I think it's total B.S. when people claim that colorizing a film ruins the film. Besides being over-dramatic, think abou
-
Jokers_Wilde — 16 years ago(December 10, 2009 09:47 AM)
As do I. I tend to watch the colourized version more, though (for some reason).
A local TV station used to play it on Christmas Eve night every year (technically, Christmas Day at midnight). And, even though I had the DVD with just the black & white version, I would stay up to watch it. One year, it was offered in colour.
I was literally blown away! I was constantly looking for the DVD of the colourized version. It was then said it would be released before the holidays a couple of years ago.
Joker's Wilde
RIP Victoria "Tori" Stafford (2000-2009)
-
EvilSpaceApple — 16 years ago(December 13, 2009 10:44 AM)
With most b&w films, I would be 100% against colorization. Casablanca? Notorious? Out of the Past? Please.
But Miracle on 34th Street should have been made in color. Christmas looks more Christmasy in color, and the reds and greens would have made it a natural choice for color. B&W adds nothing, in terms of texture, nuance, what have you.
I'm still not for colorizing in principle. But this film is an exceptionfor me.
WE SLEEP. THEY LIVE.
-
-
nymetsnl2009 — 16 years ago(December 13, 2009 09:22 PM)
Colorizing a BW movie is taking away from it's authentisity.Also when they colorize it, it just doesn't look right. Let's put it this way, if you take a 64 1/2 Ford Mustang and put seat belts in it and put custom wheels and everything else that it didn't have back then it drops it's value. The same goes for movies back then in BW and they get colorized. You also could just watch all the lame remakes in color and don't watch the BW, the original version.
-
EvilSpaceApple — 16 years ago(December 14, 2009 06:59 AM)
"By the way if they wanted to film it in color they could have, the Wizard of Oz came out few years before and it is in color. "
Oh, I certainly am aware the technology existed at the time. Which makes me think it was more than likely that it was done in B/W not for artistic but for financial reasons. It was a "small" film, probably conceived mainly as a money maker, so I think the Fox folks felt, well, maximize the profits by filming in B/W..
so yes, if they had wanted to, they would have. My hunch though (and it isn't more than a hunch, I'll admitI have no solid evidence to backit up) is that they didn't want to not b/c they felt it should be black and white but b/c color was more expensive.
I repeat: I am not for colorizing in general. In 99 case out of 100 it does diminish the original. But for a film potentially replete with the glorious colors of the seasonbegining with Kris' red suit, add to that the parade, the decorated tree, the store set, and so onI AM for coloring this film for those who wish to have an idea of what it might have looked like.
As long as it doesn't replace the B/W altogether, which would be a crime.
WE SLEEP. THEY LIVE.
-
CarolVickiFan84 — 16 years ago(December 15, 2009 12:07 AM)
It waas black and White to cut cost because Zanuck didn't have high hopes for the movie, infact he didn't think it was gonig to be hit at all at first.
Maureen O'Hara, Ireland Best Actress. Got Maureen O'Hara and Julie Andrews autograph 2008! -
EvilSpaceApple — 16 years ago(December 15, 2009 03:33 PM)
Someone mentioned It's a Wonderful Life. I think that if that HAD been made in color, the Potterville sequences would still have had to be in black and white. That would have been a pretty good idea at that, heightening even more the contrast between it and Bedford Falls.
But on the whole the Capra film is not among that small number of films whose colorization I sanction on general principle. Miracle is among them.
WE SLEEP. THEY LIVE.
-
angelgwen16 — 16 years ago(December 15, 2009 10:28 PM)
I like things colorized. If I get to choose then I always choose color. I don't care about how the color looks, I like it anyway.
However, if the only way to watch it is in black and white then I will still watch it. Such as I Love Lucy. I love that show and I deal with the fact that it's in black and white (at least the older episodes) and I still enjoy it nonetheless.
That's just the way I like it. -
Voldemort-Weasley — 16 years ago(December 18, 2009 06:02 PM)
The first time i watched it on dvd i watched it in black and white.Then the next time colour,the coloured version wasn't to bad.And it looked good but i prefer it in black and white,as i liked the original aspect of the film.
Matthew Followill is so purty.And he has dimples to make him purty -
MortimerM1928 — 16 years ago(December 22, 2009 01:29 PM)
The answer is very simple. Black and white movies is an art in itself. It took many people to achieve the proper lighting and all that goes into establishing the mood of the scene. It is my opinion that people today lack appreciation for the hard work and creativity that went into creating such masterpieces. To colorize it would be the equivalent of someone coming into you house and redecorating it because they did not like your color scheme. (Especially when you are the creator and owner). Ridiculous right? It's about respecting someone's work. There is nothing wrong in prefering color movies especially since that's what you were exposed since childhood. However , to bastardize someone else's work especially after they poured their heart and soul into it, is criminal.
-
angelgwen16 — 16 years ago(December 23, 2009 06:44 PM)
"To colorize it would be the equivalent of someone coming into you house and redecorating it because they did not like your color scheme. (Especially when you are the creator and owner). Ridiculous right? It's about respecting someone's work."
I disagree. Colorizing a movie isn't like someone coming into your home and redorating it. Colorizing is like you BUYING someone's home and THEN redorating it once it is in their posession.
By colorizing a video they aren't dissing it in any way. But back when these movies were made, they didn't have the technology to colorize them. We do. So we changed it once we had the technology to. We didn't change it from black and white simply because we could, but because some people would like to see it in color.
And I'm one of those people. -
PillowRock — 16 years ago(December 28, 2009 04:20 PM)
But back when these movies were made, they didn't have the technology to colorize them.
You should learn more about old movies / movie history. They could make color movies then. Plenty of color movies were made before
Miracle
. It was just more expensive to film in color than B & W at the time, so only the "bigger" or more "prestigeous" pictures got the extra money for it.
We didn't change it from black and white simply because we could, but because some people would like to see it in color.
The problem with that reasoning is that you are not seeeing it "in color". Colorized and "in color" are two very different things, and they don't look anything alike. Take a Technicolor film, for example
The adventures of Robin Hood
, and make a "colorized" version of it; convert it to grey scale, and then apply the colorization process to it. Then conpare that colorized version to the original; it will look very different.
Besides which, as I pointed out in my earlier reply, all of the lighting etc. was designed specifically for B & W filming. That all would have been done differently had they been producing a color picture. -
moundshroud — 16 years ago(December 28, 2009 05:54 PM)
Colorizing is like you BUYING someone's home and THEN redorating it once it is in their posession.
Interesting analogy, but I think this better describes remaking the film rather than colorizing it. A remake can do things like add, omit, or drastically alter major elements such as characters, plot points, setting, etc. In other words, it's the same house structure, but there's serious renovations going on: Knocking out walls, replacing cabinetry, rewiring the electric, etc.
Colorizing the movie is more like having one's house redecorated while one is still living in it. The
Miracle on 34th Street
house was constructed by George Seaton (upon a foundation by Valentine Davies) and was decorated with his vision. Yes, it's decorated on a lower budget (black and white), but if Seaton had had a large budget he would have designed the entire house differently from the ground up.
Seaton's house is charming, quaint, and heartwarming. Colorizing it is like one of those
Trading Spaces
room-swaps that goes completely wrong. -
ZeoRangerFive — 16 years ago(December 24, 2009 10:05 AM)
There is no reason for the film to be in black and white.
Yes there is because that's how it was filmed!
I think it's total B.S. when people claim that colorizing a film ruins the film.
Why colorize a movie? Colorizing movies like taking a movie that was shot in widescreen and making it full screen. It's changing the way it was originally shot. It's changing history in a way.
If the film had been made a few years later down the line, it would have automatically been in color anyway
It could have been shot in color in 1947, it was just too expensive for the medium sized budget the film had.
Most of the movies and films that are in black and white would not be in black and white if filmed today. They were not meant to be filmed in black and white, there was just no way to film in color
Dude, shut up! You have no clue what you're talking about. Today is today and then was then. There was indeed the ability to film in color in 1947 but it was kind of on the expensive side. It wasn't an artistic choice to film in black and white, look at pretty much all of the films made in the 1940s. And I'm pretty sure it WAS meant to be shot in black and white.
Now at least if you see a film or scene done in black and white you know for a fact that the director did it for artistic emphasis
Yeah NOW not then black and white came BEFORE color. Colorizing films takes time and money to do, it's pointless, it's simply for people who can't handle watching black and white. Colorizing films does indeed ruin films, it's like adding a dog in the background that wasn't there. It's basically like George Lucas taking a bat to a film to make it more modern. Why not remove the 1940s cars and replace them with 2010 hybrids because there's no reason for those to be there, had it been shot this year they would be there.
Dragonzord! Mastodon! Pterodactyl! Triceratops! Saber Toothed Tiger! Tyrannosaurus! -
SinemaGirl — 15 years ago(November 26, 2010 06:11 AM)
The film looks crisp and clean in black and white because that is what it was filmed in. The colorized version looks choppy and messy.
Abolutely agree! Several years ago, I saw "Miracle on 34th street" in the cinema, and was greatly impressed by the crisp B&W cinematography. It truly was an art in its own right.
The colorized version I saw had poor definition, and in many shots, the color was only applied to the main elements; some of the large scenes were B&W in the background. Very sloppy. After seeing the movie at its monochromatic best, there is no way I can watch
that
colorized version. The newer colorization of "It's a Wonderful Life" seems surprisingly good. I might be willing to give "Miracle" another chance if it looks as good as the other movie.
But the story involves reality vs. fantasy. IMO, color in a 1947 movie, whether it was shot in Technicolor or was colorized after the fact, tends to remove some of the reality and bestow an aura of fantasy. So already, in color, the story tips greatly in favor of fantasy (to me). The movie in B&W (the choice of the "realistic" dramas of the day) keeps the fantasy element in check, making Kris Kringle's identity more in question than it might have been otherwise.
I'll stick with the original version, but if the colorized version brings more people to this wonderful movie, I'm at no place to try and oppose that. -
PillowRock — 15 years ago(December 02, 2010 02:03 PM)
in many shots, the color was only applied to the main elements; some of the large scenes were B&W in the background.
The newer colorization of "It's a Wonderful Life" seems surprisingly good.
One of the issues that I remember is that one or two of the often seen apartments in
Miracle
have extremely busy paisley-ish wallpaper. That was a nightmare scenario for colorization, and they didn't even try (just left it in gray scale). Off the top of my head, I don't recall any similar colorization process nightmares in the set decoration of
It's a Wonderful Life
.