I have always preferred the colorized version of this movie, but the colorized version is rarely seen nowadays, and it has never been released on vhs or dvd (just the b&w version.
They should make a "special edition" dvd that contains both the original version and the colorized version.
I don't think there is a huge market for colorized movies anymore. I remember TCM used to advertise their big colorized movies until people complained and TCM caved in and started showing films in their original form.
Mecca
We should at least have the choice. I know that there are many other people like my family- and we all prefer the colorized versions of movies. And, since a colorized version already exists of this movie, both versions should be included on the dvd. (That's what they did on the dvds of "It's a Wonderful Life", "Miracle on 34th Street", "Night of the living Dead", and "Carnival of Souls".)
shareColorization is vandlism.
shareI agree 110% with Tony-358
shareI'm not much of a fan of colorization, but the argument goes that there are a lot of people who simply don't enjoy black and white films. I know people like that, and it's a shame they won't ever enjoy movies like A Patch of Blue. And all it takes is a few clicks of the remote control for people like us so see them without color if we wish.
And what about the restoration of severely faded prints? The restoration of Vertigo is gorgeous, but in places the restoration is so extensive that it does look like a colorized movie.
oh my goodness! so I'm not crazy! I remember first seeing this movie on TV a few years ago and I really loved it. A few months ago I decided to rent it & watch it again. I could've swore it had been in color when I saw it on TV, but the movie I rented was black & white. I was a bit confused! haha
& I agree, they should release the colorized version!
There's clips of the color version on youtube:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ikUbYAo8fJI
[deleted]
I usually condone to have colorized versions of films out there, but as I was watching this on TCM today, I really did enjoyed the fact that this film was in photographed in black and white, to add further subtext to the relationship between the black man and blind white woman. When I heard that this was colorized, I was shocked, as I felt the subtext was ruined. Now I'm beginning to see why many don't enjoy seeing black and white films colorized.
share[deleted]
I must say that it has gotten better since the 80's, but you do always have to take the subtext into consideration. Frank Capra was a condoner of colorization, until the studios found out It's A Wonderful Life was public domain and they didn't need Capra for the process. It was then when he sided against it. Now Ray Harryhausen is now the main condoner of having his films colorized, as he wanted to make his film in color, but was unable to. It was with today's colorizing technology that he decided to do it, as the early colorization process was not as good. Also, there is ALWAYS the option to watch the film unaltered.
share[deleted]
Remember... you have the option of watching the original unaltered version. It's ALWAYS interesting to take an alternate look at some of your favorite films, but making that one the DEFINITIVE edition of the film for all to see? No. Let there be a choice. Listening, LUCAS?!
share[deleted]
I agree with you. I love B&W films. This is because I tend to see things more clearly on the screen, aside from aesthetic reasons. When a film is B&W, it should be kept that way and not colorized. When I saw this film, I understood why it was shot in B&W and I liked it more because of that. I think Guy Green wanted to show that people saw and judged each other by B&W; but the girl, even though blind, could “see” past that.
shareFYI - Does anyone realise that Robert Burks was nominated for a Best Cinematography Academy Award. This film is brilliant in B&W!
Color had been available for decades when this film was made. The director made a deliberate choice to film in B&W, and discussed his decision in several interviews after the film came out (but long before people started colorizing movies). People seem to forget this; Technicolor has been around since 1935, and there were other color processes before that. There are even silent films with long color sequences-- the main reason there are not more color films from before 1935 is that the cameras were huge and heavy, and pretty much had to stay in one place for an entire scene. At any rate, any film post-1935 that was in B&W, and particularly one post-1950, was made so deliberately. It's a real disservice to the director's vision to colorize it.
shareI find it amazing that anyone who prefers colorized versions of classics was actually able to beat out a million other sperm.
share