I saw this movie in a colorized version and I can say that I was hugely disappointed. In the first place, colorization should be done. Also, the colorization was poorly done, you can tell from watching the version that it was originally shot in black and white. Certain things did not have consistent color in the movie (e.g., the color of the bed in the bedroom).
I just wish they'd stop bastardizing movies.
Suspicion (1941) is great in black and white. If they colorize the Classic Pictures in the future, then the movie will be losing certain values it has.
For example, if they colorize Arsenic and Old Lace in the future, then the film will lose its value and its touch of Dark Humor.
Actors like Gregory Peck, Burt Lancaster, and Orson Welles were against colorizing the Black and White Movies.
In 1980s, Ted Turner tried to Colorize the Citizen Kane (1941). This was the reply of Orson Welles.
[On Citizen Kane (1941) being colorized] "Keep Ted Turner and his goddamned Crayolas away from my movie."
I agree that colorizing a black and white classic movie is not being true to the film. The arguments for colorizing basically come down to two items: 1, Color was too expensive or not practical due to poor quality when the film was made. 2, Colorizing makes the film more lifelike because the world is not in black and white.
However, I have seen very few films where colorizing actually is any improvement. It is usually the younger audience who are used to color and think that black and white is old fashioned. Black and white is considered an art form. An example would be the black and white nature photography by Ansel Adams.
Orson Welles was correct!
Although I wouldn't object if some of the old series westerns had a bit of color! They are good, but not classics.
Why are certian Hitchcock films like, Rear Window, Dial M for Murder, and Rope (plus many more) colorized at all? I just don't understand why some of the earlier films were colorized and others weren't. Dial M for Murder is the only one that looks good colorized.
share
Turner only colorized Hitchcock's Suspicion. Others were really in color.
"Why are certian Hitchcock films like, Rear Window, Dial M for Murder, and Rope (plus many more) colorized at all?"
This is probably years late and who knows if you'll ever come back to this board, but those movies you mentioned were not "colorized," they were shot in color.
Can you honestly say that Vertigo and Marnie don't gain anything by being shot in color?
We plow deep while others sleep
I am strongly against colorized versions. They simply ruins the cinematography and atmosphere of the movie. Sometimes even the "tone" of the movie. Because something that looks credible in Black & White sometimes looks ludicrous in Color!
I just saw Mutiny on the Bounty (the Clark Gable and Charles Laughton's version) on TCM. I couldn't stand it! I turned off the TV after 30 min.
To colorize B&W movies should be considered a crime!
Ditto! Colorizing classic films is criminal.
shareThe B&W version! Because of "The glass of milk" scene (by placing a light bulb in the milk, the filmmakers made the contents appear to glow as the glass is carried upstairs by Johnnie).
I just saw the colorized version with my grandparents (I wanted B & W, but was out-voted) and thought it looked pretty bad throughout, except for the milk scene, I think that worked in colour as well. It featured a dark palette, which looked pretty good. Luckily the version I got at the library has both version, so I'll be able to watch the original soon, I'm sure it's a lot better!
share