Blu-ray Review Miracle on 34th Street: 70th Anniversary Blu-ray Review (1 Viewer)

[Matt Hough]

Matt Hough

Miracle on 34th Street: 70th Anniversary Blu-ray Review

A genuine holiday classic, Miracle on 34th Street still works its magical story of heart and hope, faith and trust seven decades after its original release.

[review]

 

[Colin Jacobson]

I'm 99% sure this is a repackaging of the 2009 Blu-ray - can anyone confirm 100%?

 

[Garysb]

I'm 99% sure this is a repackaging of the 2009 Blu-ray - can anyone confirm 100%?

Review confirmed this. Only digital copy included is new.

 

[B-ROLL]

I'm 99% sure this is a repackaging of the 2009 Blu-ray - can anyone confirm 100%?

This 70th Anniversary Edition of the movie is its second Blu-ray release and is the identical disc from eight years ago. Only, a digital copy has been added to the package.

 

[battlebeast]

Review confirmed this. Only digital copy included is new.

I didn't see anywhere in the review where it said it was identical.

 

[Matt Hough]

I didn't see anywhere in the review where it said it was identical.

Read the first paragraph all the way through.

 

[LeoA]

Didn't I read on this forum that this came with a DVD bonus disc with the Teresa Wright tv movie adaptation on it? Did that end up not being the case?

Edit: Nevermind, I understand now what the specifications meant by "DVD ONLY" for this bonus feature.

I had misinterpreted that to mean that it was included here on a second disc as an extra, presumably on DVD rather than Blu-Ray because of limitations with the source that would've made a BD overkill. But they're actually saying that it's only included with the DVD version of the 70th Anniversary Edition.

Too bad they couldn't of snuck it in as a SD extra on the Blu-Ray itself. Would be 480i rather than 480p I believe, but for a kinescope, I doubt that's too much of a drawback.

 

[Colin Jacobson]

Review confirmed this. Only digital copy included is new.

Thanks - I missed that part!

 

[Matt Hough]

Didn't I read on this forum that this came with a DVD bonus disc with the Teresa Wright tv movie adaptation on it? Did that end up not being the case?

Edit: Nevermind, I understand now what the specifications meant by "DVD ONLY" for this bonus feature.

I had misinterpreted that to mean that it was included here on a second disc as an extra, presumably on DVD rather than Blu-Ray because of limitations with the source that would've made a BD overkill. But they're actually saying that it's only included with the DVD version of the 70th Anniversary Edition.

Too bad they couldn't of snuck it in as a SD extra on the Blu-Ray itself. Would be 480i rather than 480p I believe, but for a kinescope, I doubt that's too much of a drawback.

I made the same mistaken assumption when I got the review copy and opened it. I expected a DVD to be sitting behind the digital code sheet, and it wasn't. Reading the back cover of the keep case revealed there was only one disc in the case.

I agree. For a 70th anniversary celebration release, Fox could and should have gone to a little more trouble to celebrate such a classic. I think this was a missed opportunity.

 

[BobO'Link]

Yeah, I don't get why they didn't include the DVD in the BR package considering it's an "Anniversary" release. Oh well... I don't own a copy of the previous BR, this is less expensive, I love the film, and my son will have a digital copy. I'll just put my old DVD in the case with this one (or sub a 2 disc case if needed) for the few extras it has this doesn't. It's still a win for me!

 

[Rick Thompson]

Glad I didn't order this. Not at all interested in the old kinescope, ditto the digital copy.

 

[bujaki]

Is it a kinescope? What I saw in the Fox Movie Channel was filmed in 35mm and looked splendid.

 

[Nick*Z]

The original Blu of Miracle is flawed - too dark, and a lot of edge effects during the court room scenes. Fox not going back to the drawing board to correct these anomalies and rid us of a digitally harsh transfer is a HUGE disappointment. Will be canceling my Amazon order on this one. Thanks Matt.

 

[Gary16]

The other version is not a kinescope. Shot on 35mm for the 20th Century Fox anthology series that aired in the 50s.

 

[LeoA]

The other version is not a kinescope. Shot on 35mm for the 20th Century Fox anthology series that aired in the 50s.

Thanks

I read somewhere that it was a kinescope. Sorry for the spreading incorrect information.

 

[DavidJ]

Thanks - I missed that part!

Don't feel bad, I did too.

 

[Colin Jacobson]

It's a banner week for "anniversary editions that just offer repackagings", since the 30th Anniversary "Planes, Trains and Automobiles" just reboxes the old one, too!

 

[Robert Crawford]

It's a banner week for "anniversary editions that just offer repackagings", since the 30th Anniversary "Planes, Trains and Automobiles" just reboxes the old one, too!

Not just Anniversary releases as Paramount, Universal and some other studios are re-releasing a bunch of titles during this last four months of 2017.

 

[Colin Jacobson]

Not just Anniversary releases as Paramount, Universal and some other studios are re-releasing a bunch of titles during this last four months of 2017.

The "Planes, Trains..." one is odd because it's the only one Paramount promoted to reviewers.

I debated whether to even call it a "30th Anniversary Edition" since it's exactly the same product in exactly the same package with just a sticker that mentions the 30th anniversary.

But if I'm gonna review it, I gotta specify the difference somehow, so I called it a "30th Anniversary Edition"!

 

[Rick Thompson]

I have to disagree with the reviewer on George Seaton's direction ("Seaton’s direction is nothing special. It’s competent and comfortable in that studio-bound tradition of the period. . .") of Miracle. It's exactly what the film required. Part of good direction is knowing when to be simply simple. Seaton knew that with this story and this cast, he had something special, and he served it best by staying out of the way and letting what he had work its magic. Any kind of flashy direction would hurt the film. Seaton got it just right.