Tema: El padrino (The Godfather, 1972, Francis Ford Coppola) y secuelas

Iniciado por Ponyo_11

Veo que nadie fue a verla al cine en el reestreno

Eso iba a decir, tan fácil como saber como se veía el reestreno en cines y ya tenemos algo aclarado.

Por si sirve de ayuda, este es el tráiler del reestreno:


Y esto una muestra de lo que se ve en la primera parte de El Padrino:


Y El Padrino II:


También debemos decir una cosa, la mayoría de comparativas lo están haciendo en SDR. Posiblemente en HDR la cosa sea totalmente distinta y por eso han decidido hacer los cambios en los UHD. Ojo, esto como suposición.

EDIT: Por cierto, si ponéis el tráiler en el minuto 0:24 y el fragmento de El Padrino I en el minuto 5:35 veréis que el tono es distinto.

Comparativa 3ª Parte

De los Blu-Ray de 2007 analisis hecho en su día:

Admittedly, there have been some rather obvious liberties taken here with the color timing, most noticeably on The Godfather Part II.


For example, the scene in which Michael testifies before the committee is now awash with sepia tones that are almost overwhelming if you’re not expecting the change from previous home video versions which employed a more natural scheme. Also, the contrast (as I mentioned) has been pumped up substantially in several sequences which lends to a hotness in the image that was never there before. No doubt this was an artistic decision, and I will not question Coppola’s visual judgment in this review. Suffice it to say that hardcore purists may take issue and might want to give this set a rent if they think it may be a deal-breaker. For me, it was not. In my opinion, the numerous benefits of the new restoration far outweigh any questionable, revisionist color timing decisions. This is unarguably the finest presentation of the Godfather films ever released and, barring a miracle, I can’t imagine this series looking any better than it does in this collection.



Claro, esto es lo que dijo deportista antes. No se puede tomar cómo referencia cómo lucía la saga antes de la restauración de 2007 por:

A) El estado en el que se encontraban los negativos del filme.

B). Los formatos domésticos anteriores al Blu-Ray no daban la talla.


No obstante, analizando este parrafo, ¿es posible que lo que se haya decidido hacer con los UHD sea volver a la colorimetría anterior a los Blu-Ray, por vaya usted a saber que razones?

Iniciado por Stephenlarsson

EDIT: Por cierto, si ponéis el tráiler en el minuto 0:24 y el fragmento de El Padrino I en el minuto 5:35 veréis que el tono es distinto.

O sea, que la última restauración respeta a Willis al 100% pero el UHD no... pues vaya.

Iniciado por Branagh/Doyle

Del New York Times.

De ahí saqué yo las palabras de Coppola, que puse en mi anterior post.

Que, por aclarar, el resto del mensaje se refería sólo a lo visto en capsaholic. No tengo ni idea de cómo se verán las pelis.

No nos ponemos de acuerdo, por lo que veo. Cambian las opiniones por minuto.

Harris respecto a los tres segundos que faltan en el Padrino II.


I’m not seeing a problem, as the footage may have been there in error, due to an odd series of events.

I checked our internal inspection reports, and found a hand-written note from my assistant referencing a possible re-cut and re-conform at that shot from an earlier version.

For the record, presumably based on numerous re-cuts, there are two sets of masters on the film.

If one takes a careful look at the shot in question, a slight bump is evident going back to all earlier versions. Although not overly evident, it can be seen in the 2007 Blu-ray.

Conjecture on my part:

The shot in question was not originally a reel end. When changes were made, and it became such, an additional three seconds were re-cut to the negative from the trim.

When a further change was made, and the shot was no longer the final in the reel, the 72 frames were inadvertently left in place during the heat of post-production.

A bit more complex than might be expected, but you asked for my thoughts.

Iniciado por Ponyo_11

No nos ponemos de acuerdo, por lo que veo. Cambian las opiniones por minuto.

En realidad no. Ahora estamos intentando entender las razones de lo sucedido.

A ver si sale el documental de la nueva restauración.

Iniciado por Branagh/Doyle

En realidad no. Ahora estamos intentando entender las razones de lo sucedido.

A ver si sale el documental de la nueva restauración.

Yo veo un 50-50. Según veo las opiniones que recopilo por aquí la opinión general es que no está tan mal como se temía, parece que se arreglan cosas que tenía mal la versión de 2008, pero hay ciertas escenas que se han "arreglado demasiado", quizá eliminando la intención. Pero el resto no está mal.

Por eso digo opiniones mezcladas.

He de decir, que a mí también me escamó mucho una de las escenas controversiales de las que se habla, concretamente las de Las Vegas; que está ahora de una manera que parece casi tintada, no se ve de color natural, como si le hubieran puesto un filtro de ''noche'' a algo que está grabado de día. Claro que es la impresión que me dió. No he visto la película entera todavía.

La otra segunda impresión que me dió es que la película se veía muy bien pero no me gustó eso de que el grano no sea homogeneo toda la peli, pero me alegra que al menos no se haya eliminado en toda la película.

Iniciado por Marty_McFly

Vaya por delante que no estoy hablando de la edición, porque ninguno la hemos visto y ni siquiera esas fotos que aparecieron son válidas. Pero sí quiero decir que esas palabras del señor Harris me parecen un disparate. ¿Cómo que "la forma correcta de ver la película en 2022?" No, oiga, El Padrino es la película que Coppola, Willis y el resto del equipo hicieron en 1972, y esa es la forma correcta en 1982, 2022 y 4138.
Coppola y Paramount están en su derecho LEGAL de cambiar lo que quieran 50 años después, pero lo de "correcto", desde el punto de vista artístico, no lo compro.

Lo correcto es aprovechar los avances de los formatos domésticos para acercarse lo más posible a lo que hay en los negativos originales. Lo otro podrá gustar o no, pero para mí son opiniones irrelevantes (sin faltar al respeto a nadie), porque no es una cuestión de gusto, es una cuestión de autenticidad.

Harris ha continuado explicándose (negritas mías):

(...)

Actually, Mr. Willis approved all elements, albeit some with very specific notes - 35mm prints (which he viewed), 4k DCP, and Blu-rays.

And going back in time, I recalled forwarding him a 2009 response from Patrick McCart, to which he replied as follows:

I'm pleased Patrick McCart recognizes the elegance of simplicity... not getting motion confused with accomplishment. I had a hard enough time making people understand that when I was shooting these films. I'm delighted when someone looks, and actually sees that these films were Restored.... not remade.....of course, I'm delighted when someone is looking at anything, as opposed to texting. I also have to thank Patrick for the recognition of visual structure as it relates to story telling.

Thank you Patrick, that was very nice.

Gordon Willis"

(...)

To be clear, this received my "stamp of approval" as a new work for a new generation of film fans.

There are now two versions of the film, and both are relevant to different sets of eyes.


.


One represents the look and textures of original 1972 and 1974 prints, while the other takes the original negative and revisualizes certain attributes, while generally respecting the original.

They're different.

If one were to try to categorize the 2022 as wrong, they would be incorrect.

It's just a new take on what was captured within the emulsion of the original negative.

The 2007 is still what it is, and could be released in 4k as an interesting alternative, without HDR or Dolby Vision should the studio elect to do so.



(...)

I’ve described performing color and density for these films as akin to riding the edge of a razor blade. Decisions regarding where to place shadow detail, especially as permitted by Mr. Willis original photographic design, as well as how to handle his specific desires toward highlights, is all an extremely delicate matter.

It is all by design, and cannot be left to digital experimentation.

We have wonderful digital tools today. Some better than we had in 2007.

The trick is knowing when, and when not to use them.

I don’t desire to get into a long back and forth on the subject.

Suffice to say, that the 2022 release is a slightly different experience, by design, both as seen through a different set of eyes, as well as via the application of HDR or Dolby Vision.

Any deep dive into the weeds would necessitate a master’s class, working shot by shot, and I’m not going there.

The films are still The Godfather(s), and as such, there’s nothing that minor visual alterations can do to change their structure, brilliance and craftsmanship, regardless of which generation is their intended audience.

Through Paramount’s most recent work, the elements are protected and supported for generations to come.

Hopefully, these words will suffice toward discussions occurring at HTF and elsewhere.

Iniciado por Branagh/Doyle

A ver si sale el documental de la nueva restauración.

Fotos del digipak nordico. Imagino que será igual en todos los lados del mundo en el que haya digipak y tenga los 9 discos. Imagino que la española igual pero menos palas. No me disgusta, es igual de simple que la de Indiana pero yo esta la veo mucho menos seca. Una pena que no hay manera de conseguir el digipak en ninguna parte del mundo con castellano en todo. Visto esta situación aunque de verdad tenía ganas de pillarla de salida, esperaré a ofertazas como las de Indiana, y si la veo a precio de "bug", no me importará la falta de castellano.

Iniciado por Kev D

My Nordic standard edition was just delivered and it has a DigiPack with all 9 discs that the Deluxe has.

Iniciado por Branagh/Doyle

Harris ha continuado explicándose (negritas mías):

(...)

Actually, Mr. Willis approved all elements, albeit some with very specific notes - 35mm prints (which he viewed), 4k DCP, and Blu-rays.

And going back in time, I recalled forwarding him a 2009 response from Patrick McCart, to which he replied as follows:

I'm pleased Patrick McCart recognizes the elegance of simplicity... not getting motion confused with accomplishment. I had a hard enough time making people understand that when I was shooting these films. I'm delighted when someone looks, and actually sees that these films were Restored.... not remade.....of course, I'm delighted when someone is looking at anything, as opposed to texting. I also have to thank Patrick for the recognition of visual structure as it relates to story telling.

Thank you Patrick, that was very nice.

Gordon Willis"

(...)

To be clear, this received my "stamp of approval" as a new work for a new generation of film fans.

There are now two versions of the film, and both are relevant to different sets of eyes.


.


One represents the look and textures of original 1972 and 1974 prints, while the other takes the original negative and revisualizes certain attributes, while generally respecting the original.

They're different.

If one were to try to categorize the 2022 as wrong, they would be incorrect.

It's just a new take on what was captured within the emulsion of the original negative.

The 2007 is still what it is, and could be released in 4k as an interesting alternative, without HDR or Dolby Vision should the studio elect to do so.



(...)

I’ve described performing color and density for these films as akin to riding the edge of a razor blade. Decisions regarding where to place shadow detail, especially as permitted by Mr. Willis original photographic design, as well as how to handle his specific desires toward highlights, is all an extremely delicate matter.

It is all by design, and cannot be left to digital experimentation.

We have wonderful digital tools today. Some better than we had in 2007.

The trick is knowing when, and when not to use them.

I don’t desire to get into a long back and forth on the subject.

Suffice to say, that the 2022 release is a slightly different experience, by design, both as seen through a different set of eyes, as well as via the application of HDR or Dolby Vision.

Any deep dive into the weeds would necessitate a master’s class, working shot by shot, and I’m not going there.

The films are still The Godfather(s), and as such, there’s nothing that minor visual alterations can do to change their structure, brilliance and craftsmanship, regardless of which generation is their intended audience.

Through Paramount’s most recent work, the elements are protected and supported for generations to come.

Hopefully, these words will suffice toward discussions occurring at HTF and elsewhere.

De verdad que no doy crédito. No puedo creer lo que leo

"Es diferente, está hecha para 2022, pero respeta el original". Qué huevos. Parece un sketch de Faemino y Cansado.

Miedo me da cuando veais los featurettes de restauración.. y sobre todo, los de comparación.

Iniciado por Ponyo_11

Me refiero a que el de 2008 lo subieron a Youtube, igual este también.

Iniciado por Branagh/Doyle

Me refiero a que el de 2008 lo subieron a Youtube, igual este también.

Iniciado por Ponyo_11

Me he perdido con tanta cortinita...

Espero que lo suban a Youtube, porque por alguna razón los extras de Itunes siguen siendo los de 2008, y no viene.

Ostras. Si has sido tú, mil gracias.

¿Yo? No, imposible. Si no tengo el disco. Yo tan solo me lo he encontrado por ahí porque me lo han pasado y lo he compartido por aquí para el uso en el debate.

Pues con eso se acabó el debate. Si Willis levantara la cabeza…

Está súper bonito eso de asumir lo que pensarían los que ya no están porque tenemos que empujar adelante el argumento.