 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Posted: |
Aug 15, 2011 - 6:05 AM
|
|
|
|
By: |
Richard-W
(Member)
|
Den, then I must conclude the Diamond edition has improved, because the one I bought years ago looks like shvt on a shingle. Maybe I should buy another one.
Richard
The cover insert for the dvd lists the release date as 2000.
I've had the dvd quite a few years now, so I must have
purchased it sometime around 2000 or 2001. I really don't
remember. Does it look like a HD transfer? No.
I'll tell ya one thing though. Considering this
dvd is a "public domain" disc by a fly-by-night
label, it looks wayyyy better than THE GAUNTLET,
(WB DVD) which looks absolutely AWFUL! I've never
seen a muddier or more grainy transfer in all my life.
Den
Den, okay, that's fine. I did not intend any offense. My copy of the Diamond edition was bought in September 2006 (after watching a private screening in Bel Aire, Ca). It did not come with an insert, but it's the same DVD alright. I think Front Row Features offers a better port of the laser-disc. That isn't an HD transfer, either. None of them are. But since you appreciate this film as much as I do, you might want to give the Front Row Features edition a look.
Richard
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Wow. Someone seems a tad, shall we say, TESTY today. 
I've crossed trails with haineshisway elsewhere. He was fanatical, irrational, obsessive and insulting at a British forum not too long ago. He polices the internet looking for arguments and picking fights with people. He likes to derail Peckinpah threads. He loves to provoke arguments and he relishes making personal attacks. He interprets everything to be about him. He is banned from Home Theater Forum for this conduct. I have no respect for him. I would just ignore him if he weren't so obnoxious.
This thread is NOT about haineshisway. He thinks it is. His summary of my motives in his post above is wrong. I ignore him because of my previous experience with him. I come back here to update the thread from time to time because I intend to keep it going when there is news to report.
He is right about one thing, however. Paramount's laser-disc was not sourced from VistaVision elements but from the studio's internegative. I should have spoke with more specificity in that regard. However, that internegative is a close representation of the original dye transfer negatives. The laser-disc is as accurate in color and density as it was possible to be when it was released. Wild Side Video has tinkered with color and brightness in its new DVD so everybody who appreciates this film should stick with the Front Row Features DVD. It isn't much but it's better than nothing.
Again, this thread is not about haineshisway, it's s about One-Eyed Jacks.
haineshisway:
This is not the only place Richard W has been a pedantic know-it-all.
This is not the only place haineshisway has been a pedantic know-it-all.
Message to haineshisway:
Get the picture?
Richard
I believe you threw down the offensive gauntlet, pal. You said, "Shut up." Prior to that you'll have to point out anything offensive from me in this thread. And I'm not the eight-year-old who posted a picture of someone giving the finger. And while it must be fun to live in Fantasyland, I hardly trawl the Internet looking for fights because I, you know, have a life and am very busy putting out two CDs every month (including a rather wonderful two CD release of a film called - One-Eyed Jacks) as well as so much other stuff that I barely have room to breathe. You on the other hand...
You will notice by simply scrolling up (I know this is probably difficult for you, but give it a try) that it was I who bumped this thread giving the information that Germany had put out a blu-ray and the information about the Wild Side DVD. I believe those posts weren't about ME, they were about - wait for it - One-Eyed Jacks. Factual good information. I didn't tell anyone to shut up and I didn't give anyone the finger. You sir, are a first-class jackass, and if you are who I'm told you are, then you ought to be ashamed of yourself.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Wow. Someone seems a tad, shall we say, TESTY today.
I've crossed trails with haineshisway elsewhere..... He was banned from Home Theater Forum for this conduct.
Richard
banned from the Home Theater Forum?
wow!
|
|
|
|
|
|
If this thread is to stay alive, I want the pissing contest to end now. Keep it focused on the topic and NO MORE attacks against each other. Thanks.
|
|
|
|
|
|
JACKS is one of my all-time faves.
too bad the people with the tools to release it properly, are not interested in doing so.
Put it on Blu-Ray from the original VistaVision elements, "you scum suckin' pigs!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
damn, i wish my laserdisc player still worked!
seems as if everybody who owned one has the same problem
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: |
Aug 16, 2011 - 3:27 PM
|
|
|
|
By: |
Richard-W
(Member)
|
Yeah, my laser-disc player is busted, too.
I'm trying to pick up a used one but so far I haven't trusted the prospects.
JACKS is one of my all-time faves.
too bad the people with the tools to release it properly, are not interested in doing so.
Put it on Blu-Ray from the original VistaVision elements, "you scum suckin' pigs!"
It's one of my favorite westerns, too. I'll go to great lengths to see westerns from that period projected. I first saw One-Eyed Jacks in the early 1970s at the Mini Cinema in Uniondale, Long Island NY, a reel house that specialized in double-features of old films. Later in the early 1980s I saw it again in L.A. at the Nuart and elsewhere, and I remember driving to San Diego a couple of times to see it at the Ken Cinema, another reel house that changed double-features every two days and brought certain films back year after year. The last time I saw it was in September 2006. The film has always been respected and it always drew a good crowd to repertory screenings. The laser-disc represents the film well but it doesn't have the gravitas of a theatrical screening. One needs to see it on a big screen.
A full restoration of the VistaVision elements is preferable, but I'd be content if Paramount took the exact same negative they used for the laser-disc and transferred that to Blu-ray. I don't want to see it scanned at 2K or 4K into a digital intermediate that dims the exposure and turns the grain into a xerox in which details that are not supposed to be visible become an alternative texture of the film, which the director and cameraman could not have imagined and did not intend. I prefer a strictly photochemical approach, insofar as is possible.
The last thing I want is another travesty like what Warner Brothers did to The Searchers. That was an artistic rape, like urinating on a canvas painted by Charles M. Russell or Andrew Wyeth.
All these cheap public-domain editions testify to the enduring popularity and marketability of One-Eyed Jacks. People settle for substandard editions in the absence of something better. But people want to see a proper transfer, and they will pay for it.
Richard
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
yeah, i have been lucky enuf to see it a rep houses also!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: |
Mar 5, 2012 - 10:37 AM
|
|
|
|
By: |
bannister
(Member)
|
There is going to be a new release of One eyed Jacks on March 13 by Warner (seen on Amazon). Unfortunatly it will be part of 6 western films on a 2 disc pack called 'Outlaw Justice'. At a very cheap price I will certainly get it since I don't own any of the others movies, but I hope it will get released as a single dvd one day.Updated 15 August 2011.
 
 
 
To date, the cleanest, sharpest version of ONE-EYED JACKS available to consumers remains the Paramount laser disc. Bob DiMucci shows the cover art in his post below. It was sourced from Paramount's internegative that represents the original IB tech Vista Vision elements very closely. It has the photochemical "look" it is supposed to have. The color is accurate with perfectly acceptable saturation. The image is steady, widescreen but not anamorphic, and uncut. It was not restored, so there is some minor damage and a little dirt here and there, but it shows the film the way it was meant to be seen.
Although Paramount retains Vista Vision elements, ONE-EYED JACKS has NOT been restored or digitally remastered for DVD / Blu-ray release. Not officially.
However, the film proliferates in public-domain editions. Without exception, all public-domain editions are of substandard quality. A few years ago I BOUGHT every DVD release of ONE-EYED JACKS to find the best transfer on DVD. Frankly, I was hoping to find a privately-sourced transfer, perhaps from an original 35mm print that didn't come from the laser-disc. I have 19 different editions sitting here and several duplicates with the cover art changed. It is hard to keep track of which is which because the public domain labels keep reissuing them with different covers. Most editions are pictured here:
http://www.dvdaf.com/search.html?has=one+eyed+jacks%2F%2F&init_form=str0_has_one+eyed+jacks%2F%2F
The cleanest, sharpest, steadiest print appears on FRONT ROW FEATURES, uncut and widescreen but not anamorphic:
The Front Row Features edition can still be found on ebay from time to time..
The next best print, uncut and widescreen but not anamorphic, appears on BRENTWOOD label in various editions, singly and in packages, usually with a still from MISSOURI BREAKS on the cover:
 
The only place I've seen Brentwood editions for sale is on ebay. Both FRONT ROW FEATURES and BRENTWOOD are ported from the laser disc.
Alpha / Oldies, American Movie Classics, CatCom, Diamond, EchoBridge, Genius Entertainment, Koch, Madacy, Mill Creek, MovieClassics, Platinum, St. Clair, Unicorn, Ventura, Waterfall and Westlake, among others, have released widescreen, uncut editions in substandard quality. Some are less than substandard. Probably because they are porting the transfer from each other instead of from the laser. I would say Digiview is one of the worst.
Out of several public-domain editions released in France, where the film is much-admired, PARAMOUNT evidently authorized a DVD release under the title La Veangeance aux deux visages on the LES FILMS DE MA VIE label. I will post front and back cover scans here shortly. I'm not sure if the Les Films De Ma Vie edition is from the same transfer as the laser-disc or it is merely a port of the laser-disc. The blemishes are the same. Sometimes the picture appears to be slightly better quality than the laser disc (which I have) and at other times it appears to be the same. French subtitles are burned in. It has an interactive menu, a text filmography and biographies of Brando and Malden, and an off-the-wall trailer for a royal wedding.
Curiously, this page for Les Films De Ma Vie edition at amazon.fr has replaced it with an altogether different DVD:
http://www.amazon.fr/exec/obidos/ASIN/B0007XT5P6/dvdaficiona01-21
for which Doug Raynes shows the cover art and scans below.
Currently, I bought the new French DVD released by Wild Side Video, a label that releases many public domain titles of foreign films in France:
Buy it from amazon.fr:
http://www.amazon.fr/gp/product/B00479MCC4/ref=s9_simh_gw_p74_d2_g74_i1?pf_rd_m=A1X6FK5RDHNB96&pf_rd_s=center-1&pf_rd_r=07HRKXZ5VZ06D6B9YD3B&pf_rd_t=101&pf_rd_p=463375513&pf_rd_i=405320
At first glance it looks like an upgrade, but upon closer examination, I've concluded it is sourced from the Paramount laser-disc and subjected to electronic enhancements. There are color timing and density issues. Why is wood blue?
The image has better definition in close-ups than in wider angles. Perhaps DNR has thinned and desaturated the picture? It is the only anamorphic edition. If there weren't color-timing issues, I might recommend it over the Front Row Features edition. However, since the color has been interfered with, I maintain that the Front Row Features edition is the best DVD so far.
There are several public domain editions of La Veangeance aux deux visages in France that I haven't watched, including:
Be advised the French editions are PAL in which the 4% speed-up plays hell with the pitch of the music, raises the voices too high, and the action too fast. This bothers me, but I hear some people never notice it.
Richard
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: |
Apr 24, 2012 - 8:22 PM
|
|
|
|
By: |
manderley
(Member)
|
.....For a film that won the Acadamy Award for its image.....
Although it was nominated for an Oscar, the photography of ONE EYED JACKS did not win its Academy Award.
I love Charles Lang's work in many, many fine films of the Golden Age, however any awards which might have been given for the photography of ONE EYED JACKS would probably have better been given to the Chief Location Scout rather than the Cameraman.
The Academy membership, particularly since the early 1950s and the extensive use of color, have always had a difficult time of ascertaining the difference between photography and scenery, with THE QUIET MAN, TO CATCH A THIEF, THREE COINS IN THE FOUNTAIN, RYAN'S DAUGHTER, THE BRIDGE ON THE RIVER KWAI and others being prime examples of wins for cameramen who often did much better jobs on less geographically-spectacular films.
(Having said all this, I'd still love to see a first-class, authorized Blu-ray of OEJ from the original VistaVision elements.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
RIGHT ON mANDELEY!
imho the award should go to the best LIGHTING - that is where the camerman skill really shines. After all, the director is the Director of Photography when all is said and done
bruce
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
