MovieChat Forums > Doctor X (1932) Discussion > How about a DVD with BOTH versions?

How about a DVD with BOTH versions?

posted 19 years ago by BijouBob8mm
15 replies | jump to latest

With DOCTOR X's companion film, MYSTERY OF THE WAX MUSEUM now out on DVD (it's one of the bonus features on the Vincent Price version of HOUSE OF WAX), it would be nice to see this early Technicolor horror classic on DVD as well. They could double it up with the Black & White version filmed simultaneously. (Unlike HOUSE OF WAX, whose B&W print was taken from the same negative as the color version, DOCTOR X actually shot an alternate black and white version at the same time the color version was being filmed...a fact that annoyed Technicolor. A comparison of the two films shows various differences in camera angles, etc.) Perhaps, if there is room, they could even throw in the obscure Warner Brothers' RETURN OF DOCTOR X, notable as being Humphrey Bogart's only horror film.

[–] The-Silent-Photoplayer 19 years ago

There's too little difference between the two versions to warrent putting both films on the set, I believe. More likely would be DOCTOR X/RETURN OF DR X with perhaps some clips of the black and white version put in a special features gallery with the DR X trailer.

-J. Theakston
The Silent Photoplayer
http://www.thephotoplayer.com/

[–] BijouBob8mm 19 years ago

Even that would be a very welcome addition to the collection! (Cool site, by the way.)

[–] bok602 19 years ago

I disagree, the B&W version should be included in its entirety on any proposed DVD, if only to share the alternate performances from the actors (ANY performance by Lionel Atwill is worth watching again!).

And also to hopefully fill in the gaps of dialogue from the damaged color print.

There are several scenes where the film appears to have broken or been spliced and cut off the tail end of a sentence. Some of these may have been due to belated censorship issues, but I'd still like to hear whatever the alternate print has to say.

"If you don't know the answer -change the question."

[–] The-Silent-Photoplayer 19 years ago

There are relatively few alternate performances by any actors since the takes used are almost entirely the same (based on a recent side-by-side analysis a friend of mine did).

Dialogue can be filled in using existing vitaphone discs and "slugs". There are not that many bits missing at all, and those that are are near reel changes.

-J. Theakston
The Silent Photoplayer
http://www.thephotoplayer.com/

[–] otrfanotrfan 18 years ago

It is coming to DVD as part of HOLLYWOOD'S LEGENDS OF HORROR COLLECTION
due out October 10, 2006.

It includes:

Doctor X
The Return of Doctor X
Mad Love
The Devil-Doll
Mark of the Vampire
The Mask of Fu Manchu

plus it's loaded with trailers and commentaries

http://www.amazon.com/Hollywoods-Legends-Collection-Doctor-Vampire/dp/B000GRUQJW

[–] Harold_Robbins 17 years ago

Very curious - where can one find background info on the B&W version? It seems odd that they'd go to the expense of filming it twice (especially a studio as notoriously cost-conscious as Warner Bros.), as B&W prints could be struck from the color negative; alternate-language versions of films were made simultaneously at the time (such as the English-language BLUE ANGEL and the Spanish-language DRACULA) because dubbing had not yet come into play, but I've never heard of filming in both B&W and color. (In the 1950s Frank Sinatra was to appear in the film version of CAROUSEL, which someone had the idea of be filming in both standard-screen and Cinemascope versions [since not all theaters were equipped for Cinemascope] - Sinatra then decided that he should be paid twice, since this amounted to maked two films - that was the end of that. OKLAHOMA! was filmed twice, in Cinemascope and Todd-AO - there are small differences in some scenes, and the Todd-AO version is considered superior - however, Fox didn't do a clean-up of it when then included it on the 50th Anniversary DVD last year.)

"I don't use a pen: I write with a goose quill dipped in venom!"---W. Lydecker

[–] Regionarian 17 years ago

Aha-I wondered why the trailer that's included in the extras in the Horror Classics set was in B&W and made no mention of the movie being in color.

The film does look great and reminds me some of the hue of Sky Captain.

[–] bheck1 17 years ago

Has the B&W version been released on video? I have both the old MGM vhs and the new dvd. I agree that a new edition of Doctor X and Mystery should be released, possibly with a commentary for Mystery (Scott McQueen please) plus archival interviews with cast members from both films.

[–] hollywwood 17 years ago

Harold Robbins, The black and white version was the one that used to be shown on television before UCLA restored the color version. I've seen the black and white version many times. It is the exact same film as the color version. (The only difference might be that the black and white version didn't give Technicolor any mention during the opening credits.) I've read that a seperate camera, using black and white film, was rolling at the same time that the Technicolor camera was rolling. The actors didn't have to do their scenes twice because both cameras photographed identical footage during the same takes. As far as dubbing goes, the use of dubbing had been around since at least the late 1920's. Alfred Hitchcock had used dubbing in his 1929 film "Blackmail". He had been shooting the picture as a silent film with German actress Anny Ondra as the female lead. When the studio decided to turn the film into a "talkie", Hitchcock had Anny Ondra's dialouge dubbed by Joan Barry due to Ondra's thick German accent.

[–] bok602 17 years ago

I must differ.

According to the excruciatingly detailed write-up in American Cinematographer at the time of the UCLA restoration, there were two different filmings and two different sets of camera set-ups (frames from both versions were used to illustrate the differences).

The black and white version was not just a B&W reprint of the color version or just as side-by-side filming with B&W film. There appears to have been some conscious effort to alter the cinematography and (perhaps) direction with the B&W version.

"If you don't know the answer -change the question."

[–] hollywwood 17 years ago

bok602, I believe that you read that, but I'm not sure that it's true. I grew up watching the black and white version many times on television. It got to a point where even before I rewatched it, I could hear the tone of Atwill's voice when he pronounced the word "scalpel", and I could visualize Wray's unmistakable nervous gasp and reaction as she noticed Dr. Rowitz watching from the cliff. (As of now, I think that it would have been impossible for Atwill and Wray to have done these things the exact same way twice.) When I finally saw the UCLA restored color version, I felt that when I was a child, I had been seeing a black and white print of the color version all along. Then I read that the studio had two seperate cameras (one filming in color, the other filming in monochrome) which were shooting simultaneously side by side. So much conflicting information has been written about this subject in books, magazines, etc. I think that the only way that I'll ever be sure is if they release the black and white version so that I could make a definite comparison. I've got the black and white trailer from "Dr. X" on a DVD. The black and white footage used in that trailer seems to match the same footage from the color version identically.

[–] bok602 17 years ago

"Scal-pel," really was quite distinctive...

However, don't forget that the American Cinematographer artical cited also included comparative frames from both the b&w and color versions -and there were significant differences between the two.

"If you don't know the answer -change the question."

[–] hollywwood 17 years ago

bok602, I've looked at the black and white trailer again and I've compared the take where Lee Tracy is sitting at his boss's desk to the same scene in the color version of "Doctor X". They are different! I've found some info on-line which tells that most of the scenes in the two versions do use the same takes, though. According to what I've read, much of the footage from the color version wound up being used for the black and white version, too. A few slight changes between versions were Mae Busch's dialogue, and Lee Tracy's ad libbing with the skeleton. I feel like I've found a somewhat happy medium! Now, if they'd only release the black and white version on DVD..... P.S. My error in the last message. It was Doctor Haines on the cliff!

[–] Shroudx 17 years ago

There are some differences in the two versions. There's some different lines, as well as camera angles. Apparantly some scenes were re-shot and used in one version, and not the other. The differences are minute, and don't change the story at all. There are bootlegs of the B&W versions floating around.

[–] FilmKoala 10 years ago

As cool as it was from a historical standpoint to see this film in color (it's the oldest full-color film I've ever seen) I think the B&W version would be much better for enjoying the film itself. The color is extremely primitive and it ends up being a distraction; it just doesn't look that great in most spots. I really wish that the B&W version was available on the Hollywood Horror DVD set.