Should The Beatles' A Hard Day's Night Be Colorized for a New Generation To Enjoy?

I mean, I don’t even particularly want to watch it again, and I definitely don’t want to pay money to do so. It’s good, but I’ve seen it. I’m all set. Coloring it in doesn’t change that for me. Had I not already seen it, sure, I’d possibly watch the colorized version, but no more likely than I’d watch the existing version.

Again, I’m one of the Millennials who would supposedly be drawn to colorized versions of films that already look great in black and white…

 

Niche, yes. Getting smaller every year? Hmm... not so sure about that. It's a big world out there, and lots of people who have never even seen this fantastic film! New audience could be sizable; certainly enough to justify doing it.

 

I think not.

 

I haven’t seen the Criterion 4K restoration, but, assuming it’s as stunning as the Criterion 4K restorations I have seen of black and white films, that should serve as definitive for any generation going forward.

 

No. The German public broadcaster tried that with „Dinner For One“, a famous sketch that is shown on TV every New Year‘s Eve. After one colourized broadcast, they switched back to the black and white one because they were criticized by the audience.

 

This is not about replacing the original. The original b/w is great! No, this is just about having another viewing option. Think remixed albums as opposed to the original. The originals have not been replaced, it's just an additional option.

 

That’s a good point. A colourization would only be ok if the original in black and white is also available.

 

I’m not sure how you think colorizing a film is the same as remixing an album. It’s more like doing a techno “remix” that adds things not present on the recording.

 

No, but I hope Criterion releases it on a 4K UHD Blu-ray... along with "HELP!", and "HEAD" by the Monkees

 

True, it's not a perfect analogy, but the remixes do have some added sonics not present in the originals.

 

Not present in the original mixes, but present on the original tapes.

 

So, if they blackandwhiteised that "Yesterday" movie, do you think I'd enjoy it?

 

No, not present on the original tapes either.

 

This is news to me.

 

I don't think colourisation would be much of a factor in whether or not a new generation could be encouraged to enjoy A Hard Day's Night. There are many other things about that film that firmly anchor it in a period that is not easily recognisable to younger generations; adding a bit of colour won't change that. I say leave it as it is.

But, I do have two 'howevers': (1) a new generation might seek out the film if they've already experienced the music (no need to colourise it for them); (2) casually interested middle-aged and older generations might be more inclined to see it if colourised - it has always been older people, in my experience, who grumble about film and TV that isn't in colour.

 

I can confirm this. It is quite stunning.

 

The initial decision to shoot in black and white may have been to save money, but once the decision was made, the director and cinematographer deliberately composed the shots to look their best in black and white. Colorizing it would remove that level of artistic intent for no good reason. Additionally, while The Beatles are generally associated with bright, vivid colors (Yellow Submarine, Sgt. Pepper/MMT and all that), AHDN stands as a beautiful contrast that echoes the artistic sensibility of the With the Beatles cover. There is nothing to gain by colorizing AHDN and so much to lose.

 

Absolutely not.

 

This is kind of the point for me.

I do think there is a tendency to avoid something random when it is in black & white, but once you are actually interested in the subject matter, the fact that it isn't in color won't be a deal breaker.

Conversely, I believe the number of people who would suddenly be interested in the film because it would now be in color is fairly negligible. There would be more people interested just because of the controversy created than anything else.

Whether this is true or not, those of us who did not grow up with The Beatles (Gen X and beyond) tend to act like color film was invented in 1965. This is not television. Color and B&W films coexisted for a few decades before color took over.

As someone pointed out, people will do to it what they do to it and it will be consumed thusly.

Given that Help! exists and is visually appealing, I just don't see the point. If people want to colorize a music film, why not Deep Purple in Copenhagen 1972 or Rush in Passaic, NJ 1976? I think those would be more revelatory.

 

I will soon be dead - so my opinion doesn't matter.

 

I don't see there's anything to lose. All you're doing is gaining a color option for AHDN. The original B/W is not going anywhere. It will still be there for all to enjoy. Nothing is lost, only another option gained.

 

I didn’t say the B/W was going anywhere, but IMO letting audiences experience a needlessly diminished version of this movie does indeed mean something is lost. Still, kudos to you in your Quixotic quest to tilt at this very particular windmill.

 

No.

 

Someone earlier compared it to taking a mono recording and creating phony "reprocessed stereo".

That's the best analogy.

Mixes of songs aren't sacrosanct. I mean, look how many different mixes so many Beatles songs got in the 60s - a lot of times there's no one "true mix".

Movie photography isn't the same. "AHDN" was composed for B&W and that's it.

The remix comparisons just don't work...