Ziegfeld Theatre
141 W. 54th Street,
New York,
NY
10019
141 W. 54th Street,
New York,
NY
10019
131 people
favorited this theater
Showing 3,076 - 3,100 of 4,511 comments
No “Gone With the Wind” for me last night – the theater was closed for a special event. No doubt some 2006 epic that’ll be forgotten in three weeks. I can’t go tonight, but I hope someone else can and then report on it so I can find out what I missed.
The print at the Jersey was fair. It was not sharp and the sound was muffled. I saw GWTW at the Loews 34th st several years ago and it was the same print. Ironically I was at the 50th anniversary screening of GWTW at Radio City in 1989 and the print screened then was superior to what I have seen recently.
I’m going tomorrow night. I’ll post about it, but I didn’t see the Loew’s Jersey print.
How was the print of GWTW? Was it the same one that was used at the Loews Jersey?
Cabaret
View link
Good one Bill!! I understand and respect what Pete is saying, but I think Dorothy’s move to the door, at the start of reel two, happens all to fast to ruin the effect of the black and white transformation to color. We all have, and are entitled to, our own opinion as to what worked best here.
When I first saw the sepia sequence I thought it was supposed to mean Kansas was in the middle of a drought, and everything was turning brown.
Bill, the 1.85 reduced print will fill the height. The image is reduced so that it will fill the image to the full screen height used with their 1.85 lens. Most theaters have a common screen height for both 1.85 and 2.35. Those that can’t get the full width on 2.35 need to come down on the height a bit and have movable top masking.
Your generic black box multiplex has one screen size, and it’s sized for 2.35 and 1.85 by using two properly sized lenses. For 1.85 they move the side mask in.
That’s also how I do it at home Bill. Since it’s a fixed screen size I use three different lenses sizes to get 1.37, 1.85 and 2.35. I use a 50mm for 1.85, 70mm for 1.37, and 82.5mm for 2.35.
The Ziegfeld is probably capable of running 1.37 and Kane probably was a 1/37 print, just as the one run at the Lafayette Saturday was. As Pete indicated there were some true 1.37 prints struck of OZ, so maybe you saw one.
Yes Pete, I saw and ran the sepia version as was bugged by why I was watching this brown muddy print instead of the crisp black and white version I was used to. All for what?? so that the 10 seconds it took Dorothy to reach the door should look the same as the Kansas footage?? Oh well… to each his own. Great debating with you!
There’s no reason why it wouldn’t, Bill. I think the Ziegfeld’s screen is common-height for all aspect ratios.
I wish Craig O'Connor would clear this up for good. I didn’t think a 1.85 reduction print masked to appear 1.37 would vertically fill the screen at the Ziegfeld from top to bottom, but the print I saw on Saturday did. It was the same height as “Citizen Kane”.
It’s possible. The full-frame 1999 prints (there were only 12 struck, IIRC) are supposed to be reserved by Warner for reel-to-reel theatres only (they are sent out by special request, as that’s how I got the one I ran at the Lafayette last year).
Pete: Could it be that one of the 1999 prints is what the Ziegfeld is running this week? Like I said before to Jeff, it sure looked full-frame 1.37 to me, and the color was unbelievable. I saw the 1997 1.85 print at the Astor Plaza and in Ridgefield Park, NJ, and this one looked much better.
That’s cool, Vito. I have to admit, I was always bugged that the transition was so obvious until I saw what it was supposed to look like with a sepia print. Have you seen the sepia version? The full-frame dye-transfer prints that Warner struck in 1999 (not what the Ziegfeld just ran) are gorgeous.
Ok Pete, thanks for the explanation. I must say however, that when we ran the movie, as I did, with reel one on black and white stock,
the audience, as Stan said to ollie, was none the wiser :)
I guess ya hadda be there.
Simple reason – the first shot of reel two is colored to look like sepia, not black & white. If reel one is in sepia tone, the two reels match perfectly and you do not know that a switch to color will be taking place. When the straight black & white reel one changes over to reel two, the audience knows that you’re in for a switch to something and the transition is jarring. There’s no way a changeover from a black & white reel one to the first shot of reel two would ever have the same effect as the sepia version.
Mikeoaklandpark
“The big 60 year re release I saw at a Regal stadium theater and it was a 16mm print, I was pissed. They opened the masking like they would for scope.” Because of the original aspect ratio of 1.33 of the film and modern theatre chain projection. (Flat 1.85 or Scope 2.40) The studios on some reissues of the 1.33 films have reformatted in a Scope 2.40 ratio frame. So you will get a non-cropped frame of the film instead of buying proper lens for that screen. For those one-off type screenings at Radio City and other special locations they have invested in the right lens. So what might appear as a small image on a scope screen is what the studios have made available, so the film will not appear tobe cropped. And the lack of fully trained projectionists that understand ratios other than Flat or Scope.
Thanks guys, however as I recall the effect of the changeover from reel one on black and white stock, to reel two on techniclor stock, was excelent. I still do not see the reasoning for using sepia in the first reel.
By the way my changeovers were always “smooth” :)
Mike, are you sure that was 16mm at Regal?
WB made brand new 35mm prints available for that release and yes, the imagine was small, but ratio correct. I can’t imagine why or how Regal would have shown it in 16mm
Here is the most complete listing of credits for “The Wizard of Oz” I’ve ever come across. It also confirms what Pete said: shot in black and white, tinted in sepia.
View link
Vito:
Yes, all of the Kansas sequences were photographed in black and white. As I posted above, the original 1939 release prints had those sequences printed in sepia tone; I don’t know if it was tinted stock or actual sepia toning. Those scenes were always intended to be viewed in sepia – when a print with the tones is projected (and if the changeover is smooth), you can’t tell when you’ve switched to Reel 2 (which starts with her running towards the door). That shot was photographed on a specially-painted set with a double wearing a dyed dress to match the sepia tone of the previous reel. When the door opens, the Technicolor bursts through and then Judy Garland walks into the frame in her full-color costume. Reissue prints (the one you ran) and the television prints printed those scenes in straight black and white, ruining the intended effect.
Peter, I have always thought the black and white sequences were actually shot on black and White stock, and for some reason some release prints used the sepia stock. My memory of running this film is reel one was on black and white stock. Perhaps it was done both ways. Surly someone knows the story here, more research on this is needed.
I saw the 50th anniversary 35mm showing at Radio City Music Hall in 1989, but we sat so far away from the screen its impact was slighly diminished. At least Butterfly McQueen was there in person to introduce the show.
Bill
I hope the Ziegfeld ast least shows the 1.85 version. A few years ago when they had the big 60 year re release I saw it at a Regal stadium theater and it was a 16mm print. I was pissed. They opened the masking like they would for scope and you had this little square picture in the middle of this huge wall to wall screen.
The original 1939 release prints had the “black & white” sections printed as sepia tone (so that the audience wouldn’t know the switch to color was coming). Later re-issues (and the broadcast TV and early video versions) presented those scenes incorrectly as straight black and white. The 1999 reissue and newer LaserDisc & DVD versions restored those sequences to the correct sepia tone.
A few years ago the Gershwin Theatre ran the sing-a-long version of “The Wizard of Oz” before “Wicked” opened it’s Broadway run at that theatre.