A Few Words About A few words about...™ The Lion in Winter -- in Blu-ray (3 Viewers)

[PMF]

[...]I think the comment above that the script here was like a cross between Shakespeare and Mamet is pretty astute.[...]

Thank you.

 

[PMF]

[...]The only difference between the UK and US one is the 5.1 audio... we did a new one.[...]

Many thanks to Kino Lorber for being forthright and for taking far greater initiatives over that of Studio Canal.

 

[Robert Harris]

Kino Lorber has confirmed that their new 5.1 is derived from 2.0 monaural.

 

[PMF]

Kino Lorber has confirmed that their new 5.1 is derived from 2.0 monaural.

Pssst,..pssst...don't tell anyone, Robert, but I think I'm gonna give those guys at KL my support.*
After all, we're talkin' Peter and Kate. Right? Right.

*Meanwhile, upon further reflection, and some hours later.[please refer to Post #67[

 

[Thomas T]

Kino Lorber has confirmed that their new 5.1 is derived from 2.0 monaural.

I've never understood the dislike for monaural around here. I stand to be corrected but The Lion In Winter was never released in stereo but in mono. Enthusiasts who would be furious about a film not being in the correct aspect ratio seem to make an exception when a film is not presented in its correct audio. I understand sometimes original stereo tracks are lost and it's not possible but creating a "stereo" track from mono elements seems a poor substitute.

 

[Robert Harris]

I've never understood the dislike for monaural around here. I stand to be corrected but The Lion In Winter was never released in stereo but in mono. Enthusiasts who would be furious about a film not being in the correct aspect ratio seem to make an exception when a film is not presented in its correct audio. I understand sometimes original stereo tracks are lost and it's not possible but creating a "stereo" track from mono elements seems a poor substitute.

For those folks who like to see ALL of their speakers, used ALL of the time, a 5.1 re-mix is the best of all worlds.

Even if it’s still mono.

Nothing wrong with it, and it sounds fine.

 

[PMF]

Being that Kino was able to create a new audio, could it be explained as to why the whole film is slightly out of sync?

 

[Mark-P]

For those folks who like to see ALL of their speakers, used ALL of the time, a 5.1 re-mix is the best of all worlds.

Even if it’s still mono.

Nothing wrong with it, and it sounds fine.

I’ll reserve judgment. If it’s simply the same mono track (including dialog) blasted out of all 5 speakers, then I hope there’s an alternative. But if it’s a proper remix where they separate out the dialog track and keep it in the center, and only expand the music and effects track into all speakers then I would be happy.

 

[haineshisway]

I'm beginning to wonder exactly what elements Studio Canal actually has, because this is not the first time something like this has happened and it's not going to be the last. For example, they purportedly own the Lumet Murder on the Orient Express, except they don't have the original negative, which resides here at Paramount, which I presume is why their Blu-ray of it looks so disgustingly awful. I don't get it, really. Who owned this film and where are those original elements?

 

[Robert Harris]

Per the vault inventories on the film, there is no stereo. An M&E exists, but no record of original mx, which Mr. Harvey once told me he “recalled” as being recorded in stereo.

Of course, the mx stem could have survived elsewhere, but it’s not evident.

Another problem, is that the record keeping at the time, did not break out elements by reel or unit, merely an overall line or lines.

One would hope that Canal inventories have been upgraded since that time, c. 1994, at which time the OCN was unusable, as it had been mishandled. I believe that problem may have solved itself a few years later.

RAH

 

[Filmgazer]

Same here. I must have gotten rid of the LP years ago, but...

View attachment 44435

Incredibly enough, I still have the original soundtrack LP and it's in pristine condition. I really must take it out for a spin sometime, as it's a glorious score.

 

[MatthewA]

It gets weirder. Unlike the TV library which is owned lock, stock, and barrel by Sony, the Embassy Pictures theatrical films are split three ways between StudioCanal for actual copyright management, MGM (and by proxy, their licensees) for American home video, and Sony Pictures Television for TV broadcasts.

I will never understand why Columbia didn't keep the movies along with the TV shows. It's not a big library, but it does have some high-quality titles.

 

[Cineman]

For the sake of his audiences, James Goldman found a middle ground that made viewer-friendly modern vernacular ("What family doesn't have it's ups and downs?") sound like it could conceivably have been spoken centuries earlier. This is largely successful due to the outstanding performances.

So true. Another case in point: At least twice a character refers to how beautiful or handsome someone looked when they were younger by saying, "I've seen the pictures," as though they are talking about photographs. Did people refer to "paintings" as "pictures" in those days? Don't know. Even if they did, I doubt they would accept an artist's rendering on royal assignment to be evidence of how beautiful or handsome the person actually looked in real life. So our minds instantly conjure and image of that character musing over photos, perhaps in a family album. Which, of course, would not have been possible. But the actors speaking the lines are so truthful and in the moment we are not jarred by the reading and implications of the utterly contemporary phrasing, if we notice it at all.

 

[Matt Hough]

They absolutely did use paintings to judge the looks of a person living in a foreign land. Henry VIII roared in anger when he first met Anne of Cleves in person. The portrait painted of her by his official portrait painter Hans Holbein for his perusal before he agreed to the marriage was a flattering image not borne out by her actual looks once she arrived at court. Henry II and Eleanor lived several centuries before, but it isn't unreasonable to assume it was the practice then, too.

 

[PMF]

IMHO, 1968's true Oscar race for Best Actor was between Ron Moody in "Oliver!" and Peter O' Toole in "The Lion in Winter".
I suspect that Cliff Robertson's win was due mostly to a splitting of the votes.
Any takers on that idea?

 

[Matt Hough]

Alan Arkin won the New York Film Critics Best Actor Award for The Heart Is a Lonely Hunter, and I suspect he got some votes, too.

I have to admit, however, I was REALLY shocked when O'Toole didn't win that night.

 

[Dick]

Alan Arkin won the New York Film Critics Best Actor Award for The Heart Is a Lonely Hunter, and I suspect he got some votes, too.

I have to admit, however, I was REALLY shocked when O'Toole didn't win that night.

I was also surprised, but I thought Ron Moody's Fagin was superb, too. Cliff Robertson's win might have had to do with the good old person-with-handicap handicap. Voters have always loved actors who play dysfunctional and disabled people as proof they can act way outside of their norm. O'Toole had already played Henry II in BECKET, so everyone knew he could bellow. Moody's part was in a musical and so might not have been taken as seriously. Arkin was very low key. Robertson, I submit, was the sentimental choice.

 

[Matt Hough]

Had I used a weighted ballot for that particular category that year, Robertson would have been in fifth place on my ballot.

 

[Cineman]

They absolutely did use paintings to judge the looks of a person living in a foreign land. Henry VIII roared in anger when he first met Anne of Cleves in person. The portrait painted of her by his official portrait painter Hans Holbein for his perusal before he agreed to the marriage was a flattering image not borne out by her actual looks once she arrived at court. Henry II and Eleanor lived several centuries before, but it isn't unreasonable to assume it was the practice then, too.

Ok. Then I'm betting the higher up the social ladder or royal lineage of the subject in those portraits, the more foolish anyone viewing them would be to conclude they look anywhere near as attractive as the portrait artist portrayed them to be.

 

[PMF]

[...] O'Toole had already played Henry II in BECKET, so everyone knew he could bellow. [...]

No, Dick, not you...say it ain't so. I, myself, would swap this out from "bellow" to "gusto". And, oh, just four short years later how wonderfully he aged his physical gait. You could feel the heaviness of those mounting years whenever he lifted his sword.