I am really looking forward to seeing Snow White on Blu Ray it's getting a very positive press with some really good reviews! I have ordered the Blu Ray combo with the book! I'll order the Pierre Lambert book from Amazon.fr it's a paperback version of the original hardback for 38 Euros!
What do forum readers who've been lucky enough to see it think of the Blu Ray quality?
Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs: Diamond Edition
-
- AV Forum Member
- Posts: 53
- Joined: April 16th, 2007
- Location: Bradford, West Yorkshire, England
- Contact:
Shame to hear about the extras, though.-
- AV Forum Member
- Posts: 53
- Joined: April 16th, 2007
- Location: Bradford, West Yorkshire, England
- Contact:
Hello Ben,
When will the full review of Snow White and The Seven Dwarfs appear ,and where will it be posted in which forum area?
I'm on holiday in Rhodes Greece , and wonder wheen the Greek version will be released? I really can't wait to watch the Blu Ray it's my all time favourite movie!
[POST EDITED FOR LANGUAGE]
When will the full review of Snow White and The Seven Dwarfs appear ,and where will it be posted in which forum area?
I'm on holiday in Rhodes Greece , and wonder wheen the Greek version will be released? I really can't wait to watch the Blu Ray it's my all time favourite movie!
[POST EDITED FOR LANGUAGE]
-
- AV Founder
- Posts: 25715
- Joined: October 22nd, 2004
- Location: London, UK
My Snow White review is now up and available from the front page of <B>Animated Views</B>! 
-
- AV Forum Member
- Posts: 10
- Joined: October 13th, 2007
Great review as usual. Ive been reading reviews of other sites and they put it as a great restoration but not on the class of Sleeping Beauty and Pinocchio, do you agree with that? Also one of my favorite Disney Villains is the queen and one of her most memorable scenes is kind of ruined when her eyes are unfocused in the bring back her heart scene. Was it always like this but not just noticeable in standard video or was the an error in the restoration?
-
- AV Founder
- Posts: 25715
- Joined: October 22nd, 2004
- Location: London, UK
Thanks, Walt!
Going by other reviewers, which I've held off reading until this afternoon, I'd say that generally the comments seem to be the same regarding the extras.
On the transfer of the film, I think they're missing the point that SW was shot to very grainy film stock under extreme circumstances. Those mis-focused moments were always there but just not as noticeable in standard def. So they really have done the best they can with the elements.
For me, this is a nicer transfer than Beauty and Pinocchio. On Beauty I thought the intention came over to present it exactly as a brand new film, including scrubbing out evidence of paint brush marks so that the color was more uniform. Since Beauty was short to expensive 70mm film, the speed of the film meant less grain and a better element to begin with so the sky was the limit on how good it could look.
On Pinocchio, they were more limited but still had better elements than for SW. Remember that SW was eventually shot in a rush and it was incredible that the film was not only finished but ready in time for the 1937 premiere. And after it was such a big hit, Walt wanted to plus it with Pinocchio, making sure that the technical problems that had plagued SW (but remained unknow to the public) were fixed. Pinocchio was even shut down for a while due to story reasons, but this gave the tech boys more time to perfect things.
So both those films had better to start with, but for me SW is a better transfer. Not because it looks cleaner or sharper, but because it retains more of the original processes. The brush marks are there, the human hand crafted nature is there. All too often the colors and exposure are made to look like digital transfers (like Beauty and Pinocchio). Those films look great, but they were never intended to look like that, and it's not how Walt saw them.
I just get the feeling with this new SW that it's not so far off what the intention would have been. It's cleaner than Walt saw it, and yes some of the imperfections show up more now, but that's what makes it an animated feature from 1937 and not a digitally produced film from the 2000s.
Going by other reviewers, which I've held off reading until this afternoon, I'd say that generally the comments seem to be the same regarding the extras.
On the transfer of the film, I think they're missing the point that SW was shot to very grainy film stock under extreme circumstances. Those mis-focused moments were always there but just not as noticeable in standard def. So they really have done the best they can with the elements.
For me, this is a nicer transfer than Beauty and Pinocchio. On Beauty I thought the intention came over to present it exactly as a brand new film, including scrubbing out evidence of paint brush marks so that the color was more uniform. Since Beauty was short to expensive 70mm film, the speed of the film meant less grain and a better element to begin with so the sky was the limit on how good it could look.
On Pinocchio, they were more limited but still had better elements than for SW. Remember that SW was eventually shot in a rush and it was incredible that the film was not only finished but ready in time for the 1937 premiere. And after it was such a big hit, Walt wanted to plus it with Pinocchio, making sure that the technical problems that had plagued SW (but remained unknow to the public) were fixed. Pinocchio was even shut down for a while due to story reasons, but this gave the tech boys more time to perfect things.
So both those films had better to start with, but for me SW is a better transfer. Not because it looks cleaner or sharper, but because it retains more of the original processes. The brush marks are there, the human hand crafted nature is there. All too often the colors and exposure are made to look like digital transfers (like Beauty and Pinocchio). Those films look great, but they were never intended to look like that, and it's not how Walt saw them.
I just get the feeling with this new SW that it's not so far off what the intention would have been. It's cleaner than Walt saw it, and yes some of the imperfections show up more now, but that's what makes it an animated feature from 1937 and not a digitally produced film from the 2000s.
-
- AV Forum Member
- Posts: 76
- Joined: February 18th, 2009
I watched the Sleeping Beauty and Pinocchio Platinum editions on Blu-Ray.
I'm expecting to get the SW DE on Oct 15th. So we'll see if Pinocchio and Sleeping Beauty PE's are better then SW's DE.
The problem with my Blu-Ray/TV is that my TV is only a 720P HD TV.
At the same time my Blu-Ray player didn't come with a HDMI Cable, it has only the original (Red/White/Yellow) Audio and Video outputs.
When I watch movie on my blu-ray I go on video 2 (rear) and it says 480i as the resolution. So it's not even coming in at 720p.
I'm expecting to get the SW DE on Oct 15th. So we'll see if Pinocchio and Sleeping Beauty PE's are better then SW's DE.
The problem with my Blu-Ray/TV is that my TV is only a 720P HD TV.
At the same time my Blu-Ray player didn't come with a HDMI Cable, it has only the original (Red/White/Yellow) Audio and Video outputs.
When I watch movie on my blu-ray I go on video 2 (rear) and it says 480i as the resolution. So it's not even coming in at 720p.
-
- AV Forum Member
- Posts: 398
- Joined: May 28th, 2009
- Contact:
Very nice extensive review, though it's a shame that the extras are so disappointing, as that is one of my major insentives for buying this new edition.
Just one small note, regarding
Just one small note, regarding
, it was recently announced that the 3-D re-release has been post-poned for late 2011.An odd inclusion is to see Beauty And The Beast’s BD debut advertised before the much-hyped upcoming 3D reissue
-
- AV Founder
- Posts: 25715
- Joined: October 22nd, 2004
- Location: London, UK
Thanks estefan!
Regarding B&TB-3D, then it's all the more odd to advertise a home video release of a film so blatantly before a theatrical reissue. I know the incentive is 3D, but that won't put off people waiting for the BD they know is coming rather than go to the movies.
That's just what happened with the DVD and Imax restoration: audiences already knew the Platinum was coming and held off from going to the Imax. 3D may be more of a draw than a giant screen, but they'll already have the disc in beautiful hi-def quality by then, so where's the real attraction?
Regarding B&TB-3D, then it's all the more odd to advertise a home video release of a film so blatantly before a theatrical reissue. I know the incentive is 3D, but that won't put off people waiting for the BD they know is coming rather than go to the movies.
That's just what happened with the DVD and Imax restoration: audiences already knew the Platinum was coming and held off from going to the Imax. 3D may be more of a draw than a giant screen, but they'll already have the disc in beautiful hi-def quality by then, so where's the real attraction?
3D is a joke...
Audiences aren't asking for this!
It's another ploy by Hollywood to try to lure people back to the movie theaters just like making enhanced versions of the 1990s Disney movies with new scenes and improvements for Imax was.
It will last a few years and cost the entertainment industry at least hundreds of millions of dollars (if not billions they really shouldn't be wasting now) but mark my words the average consumer isn't going to bite into this.
It's expensive enough to go to regular films without paying an additional surcharge for the privilege of 3D. Believe me, you will all pay for this "privilege."
So far out of all the gimmicks tried to get people back into theaters within the past 60 years, only a few have held -- widescreen, color, and digital stereo sound. Those were true artistic improvements and people on both sides of the camera appreciated the enhancements those technologies brought to film. Smell-a-vision died quickly. Why they think bringing the equally nauseating 3D back for the millionth time is going to work now when it never has in the past I don't know...
Where 3D might have a chance of succeeding is with videogames. Some hi-def TV sets will be equipped with 3D imaging chips in the coming years; some PS3s will start to be built with the same technology within the next 2 years. This will all depend on if the general gaming audience that owns next-gen consoles really finds the 3D effect worth investing in for their gaming needs. If this costs people an additional $200 or more on top of the regular console or TV price, 3D hardware WILL fail! (Note that PS3 sales only recently massively picked up when Sony finally lowered the starting system price to $299. There should be a lesson there for hardware manufacturers!)
It will still come down to cost... I frankly am still surprised the studios are persisting on pursuing this gimmick when it's been roundly turned down by consumers in the past. The world economy is lousy and they're not going to lure people back into theaters with higher ticket prices. Their biggest market, the domestic US, is going through really hard times and all this fluff won't entice people with tight-enough-as-it-is budgets to come back to the theaters. They need to concentrate on making more economical films that attract people with different premises instead of pumping out remakes by the dozen and continuing to hire the $20 million acting elitists who just aren't attracting people to movie theaters.
The future of filmmaking should be the District 9 and Paranormal Activity movies instead of more $150 million-$200 million remakes of old TV series and movies. Smartly told films with lower budgets will trump anything directed by the likes of Bay or McG. Distributors/producers will definitely recoup their investments infinitely faster, too. More importantly, most film enthusiasts will get a better bang for their bucks, too...
Audiences aren't asking for this!
It's another ploy by Hollywood to try to lure people back to the movie theaters just like making enhanced versions of the 1990s Disney movies with new scenes and improvements for Imax was.
It will last a few years and cost the entertainment industry at least hundreds of millions of dollars (if not billions they really shouldn't be wasting now) but mark my words the average consumer isn't going to bite into this.
It's expensive enough to go to regular films without paying an additional surcharge for the privilege of 3D. Believe me, you will all pay for this "privilege."
So far out of all the gimmicks tried to get people back into theaters within the past 60 years, only a few have held -- widescreen, color, and digital stereo sound. Those were true artistic improvements and people on both sides of the camera appreciated the enhancements those technologies brought to film. Smell-a-vision died quickly. Why they think bringing the equally nauseating 3D back for the millionth time is going to work now when it never has in the past I don't know...
Where 3D might have a chance of succeeding is with videogames. Some hi-def TV sets will be equipped with 3D imaging chips in the coming years; some PS3s will start to be built with the same technology within the next 2 years. This will all depend on if the general gaming audience that owns next-gen consoles really finds the 3D effect worth investing in for their gaming needs. If this costs people an additional $200 or more on top of the regular console or TV price, 3D hardware WILL fail! (Note that PS3 sales only recently massively picked up when Sony finally lowered the starting system price to $299. There should be a lesson there for hardware manufacturers!)
It will still come down to cost... I frankly am still surprised the studios are persisting on pursuing this gimmick when it's been roundly turned down by consumers in the past. The world economy is lousy and they're not going to lure people back into theaters with higher ticket prices. Their biggest market, the domestic US, is going through really hard times and all this fluff won't entice people with tight-enough-as-it-is budgets to come back to the theaters. They need to concentrate on making more economical films that attract people with different premises instead of pumping out remakes by the dozen and continuing to hire the $20 million acting elitists who just aren't attracting people to movie theaters.
The future of filmmaking should be the District 9 and Paranormal Activity movies instead of more $150 million-$200 million remakes of old TV series and movies. Smartly told films with lower budgets will trump anything directed by the likes of Bay or McG. Distributors/producers will definitely recoup their investments infinitely faster, too. More importantly, most film enthusiasts will get a better bang for their bucks, too...
-
- AV Forum Member
- Posts: 459
- Joined: December 21st, 2007
Snow White: Diamond Edition
Hey George, I like 3-D! It's cool, and sure, maybe it's gimmicky and not much, I see that, and yet, I am still quite glad that we have it for movies. It's cool we have it. I certainly would love to see many films I like in 3-D, on some occasions, as long as it doesn't cost us too much (I don't think it will be so ecenomically bad like you predict).
Deco King, this is your favorite movie, who else is going to buy that kind of big Snow White set other than a fan such as yourself? Buy the big red limited set, it's your favorite film!
Thanks Ben!
I agree, this restoration sounds perfect because it is so faithful, and that all restorations should keep the brush strokes and original mistakes, anything they can retain so they don't accidentally wipe away detail or change something. Did you know for Sleeping Beauty there was something where they thought a mistake was made in the dress changing color so they "fixed" it. The color was supposed to spread over the dress but they faded the pink in in the restoration. I'll post it here maybe, someday.
But most importantly thanks for writing such a great, extensive, in-depth review, for the first and fairest of them all. Yes, in my opinion Snow White is what started the best thing about the company, while in Walt's opinion, it started with a mouse (so I should honor that, it is his thing that he started, with mouse or princess), but Snow White is what started the animated film (with sound, right?), the best, as we know it today, what really started them.
I agreed with you on so, so many things, like this has not seemed to come with much excitement or fanfare! Is it because Snow White has been to DVD a little too recently? Is it because people cared more more last time when it was going to be such a huge improvement over VHS? Is it because most people don't have Blu-rays, and are wary of re-starting their collection and the push for them to do so?
I liked the kind of history of Walt Disney's life and early start of the company included in your review, very nice and very fitting and also helping to mark how big this film is and it's release should be. Very informative, too (animators looking at naked ladies!).
As for the Citizen Kane thing, I think people say Pinocchio is his because of the films themselves. You seemed to be talking more about how the pictures came about, their histiory, than the films themselves, and I have not seen Citizen Kane and not watched Pinocchio in too long (bought the Blu-ray with Snow White last week!), but I know people feel Pinocchio has more in it that's "important", be it darkness, truthfullness, important teachings/messages, or just more genius, I don't know, but that seems to be why people feel it more matches the dark, teaching, genius (apparently) Citizen Kane.
Of course I think Snow White wonderfully teaches you to be kind and good and someday you will be saved from misery and death and that it's no less than Pinocchio teaching you evil never dies or stops or whatever and you need to be brave, truthful, and unselfish to be a real human being or whatever people think it is. For Pinocchio's villains not always being as nice as they appear, so Snow White teaches evil can be beautiful and the harmless and gift-giving can be evil, things are not as they appear either.
I couldn't believe, though, when you said this was the first re-release since the film to "reall matter"!!! Every re-release matters! Enjoying the film again always matters! Does it only matter if it's changed in some way? Personally I'd rather see some of the earlier re-releases which I would think would be closer to how the film looked on premiere (hey, maybe not).
I liked hearing about your party trick voice, though. That sounds both funny and amazing.
I totally agree DisneyView seems annoying and distracting from the beauty of the film itself.
Oh, the DVD cased combo pack is for people like me who want Snow White as the focus of the cover, the right (and much more honorable!) way. But I think I figured out why the Witch is the center of the Blu-ray, it's because guys are more often the electroniphiles who already have a Blu-ray player and other films on Blu-ray and would not want a princess so big on the cover, but instead, cleverly, something in a black cloak with a red apple and claw-like hand in front of it's face! Still, it's totally wrong, and a lame attempt to get more Blu-ray buys (or make people see the difference between the Blu-ray vs. DVD packaging...?!)
I have bought the book and DVD casing version of Snow White for myself, and the cover was one of the incentives. I was at SunCoast looking at a $150 priced version and wanted it because it had the sketches, but then I thought I should really save my money for the big gift sets of films I love most. I just hope Disney keeps making them, this one better sell well...had they better pins, or something else instead like film frames or a miniature replica of the heart box or mirror, a slightly less big box, and a lower price (well, unless it had the miniature heart box or mirror) then maybe it would seem more attractive.
I did also want to say that I'm glad this film got a ten, but I have felt wrong about the fact that you gave Sleeping Beauty and the AristoCats the same 8 out of 10 score as Cinderella, when most notice Cinderella has better story and dramatic scenes that are poetic (Sing Sweet Nightingale), violent (stepsisters rip the dress), deeply sad (Cinderella crying alone with holy voices telling her to believe what she doesn't anymore), scary (stepmother locks Cinderella), suspenseful (getting the key to Cinderella) and surprising and uplifting (the other slipper, happy ending). Scenes that are, how do I describe, cinematically or dramatically...more. I dunno. I just have wanted to bring that up for a long time...
Deco King, this is your favorite movie, who else is going to buy that kind of big Snow White set other than a fan such as yourself? Buy the big red limited set, it's your favorite film!
Thanks Ben!
I agree, this restoration sounds perfect because it is so faithful, and that all restorations should keep the brush strokes and original mistakes, anything they can retain so they don't accidentally wipe away detail or change something. Did you know for Sleeping Beauty there was something where they thought a mistake was made in the dress changing color so they "fixed" it. The color was supposed to spread over the dress but they faded the pink in in the restoration. I'll post it here maybe, someday.
But most importantly thanks for writing such a great, extensive, in-depth review, for the first and fairest of them all. Yes, in my opinion Snow White is what started the best thing about the company, while in Walt's opinion, it started with a mouse (so I should honor that, it is his thing that he started, with mouse or princess), but Snow White is what started the animated film (with sound, right?), the best, as we know it today, what really started them.
I agreed with you on so, so many things, like this has not seemed to come with much excitement or fanfare! Is it because Snow White has been to DVD a little too recently? Is it because people cared more more last time when it was going to be such a huge improvement over VHS? Is it because most people don't have Blu-rays, and are wary of re-starting their collection and the push for them to do so?
I liked the kind of history of Walt Disney's life and early start of the company included in your review, very nice and very fitting and also helping to mark how big this film is and it's release should be. Very informative, too (animators looking at naked ladies!).
As for the Citizen Kane thing, I think people say Pinocchio is his because of the films themselves. You seemed to be talking more about how the pictures came about, their histiory, than the films themselves, and I have not seen Citizen Kane and not watched Pinocchio in too long (bought the Blu-ray with Snow White last week!), but I know people feel Pinocchio has more in it that's "important", be it darkness, truthfullness, important teachings/messages, or just more genius, I don't know, but that seems to be why people feel it more matches the dark, teaching, genius (apparently) Citizen Kane.
Of course I think Snow White wonderfully teaches you to be kind and good and someday you will be saved from misery and death and that it's no less than Pinocchio teaching you evil never dies or stops or whatever and you need to be brave, truthful, and unselfish to be a real human being or whatever people think it is. For Pinocchio's villains not always being as nice as they appear, so Snow White teaches evil can be beautiful and the harmless and gift-giving can be evil, things are not as they appear either.
I couldn't believe, though, when you said this was the first re-release since the film to "reall matter"!!! Every re-release matters! Enjoying the film again always matters! Does it only matter if it's changed in some way? Personally I'd rather see some of the earlier re-releases which I would think would be closer to how the film looked on premiere (hey, maybe not).
I liked hearing about your party trick voice, though. That sounds both funny and amazing.
I totally agree DisneyView seems annoying and distracting from the beauty of the film itself.
Oh, the DVD cased combo pack is for people like me who want Snow White as the focus of the cover, the right (and much more honorable!) way. But I think I figured out why the Witch is the center of the Blu-ray, it's because guys are more often the electroniphiles who already have a Blu-ray player and other films on Blu-ray and would not want a princess so big on the cover, but instead, cleverly, something in a black cloak with a red apple and claw-like hand in front of it's face! Still, it's totally wrong, and a lame attempt to get more Blu-ray buys (or make people see the difference between the Blu-ray vs. DVD packaging...?!)
I have bought the book and DVD casing version of Snow White for myself, and the cover was one of the incentives. I was at SunCoast looking at a $150 priced version and wanted it because it had the sketches, but then I thought I should really save my money for the big gift sets of films I love most. I just hope Disney keeps making them, this one better sell well...had they better pins, or something else instead like film frames or a miniature replica of the heart box or mirror, a slightly less big box, and a lower price (well, unless it had the miniature heart box or mirror) then maybe it would seem more attractive.
I did also want to say that I'm glad this film got a ten, but I have felt wrong about the fact that you gave Sleeping Beauty and the AristoCats the same 8 out of 10 score as Cinderella, when most notice Cinderella has better story and dramatic scenes that are poetic (Sing Sweet Nightingale), violent (stepsisters rip the dress), deeply sad (Cinderella crying alone with holy voices telling her to believe what she doesn't anymore), scary (stepmother locks Cinderella), suspenseful (getting the key to Cinderella) and surprising and uplifting (the other slipper, happy ending). Scenes that are, how do I describe, cinematically or dramatically...more. I dunno. I just have wanted to bring that up for a long time...
