Blu-ray Review A Few Words About A few words about…™ A Star is Born (1937) – in Blu-ray (1 Viewer)

[John Maher_289910]

The only version of this worn out, tired old story I like. Looking forward to getting it.

 

[Mike2001]

And the nominees (thus far) are:

1776
4K/UHD - A Grover Crisp Stand-Alone that Rivals a Volumed Set
The Godfather
4K/UHD - A Robert A. Harris Master-Class in Restoration Advancements
The Little Rascals (Vol. 6)
BD of Original Elements - A David Kawas Quest for Preservation Fulfilled
A Star is Born
3 Strip/OCN - A George Fentelstein Homecoming & Coup
The Wonderful World of the Brothers Grimm
Cinerama/Smilebox - A David Strohmaier Expedition Realized

And we are barely in to March!

 

[Noel Aguirre]

And the nominees (thus far) are:

1776
4K/UHD - A Grover Crisp Stand-Alone: How to Rival a Volumed Set
The Godfather
4K/UHD - A Robert A. Harris Master-Class in Restoration: Advancements, Articulations and Revision
The Little Rascals (Vol. 6)
BD Series Completed - A David Kawas Quest: Fund-Raising, Set-Backs and the Ultimate Preservation of All Original Elements Fulfilled
A Star is Born
3 Strip/OCN - A George Fentelstein Homecoming: The Coup
The Wonderful World of the Brothers Grimm
Cinerama/Smilebox - A David Strohmaier Expedition: The Fairy-Tale Turned into Reality

And the winner is…….……………….
The Wonderful World of the Brothers Grimm!!

A far more rare treat than any of the above! IMHO
But all are winners- no losers yada yada yada.

 

[MartinP.]

My interest is peaked by the review of this new release.

This story is always on the minds of showbiz folks...
The aside of being "ripe for a remake" made me remember that Andrew Lloyd Webber was going to do a stage version at one time. Bill Condon was going to do a movie musical version based on the Garland version. There was a movie announced at one point that would star Russell Crowe and Beyoncé. Other creative people attached and interested in new versions at one time or another were Larry Gelbart, Cy Coleman and David Zippel, Audra McDonald, Hugh Jackman...
Jonathan Butterell directed and choreographed a workshop of A Star Is Born for Warner Brothers
which featured Idina Menzel as Esther opposite Norm Lewis as Norman.

It's bound to happen again in some fashion folks! I just wonder why, if someone wants to remake the story at all, why don't they do something at least a little different. Why don't they change the dynamic a bit with a man rising to the top and a woman on her way down? Or two men or two women? Or why don't they set it in a different profession, like politics or something. Or make it a comedy! A Star is Reborn!

 

[Will Krupp]

It's bound to happen again in some fashion folks!

Of course it is. The story is bulletproof and it's like catnip for wanna be divas everywhere. Until the 1990's every generation back to the 1930's had its own STAR IS BORN. 1937, 1954, 1976, as I said we skipped the 90's but we had it again in 2018. Next chance is probably sometime in the 2030's to the 2050's (depending.)

 

[Josh Steinberg]

I dunno, reboots come so quickly now we could have the next one in five years or less.

 

[GerardoHP]

Slightly different intents. The '37 SiB shows what raw imagery looked like toward the final intended (very muted and sepia) result.

As to Robin Hood, the original prints were far more muted than what we see today:

View attachment 130158

Back in 1979, I got to see an original nitrate print of Gone with the Wind that, to my recollection, looked a lot more like the above frames from Robin Hood than what we have today on BR. I had seen GWTW a few times before in what were likely poor Eastmancolor prints and I was surprised this "original" (which I am told doesn't exist anymore) was so golden-brownish. The color was, of course, still stunning. Can anyone tell me, is my memory playing tricks on me or am I right?

 

[Mark Mayes]

Great review, looking forward to it.

I think the BR looks very yellow on GWTW and yet it was intentionally timed to correspond to the color of an original print or two. I don't like it because I was used to prints made later with a less subdued pallette. Ron Haver or Bob Thomas claimed filmmakers worried about color being hard on the eyes at the time of the first release.
The current DCPs look malarial when projected, as I recently witnessed at a screening in Westwood. But I guess that was the original look...

Oz had a lot of that, to me at least, in its first BR, but the 4K lost that tinge.

Here's a Safety Print frame from the Academy and a nitrate frame of GWTW from 1940:

 

[warnerbro]

Something about this film has always been very entertaining and interesting to me. It grabs you and pulls you in and holds your interest until the end. Very well written with endearing characters. I can't wait to see what this looks like.

 

[Garysb]

They never seem to cast an age appropriate woman as"The Star". Janet Gayner, Judy Garland, Barbra Streisand, and Lady Gaga were all older than the character they played. Is it a paradox that it takes a more experienced actor to play the newcomer. Garland probably could have played it successfully ten years earlier as she did on the radio and as a similar character in "Presenting Lily Mars"

 

[octobercountry]

They never seem to cast an age appropriate woman as"The Star". Janet Gayner, Judy Garland, Barbra Streisand, and Lady Gaga were all older than the character they played. .....

It's also interesting that while Gaynor, Garland, and Streisand each played characters who were just beginning their careers in "A Star is Born," their respective versions of the film came toward the end of the time they were major box-office draws. Each made additional films afterwards, but I think it could be said that for all of them, the time when they were a real "star" in films had passed after their individual releases of this title.

 

[Henry Gondorff]

Great review, looking forward to it.

I think the BR looks very yellow on GWTW and yet it was intentionally timed to correspond to the color of an original print or two. I don't like it because I was used to prints made later with a less subdued pallette. Ron Haver or Bob Thomas claimed filmmakers worried about color being hard on the eyes at the time of the first release.
The current DCPs look malarial when projected, as I recently witnessed at a screening in Westwood. But I guess that was the original look...

Oz had a lot of that, to me at least, in its first BR, but the 4K lost that tinge.

Here's a Safety Print frame from the Academy and a nitrate frame of GWTW from 1940:

Subdued, de-intensified, desaturated is one thing; jaundiced as though viewing through amber sunglasses is something else entirely. I still will not believe this is how they intended it to look.

 

[OLDTIMER]

Subdued, de-intensified, desaturated is one thing; jaundiced as though viewing through amber sunglasses is something else entirely. I still will not believe this is how they intended it to look.

I've personally projected IB Technicolor prints with carbon, incandescent and Xenon light sources. Their appearance on the screen is significantly different in each case. These old IB prints don't look so yellow with carbon arc (which is what they were balanced for. Also, the eye acclimatises somewhat in the dark).

 

[Stephen_J_H]

I've personally projected IB Technicolor prints with carbon, incandescent and Xenon light sources. Their appearance on the screen is significantly different in each case. These old IB prints don't look so yellow with carbon arc (which is what they were balanced for. Also, the eye acclimatises somewhat in the dark).

Indeed. When I was in Haiti in 1991, I managed to wangle my way into a projection booth where they were still using carbon arc, and the colour of the print on the screen [Highlander II, if you're curious] looked somewhat odd. Couldn't put my finger on it until much later.

 

[Henry Gondorff]

Indeed. When I was in Haiti in 1991, I managed to wangle my way into a projection booth where they were still using carbon arc, and the colour of the print on the screen [Highlander II, if you're curious] looked somewhat odd. Couldn't put my finger on it until much later.

I doubt carbon arc light at a color temperature of around 5000+° Kelvin (noon daylight) would do much to correct those GWTW frames. I do think the Robin Hood frame is an accurate example for the period. I suspect the extreme level of yellow could be chemical or age-related. Seeing the prints those GWTW frames came from (not the later more normally balanced and saturated IB prints) projected with carbon arc light would probably be illuminating.

 

[Robert Harris]

I doubt carbon arc light at a color temperature of around 5000+° Kelvin (noon daylight) would do much to correct those GWTW frames. I do think the Robin Hood frame is an accurate example for the period. I suspect the extreme level of yellow could be chemical or age-related. Seeing the prints those GWTW frames came from (not the later more normally balanced and saturated IB prints) projected with carbon arc light would probably be illuminating.

A light bench will have a similar affect. The color is what the color was, and has not changed.

 

[TJPC]

Maybe I am just craby on a Saturday morning, but, Wow, I love the original ASIB as much as the next guy, but how many copies of it are we expected to buy? I've gone through seeing it in B&W on early TV, to being astonished to see it was filmed in colour, to taping my own Beta copy, to buying a VHS copy, to getting a DVD to finally "the definitive" Blu ray on Kino. Now we are expected to buy it again because THE COLOUR TIMING IS DIFFERENT!?

I probably would not notice anyway unless I could play the Kino and the new one side by side. Tell you what, if you can get Janet and Fred to tour, I'll see it live.

 

[RichMurphy]

Now we are expected to buy it again because THE COLOUR TIMING IS DIFFERENT!?

Re-read the press release or the first post in this thread. This is another miracle Warner Archive release where the original three Technicolor negatives have been scanned and recombined to perfection. Far from just a change in color timing.

 

[Tony Bensley]

I dunno, reboots come so quickly now we could have the next one in five years or less.

A STAR IS BORN: THE FAST AND FURIOUS REBOOT EDITION (2026)

 

[Patrick McCart]

Maybe I am just craby on a Saturday morning, but, Wow, I love the original ASIB as much as the next guy, but how many copies of it are we expected to buy? I've gone through seeing it in B&W on early TV, to being astonished to see it was filmed in colour, to taping my own Beta copy, to buying a VHS copy, to getting a DVD to finally "the definitive" Blu ray on Kino. Now we are expected to buy it again because THE COLOUR TIMING IS DIFFERENT!?

I probably would not notice anyway unless I could play the Kino and the new one side by side. Tell you what, if you can get Janet and Fred to tour, I'll see it live.

You could ask the same question about any other public domain hell film like My Man Godfrey, His Girl Friday, Night of the Living Dead, or Carnival of Souls. Plenty of prior releases ranging from landfill fodder to acceptable, but only once from original elements and rights holders.