack of a film that did have one, or adding scenes to a film that didn't have them, or removing the top and bottom parts of the image elements.

(And there was no "original" score to the Gold Rush, the one we think of as "original" is a product of the talking picture age. If the film were in the public domain, I'd have no problem with some country group releasing a version with their score. Much like Bill Frisell's Go West. Could work. Certainly could be an interesting take if done well.)

It is traditional to add scores to video releases of silent films, and that's what was done here. At the time the films were made, the music you heard was often the cutting edge of pop music, so a case could be made for putting modern music to a silent film, particularly one with elements of science fiction, fantasy, modernism, or horror. I happen to like the Alloy Orchestra's score for Strike quite well, though it has no particular relation to the time and culture the film was made. Sue me. It fits the experimental film making style.

I do agree with you that I find historically-based music more appropriate for the vast majority of silent films, especially those that are clearly set in their time. I also have issues with the Air score for A Trip to the Moon. But I also believe that if you put a modern score to a silent film, there's no vandalism being done; just choices being made in legitimate areas of artistic taste -- and I think that comparing a modern score for A Trip to the Moon to other changes that would be cultural vandalism is unfair to the producers of an extremely expensive labor of love.

Bottom line: the great advantage of silent films over talkies is that if you don't like the score for whatever reason, you can hit the MUTE button.

My personal taste runs to "traditional" music (my definition) of period music for a silent film. But I dislike the tracks that are just random pieces strung together even if the pieces are themselves "traditional." I also find singing, talking, etc annoying unless they actually fit scene.

There was one score by Alloy, probably Metropolis, where I thought, "My god this is just awful," but as it went along I got what they were going for and it worked.

The piano score for my copy of Mickey (1918) is the song "Mickey," but it's hacked to pieces and played throughout the film in no special order. But the song itself by Neil Moret is so good, it doesn't bother me. It most cases, this would have me heading for the mute button.

Hi, I'm new here. I have been a fan of silent movie since the middle of the 90's when I saw the Chaplin Mutual on VHS and decided to see all the movie Chaplin made. After seeing 75% of the film Chaplin made, I decided to watch other silent star like Keaton and Lloyd. It's then, after seeing other silent movie, that I realize that not only I liked Chaplin but silent movie in general as well. I've discovered this forum a couple month ago and thanks to the internet, I realize that I'm not the only person who like silent. Since all my friend don't have any interest in silent movie, I felt alone in my passion.

Now, after reading all everybody had to say, I had to add my opinion on the subject of modern music on old silent. First, I have to say that I'm a musician since the age of 8, I'm 39 now, so I know a lot about music. I know I might puzzled some people here because, when I watch a silent movie, I usually put the soundtrack off and listen to music I like instead, being Jazz, Rock or Electronic. Not that I don't like the original music made for the movies, but I do prefer modern music, especially if it's a science fiction or a comedy.

Being a big fan of Air since their first album, I was very happy to learn that they where ask to do the soundtrack for A Trip To The Moon. I brought the new Air album that included a DVD with the movie A Trip To The Moon, and to no surprise, I liked it a lot. I can understand that to most of the fans of silent movie, it might be a sacrilege but not to me
Even tough, I believe they should have put on the DVD/BD the choice of different soundtrack for people who don't like the one by Air, I don't think it would have been that difficult to do.

p.s. Sorry if from time to time my English might not be perfect, coming from Montreal, I was born and raise in a French speaking family.

Welcome, Fido.

Flicker Alley did offer an alternative score by Robert Israel for the B&W bonus of A Trip to the Moon. Money aside (ha ha) I think offering 2 tracks is an excellent idea since the music has such an influence on how one experiences a silent film.

Rodney wrote: And I was perhaps overly brusque, for which I apologize... but I still say that adding a soundtrack to a film that never had one is not comparable to changing the soundtrack of a film that did have one, or adding scenes to a film that didn't have them, or removing the top and bottom parts of the image elements.

What I meant is that it's frustrating to read about such a careful job done on the restoration of the film, followed by multiple posts complaining about an ill-chosen score. It's not as grievous as cropping a full-frame image, of course.

Rodney wrote:(And there was no "original" score to the Gold Rush, the one we think of as "original" is a product of the talking picture age. If the film were in the public domain, I'd have no problem with some country group releasing a version with their score. Much like Bill Frisell's Go West. Could work. Certainly could be an interesting take if done well.)

I was merely using "The Gold Rush" as an example of a silent film.

Rodney wrote:It is traditional to add scores to video releases of silent films, and that's what was done here. At the time the films were made, the music you heard was often the cutting edge of pop music, so a case could be made for putting modern music to a silent film, particularly one with elements of science fiction, fantasy, modernism, or horror. I happen to like the Alloy Orchestra's score for Strike quite well, though it has no particular relation to the time and culture the film was made. Sue me. It fits the experimental film making style.

You might be able to make that case for a silent film set in contemporary times, but the images in virtually all silent films have taken on the patina of age. Harry Langdon's shorts, for example, were made in the Jazz Age, and a Jazz Age score seems perfectly appropriate for them. When something else is used (such as the modern jazz on the Allday set) I literally cannot watch the films because the music is so incongruous. Nor do I enjoy watching silent films in dead silence. On the other hand, like the example you cite above, I really enjoyed the Alloy Orchestra's score for "Man With a Movie Camera" because, as you say, "it fits the experimental film making style."

The problem isn't having the AIR score on the colored version; the problem is that there's no alternative. And let's face it, nobody's buyin' this disc to watch the black-and-white version that we've all seen before, and I'd wager not a lot of people are buyin' it just for the documentary.

Having it in your contract that home video viewers are forced to watch the film only with your score without alternate choices tells me that you're a bit insecure about whether said viewers will like your score. I mean, isn't it enough that you're paid for your work? Let those that like your score watch it that way, and those who don't like it can watch it with one of the alternate choices.

Doug Sulpy wrote:Hard to rip a blu-ray, Nick.

Nah, it's easy. Google it.

Derek

This is not true as you said, cause just few segments or few frames, where the image from the original colored copy was damaged beyond repair, was replaced with computer recolored footage of the B&W version available before.

To prove my point I'm adding a link to DVD Beaver comparison, showing the B&W version and the color restored footage version, both from the Blu Ray edition:

http://www.dvdbeaver.com/film3/blu-ray_ ... lu-ray.htm" target="_blank" target="_blank


You can notice clearly, comparing the captures that the footage are different. Diferent framing, different sharpness, diferent contrast, diferent damage marks.

bigshot wrote:I wasn't going to get this set, but the film group I volunteer for bought it for me. It is one of the most frustrating videos I have ever seen.

The color version of "A Trip To The Moon" looks very nice. But after watching the documentary on how it was restored, it's pretty clear that not one single frame of it is actually taken from the original color print. They assigned frame numbers to each frame, corresponding the badly decomposed hand tinted version with a B&W print in good condition. Then they used the hand tinted version as a color key for colorizing the B&W version. They never say this in the film, but they do say that in the original hand colored print, no more than five frames in sequence every survived intact. There were gaps scattered every few frames throughout the whole film. They show a colorist recreating the hand tinting for combining with the B&W print, and he turns off the film layer to show his tinting layer and it is continuous rotoscoped throughout the whole scene. Also, they state that the color print was tinted yellow overall throughout, but after the restoration, the colors are applied over B&W.

That said, the colorizing does a very good job of mimicking the look of dye tinting. I wouldn't know it was computer colorized if I didn't see how they did it.

But according to David Shepard, 15% of the final product is produced from a black and white print. Therefore, it seems a b/w print with a similar screen area to the original "colorized" print was available, otherwise the difference in image area would be obvious during the restoration itself.

I watched the bluray with a group of student animators last night. We screened a few great films off the DVD set first, then watched the documentary and A Trip to the Moon. They loved the films from the DVDs with the great music and Bromberg's jolly mispronunciations. I didn't want to say anything about the Air soundtrack, but as soon as the film started, a groan went up from the group and someone said, "Steve! What are you doing to the sound?" These were college kids who should theoretically be the audience for (hot) Air. The music threw them off throughout the whole film. After the lights went up, they were all saying The Merry Folics of Satan (or satin as Bromberg pronounces it) was the best film. I'm not sure they would have felt that way if they had seen Trip to the Moon with a proper soundtrack. After the huge build up in the documentary, Air succeeded in letting the air out of Moon.

Watching it again, I noticed the cutting back and forth between the colorized B&W and the color footage. It's especially noticeable in the first sequence where the balance of the gray tones completely shifts, blinking on and off in the background. There's also a sequence on the surface of the moon where the whole right side of the screen is clearly the B&W version pasted over deterioration in the color version. The two layers are out of sync to each other too. When one of the actors walks to the edge of the screen he gets chopped in half because the overlay is lagging a few frames behind the color.

Looking at the documentary again, and puzzling out the restoration technique, I have to say it's great that they went the extra mile to restore the color footage, but considering the footage on the menu screen, which appears to be the computer colorized B&W print done for Hugo, I think the computer colorization gives the same impression as the original hand coloring and a much better result. I kind of wish they had colorized the whole B&W print and only used the color to fill the gaps instead of using the whole color print and filling the gaps with colorized B&W.

I also wish someone would shove Air into a giant bullet and fire them into space.

bigshot wrote: I didn't want to say anything about the Air soundtrack, but as soon as the film started, a groan went up from the group and someone said, "Steve! What are you doing to the sound?" These were college kids who should theoretically be the audience for (hot) Air. The music threw them off throughout the whole film. After the lights went up, they were all saying The Merry Folics of Satan (or satin as Bromberg pronounces it) was the best film. I'm not sure they would have felt that way if they had seen Trip to the Moon with a proper soundtrack. After the huge build up in the documentary, Air succeeded in letting the air out of Moon.

I realise it wasn't Flicker Alley's decision, but I simply don't understand the commercial or aesthetic reasoning behind making the AIR score exclusive. I know several people - including myself - who are not buying this release mainly because of it (though the region-locking of the blu-ray - another off-putting contractual requirement - is a secondary factor). To have included a more traditional - and dramatically/comically effective - score as an option on the colour version would have been a win-win situation for everyone, and would surely have resulted in more sales. Given the immense cost of the restoration, I would have thought the Foundations that put up the money would like to see as many sales as possible, instead of restricting it to those who are able to tolerate AIR, a mute film or who are technically savvy enough to re-burn it with their own choice of score. It seems to me a classic case of spoiling the ship for a ha'porth of tar.

Yep, it was a truly stupid call by the powers-that-be, stupid stupid STUPID, and I feel sorry for Flicker Alley that they'll be losing sales as a result. If this had included the score with the narration as an alternate, my money would be in Flicker Alley's coffers as I type this.

OK boys, we'll just have to weigh your $29.95 and your righteous indignation against the $500,000.00 grants and the immense amount of work that made this project possible, not to mention the enthusiasm of many people who actually like the AIR score, and be guided accordingly.

Of course we're happy when anyone wants our projects, and delighted when someone actually appreciates them; but I'm also grateful that our survival does not depend upon the stakeholders of Bitch & Moan, Inc.

David Shepard

DShepFilm wrote:OK boys, we'll just have to weigh your $29.95 and your righteous indignation against the $500,000.00 grants and the immense amount of work that made this project possible, not to mention the enthusiasm of many people who actually like the AIR score, and be guided accordingly.

Of course we're happy when anyone wants our projects, and delighted when someone actually appreciates them; but I'm also grateful that our survival does not depend upon the stakeholders of Bitch & Moan, Inc.

David Shepard

Well said, David. Thanks to you and Serge and the other dedicated people for bringing this rare version of a 110 year-old movie milestone back to life.

I've just ordered my copy. If by chance I'm less than thrilled with AIR's score, I can just do what I've always done when running silent 16mm prints: play a wild track of my own choice, maybe some Saint-Saëns or whatever feels appropriate to me. There's always a solution, as long as people keep making portable music players...

DShepFilm wrote:OK boys, we'll just have to weigh your $29.95 and your righteous indignation against the $500,000.00 grants and the immense amount of work that made this project possible, not to mention the enthusiasm of many people who actually like the AIR score, and be guided accordingly.

Of course we're happy when anyone wants our projects, and delighted when someone actually appreciates them; but I'm also grateful that our survival does not depend upon the stakeholders of Bitch & Moan, Inc.

David Shepard

Frankly, I'm astonished by the tone of your reply to my politely expressed objection (I assume I'm included in the plurality of "boys"... though I'm well into middle-age). I have never criticised the restoration of the film itself and, as I said in my earlier post, have no problem with the inclusion of the AIR score, merely its exclusion of any other. I also emphasised that I did not blame Flicker Alley. But if that's how you feel about a constructive criticism from one of your regular customers - who has bought almost every previous FA (and silent Image) release - I guess there's nothing more to be said.

Jonathan wrote:

DShepFilm wrote:OK boys, we'll just have to weigh your $29.95 and your righteous indignation against the $500,000.00 grants and the immense amount of work that made this project possible, not to mention the enthusiasm of many people who actually like the AIR score, and be guided accordingly.

Of course we're happy when anyone wants our projects, and delighted when someone actually appreciates them; but I'm also grateful that our survival does not depend upon the stakeholders of Bitch & Moan, Inc.

David Shepard

Frankly, I'm astonished by the tone of your reply to my politely expressed objection (I assume I'm included in the plurality of "boys"... though I'm well into middle-age). I have never criticised the restoration of the film itself and, as I said in my earlier post, have no problem with the inclusion of the AIR score, merely its exclusion of any other. I also emphasised that I did not blame Flicker Alley. But if that's how you feel about a constructive criticism from one of your regular customers - who has bought almost every previous FA (and silent Image) release - I guess there's nothing more to be said.

Jonathan, I don't believe David is directing his annoyance towards you for expressing your opinion in a civilized manner. But rereading the other posts leading up to David's remark, one can easily understand his frustration...it's his time and effort, his work is on a par with Kevin Brownlow's, he's not The Complaint Department. He should not have to be subjected to this kind of feedback, that's all.

Pre-ordered on 03/06. Still waiting for it.

DShepFilm wrote:OK boys, we'll just have to weigh your $29.95 and your righteous indignation against the $500,000.00 grants and the immense amount of work that made this project possible, not to mention the enthusiasm of many people who actually like the AIR score, and be guided accordingly.

Of course we're happy when anyone wants our projects, and delighted when someone actually appreciates them; but I'm also grateful that our survival does not depend upon the stakeholders of Bitch & Moan, Inc.

David Shepard

So... it's only ok for *you* to bitch and moan when something doesn't happen the way you like?

Seriously though, I bought two copies.

The problem is (and this is not referring only to you) that the usual reply that's given if someone doesn't like something is to "vote with your wallet," however we who like silent film (both in general and in this instance everything you've specifically done for it) have the conundrum of knowing that if we vote with our wallets we're less likely to get more films. So it's not really reasonable to say "if you don't like it, don't buy it," then say "don't expect more, because our last one didn't sell." It's such a niche market that it's pretty likely that a boycott by Nitratevillians (Nitrate Villians?) would be felt very much in the wallet of a distributor.

I think everyone here has been pretty clear that we understand that it's not your fault there's only one score on the color version, or that the one score that's there is, well, not very fitting. And several people have mentioned buying it DESPITE not liking (or assuming they won't like) the score. So that's a pretty strong show of support.

It just sucks when you wait so long for something and it's less than perfect in a way that could have been avoided (in this case, not by you DS). It seems that with the soundtrack choice they were chasing an audience they had no chance of getting, at the expense of the audience who has stood by them for years. Imagine how you'd feel if the Chaplin estate found absolutely pristine negative material for The Kid, complete, from its original release, then announced a Blu-ray, then released it but with the cuts Chaplin made later, and with a modern score (complete with Justin Beiber singing the theme). You wouldn't feel even a little upset?

DShepFilm wrote:OK boys, we'll just have to weigh your $29.95 and your righteous indignation against the $500,000.00 grants and the immense amount of work that made this project possible, not to mention the enthusiasm of many people who actually like the AIR score, and be guided accordingly.

Of course we're happy when anyone wants our projects, and delighted when someone actually appreciates them; but I'm also grateful that our survival does not depend upon the stakeholders of Bitch & Moan, Inc.

David Shepard

None of the concerns have been directed at you or Flicker Alley; only to those who have cost you sales by shackling this painstaking and expensive restoration to an EXCLUSIVE score. As someone said above, you apparently own stock in Bitch & Moan as well.

I've gone on the record numerous times lauding your many fine video releases, and spent plenty of money on them, so I think I'm allowed to say what I think about the AIR exclusivity silliness without you taking it personally, especially when I took pains to point out that I was sorry it was costing Flicker Alley sales (and it is), and as you should know, $29.95 can add up if 100 silent film fans don't buy it that otherwise would have.

As for the people who like the AIR score, they appear to be even more silent than the films we discuss on this board.

Ed Watz wrote: Jonathan, I don't believe David is directing his annoyance towards you for expressing your opinion in a civilized manner. But rereading the other posts leading up to David's remark, one can easily understand his frustration...it's his time and effort, his work is on a par with Kevin Brownlow's, he's not The Complaint Department. He should not have to be subjected to this kind of feedback, that's all.

Oh, cry me a river.

This is a public discussion board on silent movies. Are people here NOT "permitted" to voice objections or criticize silent film releases because someone who might be involved with one of those releases might not like it?

Nonsense.

Doug Sulpy wrote:

Ed Watz wrote: Jonathan, I don't believe David is directing his annoyance towards you for expressing your opinion in a civilized manner. But rereading the other posts leading up to David's remark, one can easily understand his frustration...it's his time and effort, his work is on a par with Kevin Brownlow's, he's not The Complaint Department. He should not have to be subjected to this kind of feedback, that's all.

Oh, cry me a river.

This is a public discussion board on silent movies. Are people here NOT "permitted" to voice objections or criticize silent film releases because someone who might be involved with one of those releases might not like it?

Nonsense.

If the criticisms towards Mr. Shepard's work were as civil as your note to me now, Doug, I doubt that he would've accused certain folks of bitchin' & moanin'. Because that's what they were doing.

Well, here's the deal... When I lower the lights and hit play, I don't care how much the restoration cost, or what sort of contract negotiations were required to make the project happen. All I care about is if the film speaks to me. All of us who have seen our share of silent films know the old adage... "Silent films aren't silent." The music is part of the show.

I would no more want to watch a current drama with a old timey clattery barrelhouse piano and plunkity plunk banjo backup as I would want to watch Melies with Pink Floyd wannabes. Even if I didn't mind the jarring unidiomatic music, the sorry truth is that Air did a very poor job of supporting the film. They miss major accents in the action and the moods are completely arbitrary. It just isn't a good job of scoring to picture. In fact, I doubt it was scored to picture at all. It sounded to me like a bunch of outtakes from albums that they cobbled together randomly over a beer one afternoon.

In order for silent film to work, it requires a soundtrack that supports the action. The new Wings bluray has a brilliant soundtrack that takes the unconventional approach of adding sound effects, but it works with the picture perfectly and enhances the viewing experience.

You can call me a griper and prefer the company of hotshots with pockets full of cash and hideous taste in music. That's fine with me. I stick with the group that thinks that silent films deserve to be presented well. I'm happy to give my undying respect to those who restore films, but Air gets the bird from me.

Last time I'm going to say this -

You can play your own music track.

That's what we all had to do in the days of collecting silent films on film, few silent movie prints even had tracks on them. Most film prints in my collection today are silent, I put together my own music preferences or for comedy shorts play a wild track. It was always a fun thing to do - it makes you feel like being a contributor to the entertainment - which, in fact, you are.

I'm just passing through life, and I know that the film prints, the DVDs, and I myself won't be around forever. Instead of waiting for another opportunity to buy someone else's track on a DVD of A TRIP TO THE MOON in 5 or 10 years, or never, I'd rather take the late Bill Everson's advice given 45 years ago: "Let's just enjoy the films while we can."