UHD Review A Few Words About While we wait for a few words about...™ The Godfather(s) -- in 4k UHD (1 Viewer)

[warnerbro]

Thank you, Mr. Harris. It is incomprehensible how a film that continually reaches the top of the list of the best films of all time would be treated so shoddily. Thanks to your team, it will be saved for future generations as close as possible to the original.

 

[owen35]

Saw it last night on a big Dolby Cinema screen. Mr. Harris is right on point--there is not a huge difference in the previous restoration vs this new one. Very subtle difference in color and that awful b-roll footage of LA and Vegas now fits in better with the rest of the film, but at no time was I aware of a startling contrast between the amazing work they did in 2007 and now. The biggest treat, however, was seeing it again in a theater--that's the bonus with this 4K release.

 

[white vader]

Thank you, Mr. Harris. It is incomprehensible how a film that continually reaches the top of the list of the best films of all time would be treated so shoddily. Thanks to your team, it will be saved for future generations as close as possible to the original.

Well if I recall correctly the suits treated it shoddily from the very conception. Arguing with Willis' approach because if it was that dark/chiaroscuro then the people at the drive-ins (LCD, quality-wise) wouldn't be able to see it...

 

[Robert Harris]

Well if I recall correctly the suits treated it shoddily from the very conception. Arguing with Willis' approach because if it was that dark/chiaroscuro then the people at the drive-ins (LCD, quality-wise) wouldn't be able to see it...

No problem. There were specific drive-in density prints.

 

[Lord Dalek]

So am I to assume the most improved transfer is going to be (of all things) Part III?

 

[Robert Harris]

So am I to assume the most improved transfer is going to be (of all things) Part III?

One of the major attributes of the GF III upgrade is the new inclusuion (at least in CODA) of all of the original material previously seen as soft dupes in earlier versions.

In ‘07, we were able to replace only the most problematic Opticals, as we had neither time nor urgent to affect more. Mr. Mockoski has beautifully attended to this, an the results are spectaular, as the film was shot S35.

 

[Lord Dalek]

One of the major attributes of the GF III upgrade is the new inclusuion (at least in CODA) of all of the original material previously seen as soft dupes in earlier versions.

In ‘07, we were able to replace only the most problematic Opticals, as we had neither time nor urgent to affect more. Mr. Mockoski has beautifully attended to this, an the results are spectaular, as the film was shot S35.

Correct me if I'm wrong (and I probably am) but the 2007 remaster was mostly taken from the 1.85:1 conversion IP right?

 

[Robert Harris]

Correct me if I'm wrong (and I probably am) but the 2007 remaster was mostly taken from the 1.85:1 conversion IP right?

No. S35 camera negative. The director’s cut had only previously been finalized on video.

We began with all new 4k scans.

 

[white vader]

No problem. There were specific drive-in density prints.

Exactly! But my point is that they were arguing to shoot it bright in the first place! Not alter the prints after the fact!!

 

[Rob W]

Exactly! But my point is that they were arguing to shoot it bright in the first place! Not alter the prints after the fact!!

Studios routinely provided drive-in density prints for almost all of their films in the 35mm days.

 

[MarkNYLA]

There is one shot in the Godfather Part Two that always makes me crazy when I see it. After the New Year's Party falls apart in chaos and Fredo runs off, there are scenes of people running out of the building. In one such exterior shot there was clearly piece of torn film in the camera gate during the shot, it covers the lower part of the frame. Yet, it remains in the picture. The shot in question doesn't appear to be especially important. I have always wondered what the philosophy was in leaving an obvious blunder in.

 

[madfloyd]

I tried watching this movie several years ago, thinking I would love it as I am a fan of the genre... but I couldn't get past the poorly choregraphed fight scene(s); it was so amateurish that it immediately dissolved any suspension of disbelief and I somehow found myself thinking that there were better ways to spend my time.

I do intend to revisit as obviously it's a classic for reasons that go beyond what bothered me at the time.

 

[ManW_TheUncool]

"Poorly choreographed fight scenes"??? What fight scenes? Did you just mean the singular scene where Sonny beats up Carlo? OR did you really somehow also mean when Carlo beats Connie?

There's really hardly any fight action at all -- and that one scene was just a completely one-sided beat-down, not really intended as an actual fight anyway -- and to nitpick and focus that much on the one or two poorly shot/choreographed punch (each lasting a split second) in a virtually 3-hour epic... well...

Anyway, maybe this might help add some perspective (and balance) to the nitpick on that scene I guess...

A Too-Realistic Fight | The Anniversary You Can’t Refuse: 40 Things You Didn’t Know About The Godfather | TIME.com

On March 15, 1972, The Godfather hit movie screens. In the four decades since, it has become acknowledged as one of the greatest movies of all time. TIME has compiled the most interesting stories, anecdotes and tidbits from the film's production

entertainment.time.com

_Man_

 

[Robert Harris]

There is one shot in the Godfather Part Two that always makes me crazy when I see it. After the New Year's Party falls apart in chaos and Fredo runs off, there are scenes of people running out of the building. In one such exterior shot there was clearly piece of torn film in the camera gate during the shot, it covers the lower part of the frame. Yet, it remains in the picture. The shot in question doesn't appear to be especially important. I have always wondered what the philosophy was in leaving an obvious blunder in.

Virtually the entire 1000 foot camera roll exhibits the problem. The film chip was left in because it was always part of an Academy Aware Best Picture.

 

[PMF]

I'll be buying and looking forward to the 4K/UHD but will not betray my holdings of the BD set.

FILE UNDER: "Leave the gun, take the cannoli".

 

[Sam Favate]

This is already one of the most anticipated sets of the year for me. It may even end up being the best thing in 4K this year.

 

[zoetmb]

And these faces and performances need to be seen on the big screen as originally imagined. Brando. What can you say about him? One of the great iconic acting performances of all time. I emotionally connected with his performance more than I ever did and could say the same for everyone in the film. So I urge everyone to buy the 4k but really try to see this restoration in a cinema.

Unfortunately, the AMC theaters in my area either pulled the film early or didn't intend to play it an entire week and I wound up missing it. I did see a trailer for the film in a theater and maybe it was just the trailer, but the level of grain was really high and it didn't look good to me, but maybe I've gotten too used to digital presentation (although I did see Licorice Pizza and Murder on the Nile in 70mm).

 

[mskaye]

Unfortunately, the AMC theaters in my area either pulled the film early or didn't intend to play it an entire week and I wound up missing it. I did see a trailer for the film in a theater and maybe it was just the trailer, but the level of grain was really high and it didn't look good to me, but maybe I've gotten too used to digital presentation (although I did see Licorice Pizza and Murder on the Nile in 70mm).

sadly just one night/one show in suburban GA as well. I would have gone multiple times.

 

[white vader]

Studios routinely provided drive-in density prints for almost all of their films in the 35mm days.

I wasn't debating this. Why do you think I'm confused?

 

[Jeffrey D]

"Poorly choreographed fight scenes"??? What fight scenes? Did you just mean the singular scene where Sonny beats up Carlo? OR did you really somehow also mean when Carlo beats Connie?

There's really hardly any fight action at all -- and that one scene was just a completely one-sided beat-down, not really intended as an actual fight anyway -- and to nitpick and focus that much on the one or two poorly shot/choreographed punch (each lasting a split second) in a virtually 3-hour epic... well...

Anyway, maybe this might help add some perspective (and balance) to the nitpick on that scene I guess...

A Too-Realistic Fight | The Anniversary You Can’t Refuse: 40 Things You Didn’t Know About The Godfather | TIME.com

On March 15, 1972, The Godfather hit movie screens. In the four decades since, it has become acknowledged as one of the greatest movies of all time. TIME has compiled the most interesting stories, anecdotes and tidbits from the film's production

entertainment.time.com

_Man_

Carlo beating up Connie- I don’t think there are any flubs or poor shots in that scene. I do agree with madfloyd’s point, if the Sonny beating up Carlo scene is his beef, that it could have been shot better. The Godfather is one of my top 2 favorite films
(Pulp Fiction is the other), but the one punch Sonny throws that doesn’t even come close to landing is a flub, and the kicks Sonny delivers are obvious that he was bending his knee, in an attempt to lessen the impact. My take.