A List of blu-rays retroactively color timed toward teal (and adjusting your TV to watch them)

Just wanna make a list of older films that've been teal-ized lately. I assume the only way to battle this is to calibrate your TVs in warm or warm +1 modes when watching these titles to balance the teal out. I'm not sure how successful this is, but I'm really sick of classic titles being tampered with. This is the brickwalling of films. (Please note: this list doesn't apply to newer films with an original Orange & Teal color palette, just older films shoe-horned into the current look.)

Off the top of my head:

The French Connection (Signature Series 2012)
The Fellowship of the Ring
Scanners (Criterion)
Ran (Studio Canal 4K restoration)

 

Blade Runner: The Final Cut (although it reflects the "restoration" of it, but it ruins what the '82 and '92 cuts had)

 

I think there's some debate about Tarkovsky's Solaris having this, no?

 

Do all versions in the blu ray set have this?

 

Criterion has been doing this a lot lately unfortunately, which is why I bought the UK version of Cronenberg's blu ray for Scanners. I haven't seen a comparison for The Brood yet. (I already have the UK blu)

 

I believe it's just the Final Cut. I have the box set on DVD

 

Maybe this can help?

The Brood • UK Blu-ray vs. US Blu-ray »

BTW, did you mean the original BluRay of French Connection?

 

Here's a great list. This is why I'm sticking with many DVD's and not upgrading them


Orange and Teal, or How “Re-Mastering” is Distorting Our View of Classic Films - Not on Blu-ray »

 

Nope. There's still a teal lean to the "corrected" 2012 release. But it's way better than the 2009 debacle.

 

The Good, The Bad, & The Ugly. WOOOF!

 

how sad is this? thankfully I did not get rid of any of my DVDs when I upgraded...yea, right.

 

The most recent release of the original Terminator, I think.

 

The dynamic range compression of movies. Sigh.

 

Sad, sickening trend in movies. I've watched some old movies lately (the original prints, not this re-color timed ****), especially 70's and 80's and marvel, "Wow, COLORS! Full, living color!". It's so easy to forget.

 

I don't adjust my TV to watch them...I deal and try to avoid another...

 

LOL..my wife mention the fact that so many movies today look washed out with the orange and teal tones when a few years back they were overblown...the worst of both worlds...yea, the older movies when color was allowed to be full color!

 

Naw, there's a human being turning the knobs. This is not an automatic mode -- it's a deliberate choice by a person.

 

Human mastering engineers apply compression, I'm not sure why you think it is so different.

It is a decision to alter the the original work to adhere to a modern "standard" (specific color palette, loudness).

I think your point is that in many cases the director is involved in the decision to make it look different. I will agree. I think music artists are largely ignorant as to what is being done by the engineers where in this case it is a conscious decision by the artist.

Doesn't mean I have to like it any better. Adam Ant supposedly remastered Kings of the Wild Frontier for its latest release and it is a loud, compressed mess.

 

You never know. It may be a more complex problem: for example, in the case of a film, maybe the director never wanted the movie to look the way it was originally released. No less than Robert Wise told us (as an example) that he deliberately did not want a lot of The Sound of Music to look warm -- he wanted it cooled off. Fox had overruled him in 1965 and made the film warmish and chromatic, and he didn't want that. He got his way when the film was remastered for video in the 1990s. I'm not the guy to tell him no.

In the case of either color or compression, these are tools that go up and down and have a dozen (more like hundreds) of potential adjustments. It's not just one decision -- it's a series of decisions that hopefully work together. There's some major studios that typically look at the old transfer when a new master is prepared, and it's used as a guide when they know the director approved the first one. The hope is to keep them in the ballpark, but make the new one better. Sometimes, this doesn't happen... or the director says, "hell with it, I want it a different way." Friedkin, Michael Mann, George Lucas... there's a long list of directors who have the power to do that.

 

What! Chromatic heresy!

 

Just takes one click. I refuse to deal with cyan teeth and snow.

 

Yup. But I still question their artistic integrity when they all jump on the same bandwagon at the same time with revisionist re-color timed releases. I just cannot understand the logic behind everyone wanting their movies looking the same. I've mentioned this before but as good as Whiplash was it was unwatchable to me. So drainingly BORING to look at. As was the Bessie Smith biop featuring Queen Latifah and Avengers 2. (I only saw these films via other people on the plane watching them. Every airplane screen was a blur of Orange and Teal.)

That said a few of these directors blame the final product on the mastering house if they get too much backlash for the changes, pulling the old, "It looked fine when I was in the studio, they must've done something to it after I left." routine. *ahem* Cronenberg; Friedkin *

 

Anyway we need more titles for the list!

 

Thanks for posting, that's a good read. However I'm confused about some of the picture examples there. The one for Badlands, for example. It says the bottom one is the Criterion, and in the opinion of the writer, the bottom one is the "wrong one". However Martin Sheen's face looks more orange to me in the top picture, no? They aren't very big images, so its hard to see details. The grass color looks artificial in the bottom one, but Sheen himself looks better, to me.

 

Yeah, teeth and whites of eyes. I can't believe anyone intentionally colors things so that the whites of peoples eyes are aqua/teal. It just looks horrible.