Tuesday, July 19, 2011

Movies that were not shot in color should not have color added to them. Ever.

4 comments:

Nance said...

Oh, bravo! It was bad enough to see that they painted up "Miracle on 34th Street" like a cheap whore, but so help me, if I ever, EVER hear of anyone flinging so much as a pastel wash at "To Kill a Mockingbird", well, there is going to be An Incident.

That's all I can say without having to kill you.

S said...

Don't kill me, Nance! I'm on your side. I saw an add for a collection of Shirley Temple movies that had color added and it made me furious.

The "Miracle on 34th Street" one infuriates me no end. Just last Christmas, I was surfing through the channel guide and got excited when I saw that was one. You can imagine my intense horror when I flipped to it and saw Maureen O'Hara in a green suit! Gah!

I agree with you about "Mockingbird," but I think the one I would most lose my shit on would be "Psycho." Surely no one would ever think to colorize that, right? I mean, he chose to film it in black and white for a reason.

Ortizzle said...

Yep. There's a reason why some things need to be in B&W. When I first started doing B&W photography and developing my own stuff, etc., someone commented on my first collection of pics: "Gee, what a shame these aren't in color." That's the same kind of person who would enjoy the (gasp) colorized version of Casablanca. And it HAS been colorized.

S said...

No, Ortizzle, it HAS NOT BEEN! (Not in my world, anyway!) Just like there was never a sequel to Legally Blonde.

 
Blog Designed by : NW Designs