HTF REIVEW: Mary Poppins 40th Anniversary SE - HIGHLY RECOMMENDED!!! (1 Viewer)

[DaViD Boulet]

They *sort of* included the original mix.

The original mix was discrete L-C-R and so the 2.0 "original" mix on the DVD is a matrixed mix that loses fidelity due to ProLogic processing and the reduced bit-rate afforded 2.0 DD tracks.

It would have been much better, and a proper solution IMO, to have given us a 5.1 or 5.0 encoding of the "original" mix that kept the source L/C/R tracks discrete...and then ambient information could have been placed in the surround channels for atmosphere (or even left empty)...this would have given the best fidelity not only due to the discrete nature of the preserved mix, but because the added bit-rate for the 5.0 mix would improve the fidelity of the encoding (DD uses bit-sharing across all channels so the more bits the better).

Still, you're right. Thank god they included the "original" mix in some fashion...otherwise I would not be recommending this disc at all.

-dave

 

[Carlo_M]

So maybe I buy this version, hook up 2 DVD players and sync this and the old version up, run audio from the old version while watching the video from the new version.

Would that about do it?

 

[Ernest Rister]

To be honest, I think I have a morbid curiosity about what's been done to the audio of Bambi to boost it into the realm of the "Disney Enhanced Home Theater Mix".

 

[ArthurMy]

If you want my two centavos, here they are. The image looks great, and much better than any previous transfer. There are no problems with color, and I base that on having recently seen an IB Tech print of the film.

The dreaded new mix: Well, I'm going to go out on a limb and say that it sounds like a mistake has been made. I'm not talking about a bad mix, I'm talking about an actual mistake in the transfer of the sound - like someone forgot to push a button or something. I think that's what we're ultimately going to find out. There is no other explanation that makes sense, frankly. There is clearly something wrong with the track, technically.

 

[rich_d]

David,

When you say "ambient information" what ambient information was in the original film?

All,

I'm thinking the problem is how they did the "enhanced mix" (or didn't do it) then the reality of lost bytes for a better picture. After all, Lord of the Rings is delivering 7 audio tracks on the EE release and I don't hear people complaining about picture quality.

 

[DaViD Boulet]

by "ambient" information I just mean the out-of-phase info comparing the L/R front channels...the way a Dolby ProLogic decoder extracts the surround channels...

 

[Keith Paynter]

The Disney 5.1 and 2.0 HT remixes are simply wastes of time. After having watched a rental copy last night and listening to the "practically perfect" "original" mix and watching the finely detailed picture (in spite of Disney's CAPS-oriented 1.66:1 aspect ratio), I concede that this is probably the best version we're going to see for a long time.

I don't know the cause for the unfortunate shimmer during the opening scenes (as mentioned initially by DaViD), especially during Andrews' opening closeup (the sky on her left was particularly annoying), but amazingly enough the matte artwork throughout looked phoenominal in spite of (or possibly because of) the detail in the wide color pallates. Likely that the sky's colors on her first close-up were so consistant that it was difficult to maintain a 'grain'-like look. The video bitrate was in the upper 7's to mid 9's throughout.

The dual commentaries by Julie Andrews and Dick Van Dyke, and Richard Sherman and Karen Dotrice were quite good (although Andrews' and Van Dyke's reminiscings were the most entertaining), and the Pop-Up facts were very enlightening. I haven't even had time to examine the supplements disc in great detail, but consider it sold.

This film has been a favorite of mine for years, and I'm sure many of you will admit that it is the most timeless of all Walt Disney's live action films and, unlike most, has failed to date itself even after 40 years.

 

[Tom Brennan]

No, it's a "deliberate creative decision".

 

[Ernest Rister]

I'm having Star Wars flashbacks...

This film has been a favorite of mine for years, and I'm sure many of you will admit that it is the most timeless of all Walt Disney's live action films and, unlike most, has failed to date itself even after 40 years.

Perhaps, but I tend to think of it is as a film of its time, and more precisely, a film from a certain moment of the waning days of Walt Disney's time. It truly is the film that seems to sum up Walt's body of work. All the film needs are some documentary shots of wild animals, and then it would contain a nearly complete summary of Walt Disney's film career.

I'm not sure if Poppins is any more or less resilient to becoming dated than some other Disney titles - Pollyanna and Treasure Island immediately spring to mind, as well as other period films from the studio...Greyfriar's Bobby, The Three Lives of Thomasina, Third Man on the Mountain, etc.

 

[rich_d]

Here's what I just did for a test. I turned off all the speakers except for the center speaker. I played the 'step in time' section in a variety of modes including normal Dolby ProLogic, enchanced prologic and other enhanced modes. No mode setting had any effect on the center speaker.

When the dancers on the outer wall jump down onto the flat roof (where Van Dyke is standing) they all call out "step in time" in reply. (@1:47:55 into the film).

a. In enhanced 5.1 mode the singing of "step in time" by the backup singers has the accompanying sounds like reverb coming off a non-melodic cymbal.

b. In "original theatrical mode" the same sound occurs.

c. In "enhanced 2.0 mode" this sound is not present.

Again, I'm only referring to what is being sent to the center channel with the l/r and rear speakers off.

So how does enhanced 2.0 mode not have that particular singing reverb (for lack of a better phrase) and both the original 2.0 and 5.1 enhanced mode do?

Or did they record the backup singers in some sort of storm drain originally?

 

[Casey Trowbridg]

Wow, what a great review David. Seriously, this review clearly shows your affection for this classic film.

I picked this up on release day, the first time I own Mary Poppins on DVD.

 

[Greg_M]

The direction on the supplementary material SUCKS!

Who directed these making of features with "Moulin Rogue" style editing and camera work? They can't show a still photograph with out ZOOMING in on it? Just show the DAMN picture - God forbid. The feature with Andrews, Van Dyke and Sherman is just as bad. The piano they're sitting around seems to be turning on a carousel, with fast cutting edits. VERY BAD DOCUMENTARY FILM MAKING. I'm just glad the film itself wasn't made in 2004.

I'm not a fan of this style of editing as it draws attention to itself. It's discusting that Disney feels they must edited these things for the MTV generation.

The damn thing makes me dizzy on a 35" screen. At least the interviews are motionless, thank God for that.

Sorry guys I had to bitch:frowning:

Not as perfect as could be

 

[ArthurMy]

So, someone said that the region four or something has the 5.1 theatrical mix. Where do you buy such a thing? I'm only used to the UK, France and Germany, all of which, I think are region 2.

 

[Doug Bull]

Region 4 is PAL and is available Worldwide from all on- line DVD stores in Australia.

It is possible, although I have no confirmation, that Region 2 might have the same choice of Tracks, as Regions 2 and 4 both being PAL regions often share the same specs.

The downside to the region 4 edition is PAL speedup, but if that doesn't bother you then the region 4 Edition is otherwise fabulous.

 

[ArthurMy]

Doug, can you provide the name of a good Ozzie online store for me to order from? I don't think amazon does Australia.

 

[Keith Paynter]

DaViD's discussion of the music supplement hosted by Richard Sherman overlooks one important thing - how stunningly clear the orchestral stems sound, especially the multitrack separation for the "Pearlies" song (if you've seen the segment you know what I mean). The whole engaging segment is in plain Dolby Surround, but the quality is simply stellar, comparable to the Capitol Records studio recordings by Nat King Cole and Frank Sinatra! The fact that these stems are so well preserved in the Disney Morgue begs to again ask the question of why these elements were not used in the contemporary surround mixes?? The only flaw here is that they would sound too good for most of the vocal accompaniments.

 

[BBbrowd]

You said it, Keith. Using those original elements to put together the contemporary mix would have been FANTASTIC !

It reminds me of how they recently reassembled the original tracks for the "It's A Small World" attraction, when they discovered the original multi track recordings in the Disney vault. They sound like they were recorded yesterday.

 

[Drew Salzan]

Agreed. Starting from scratch and a creating a new 5.1 soundtrack mix faithful to the original theatrical one would have been amazing. This is assuming the vocal stems, effects and foley tracks and orchestral tracks ALL still exist separately. Even a discrete L/C/R option replicating the original theatrical mix would have have been preferable to what has been done in the new edition. Hopefully Disney is listening out there and will do what they should have done when the HD version emerges.

 

[DaViD Boulet]

agreed.

What Drew said...

Apparently, Disney didnt' want to spend the $$ to remix the auido from the original source elements. Now *that* would have been a DEHT mix (if they would have gotten Terry Porter to do it and resisted the new Foley effects) that might have blown us away.

Maybe when Mary Poppins comes out on BluRay?

 

[Marko Berg]

For additional supplementary material, see if you can check out the 2002 Australian documentary The Shadow of Mary Poppins. While the documentary focuses mainly on the life and the person of author and creator of the Mary Poppins character, Pamela Travers instead of the making of the film, there is discussion on the difficulties of filming the story. Apparently the development from book(s) to film took a while and there were some creative differences involved.

I don't know if this documentary is available on any home video format; I caught it on broadcast TV yesterday.