"The Longest Day" colorized.

Hey, no swearing here or its the cooler for you....

 

After having seen Sands of Iwo Jima a couple hundred times I tried watching it in the colorized version. IMO it took away immensely from the overall aspect of the film. I thought it was absolutely horrible and I loved the film, having watched it plenty of times prior. I decided at that point that never again would I watch a B&W film in a colorized version.

 

Morning-rather-Afternoon now ;-)) You can say th

at again-therre will never be another cast as great as the Longest Day had-ever assembled again--mostly because too many of the them get paid $20 million per pic-which I personally feel that few of them deserve. Of the few I feel who do deserve that amount-Clint Eastwood is at the top. I don't know what he gets for his movies but I feel he and Tom Hanks and Mel Gibson are the few who deserve that amount/

Originally-as ted turner said-th e reason he colorized many of his movies becaue that was supposed to be a way of restoring them and preserving them--which is hog-wash. There are more than a few ways in preserving film without colorizing them.

 

Heh heh, love it ;-))

Also, th
e first colorized turner movie I saw was Objective Burma w/ Errol Flynn. The colorization was awful. The teddy boy colorized Seahawk--another Flynn classic-it too looked bad-but not as bad as it's predecessor.

I then saw his colorized version of Edge of Darkness--another Flynn classic-and it too looked bad but you could tell it was improing some. After that they colorized a few Cary Grant classics-which looked hOK but still needed much improvement. I think the first Cary Grant movie colorized by turner was is earlier Submarine movie-name escapes me at this time. Then they colorized another Grant classic-name escapes me at the mo-then colorized a few Gary Cooper classics-which by that time the process had much improved but I still hated it. Sergeant Your, The Westerner and Beau Geste-were the ones that fell victim to being colorized.

Grant in Gunga Din was next followed by at least three John Wayn greats--Fort Apache, Sands of Iwo Jima and Rio Grande. Those were by far-the best-looking of the turner colorized films-though Sands of Iwo Jim still needed much improvement. One thing I did like about it being colorize was the fact that you could easily make it out the "Herringbone Twilll" patern Marine uniforms a bit easier.

 

I believe jughead suggested punishment, not a totally inhumane act...

I have a fair pile of Laurel & Hardy dvds, which feature many colorized versions I've only ever managed to watch part of one, mainly because the technology wasn't that good.

The surprising bit about this one is the technology seems a lot better, so I wouldn't mind giving it a go. It'd deffo go down well with the younger folk who seem to have great difficulty with B&W even as a concept, let alone watching it.

 

If colorization is what it takes to get these young folk to watch some of these old B&W classics then that is what it takes. I have noticed my own kids do not tolerate B&W well at all-it's like it hurts their eyes or something.

 

I like both B&W and Color about equally. I prefer to see those filmed in B&W to be so-and if im watching an old gritty Western or War Movie in B&W--i'd rather it stay that way.

My Sister and Brothers are the opposite of me and can't stand
anything not in color and not older than maybe 20 years. All I can say is that they are the ones missing out and not us ;-))

As im typing this, im watching something with Red Skeleton that is being shown on PBS. So far, a very youngish Carol Burnett and Lyle Waggoner-have been in some of his skits. Currently Lyle Waggoner is doing one with Skelton being Clem Kaddiddlehopper (SP?)

 

the longest day is a classic war movie and it being colourized does not matter to me or other fans of the longest day

 

Personally I would have it on the curriculum of every school, the film has its flaws, but what film doesn't. Just what film could actually protray that day which every person is agreed is accurate and was happy with. I am not a Duke fan, but even though some of the acting is not the greatest (The Duke is not at his best here) it still provides some of the most accurate dipictions of the D-Day we will ever get. Especially since the even greater influence that Hollywood has on the History, if it does not suit the cinema focus groups that Hollywood employs then they feel quite free to irradicate the truth from the story and just make it up to suit the cinema going public. Just look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U-571_(film) for instance - although no doubt this has been greatly discussed in the past on these forums so nothing new then.