Customer Discussions > King Kong forum

Did they do a new restoration for the Blu Ray?

Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-21 of 21 posts in this discussion
Initial post: Aug 25, 2010 11:22:13 AM PDT
M. Gaudet says:
Or is it Just the same master used for the last DVD release.

Technology has come further along since then, with the beautiful Transfer wizard of Oz got i was hoping they restored this as far as possible. Not when i refer to restoration i don't mean dumping an old video master to disc after using a dvnr process on it.

Posted on Sep 24, 2010 1:32:24 PM PDT
Joshua Luna says:
The last DVD was from 2005, they definitely remastered this for blu-ray.

In reply to an earlier post on Sep 29, 2010 4:54:16 PM PDT
P. Reilly says:
The Blu-ray quality of this film (1933 King Kong) is grainy and horrible. I'm quite shocked that more fans of the 1933 King Kong film have not spoken out about the awful Blu-ray transfer. It is (unfortunately) almost unbearable to watch.

Posted on Sep 29, 2010 11:38:37 PM PDT
LP Quagmire says:
For a movie that's seventy-seven years old, KING KONG looks surprisingly good on blu-ray.

Posted on Oct 2, 2010 5:46:05 PM PDT
BeastNYC says:
The General looks way better than this King Kong and The General is older. Shame on Warner Bros!!!

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 14, 2010 9:35:55 AM PST
Last edited by the author on Dec 14, 2010 9:38:16 AM PST
Casey62 says:
The blu-ray of THE GENERAL is off the camera negative. KING KONG's camera negative is gone. That said, KONG on blu-ray still looks darn good; better than ever, and as good as it is ever likely to get.

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 14, 2010 5:24:01 PM PST
LP Quagmire says:
"KING KONG's camera negative is gone. That said, KONG on blu-ray still looks darn good; better than ever, and as good as it is ever likely to get."

Unless there's a copy of the negative buried somewhere on Skull Island, I agree.

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 31, 2011 3:04:01 PM PDT
John Hogg says:
hi i am with you i sat down to watch this film and turned it off i could not watch it my original 60th anniversary edition was far better who do me make comments to this is pure dul crap and a costly item

Posted on Jan 10, 2013 4:12:12 PM PST
FlannMann says:
With regards to the original camera negative being gone. It was cut up and placed in acrylic as part of the 60th anniversary VHS box set. I actually have one of these pieces. It's 3 frames of kong on top of the Empire State Building, right before he falls. Really cool, glad I have it. I personally like the film grain. But I can understand why some people don't. I've seen certain films where I thought the blu ray transfer was a little too clean. Particularly the godfather part 1 blu ray comes to mind, and others where it looked fantastic, the wizard of oz blu ray for instance. I think it's all a matter of taste really. But I'm sure they will rerelease kong on blu ray again with a more remastered transfer. Just look at how many DVD or VHS releases it had.

Posted on Jan 16, 2013 3:41:12 PM PST
Last edited by the author on Nov 19, 2013 10:33:18 AM PST
Charlie says:
FlannMann, you don't have frames from the original negative! The boxset you mentioned included frames from a film PRINT of Kong, but certainly not from the original negative. They wouldn't destroy the only original copy, and just a glimpse at the film frames will show you that it's a positive, not a negative image. Just FYI.
Glad you like the blu-ray -- I do too!

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 25, 2013 9:37:25 PM PST
FlannMann says:
Ok. Could you explain the archival master negative it says posted on it? It does look like a positive rather than a negative. Could be that they just labeled it differently to make it sound cooler to collectors.

Posted on Jan 26, 2013 11:38:06 AM PST
[Deleted by the author on Jan 26, 2013 12:47:44 PM PST]

Posted on Jan 26, 2013 12:46:40 PM PST
Charlie says:
You've got me -- I didn't realize it was a negative image on your clip. Still though, it would certainly have to be duplicate negative, perhaps one they made from the master print they assembled. Can you imagine a movie studio destroying something as valuable as the original camera negative - leaving themselves completely unable to EVER make another print from it - to include a few frames as a collectible on a VHS set? The original negative would be of great value for future releases, restorations, etc.
In any case the original negative is supposed to be long gone. I imagine you have frames of a modern one made from a print. Bear in mind, I'm not an expert on what you have -- I have no insider knowledge here - but no studio would destroy the ORIGINAL camera negative for a collectable. Either way it sounds like a cool collectible!

Posted on Jan 26, 2013 7:40:24 PM PST
FlannMann says:
I've tried to do some research on it but I come up with nothing every time. My guess is its off the master print. Now if I can just find a sideshow King Kong armature to put next to said film cells....

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 26, 2013 11:01:51 PM PST
Charlie says:
I've seen the original one! Monster movie memorabilia collector Bob Burns has one of the original armatures in his collection. The rabbit fur and cloth "muscles" are one gone, but the steel armature still exists. It was only about 18" tall!
I have some Sideshow classic monster figures, but not the Kong armature. I didn't know they made them until I read your post. Very cool!

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 27, 2013 8:10:41 PM PST
FlannMann says:
Yeah they only made about 500 of them plus a few production models. There is one on ebay right now but it is waaaaay outside of my college kid budget. I guess ill just have to live with my mcfarlane king kong figure for now. Ive seen several videos on bob burns king kong on youtube. I envy you to have been able to hold that history piece of movie magic.

Posted on Feb 26, 2013 1:05:00 PM PST
I finally cracked the cellophane shrink wrap on my Kong blu-ray (book version) and played it because I'm creating a new King Kong movie poster. YIKES! It's like watching the film through the middle of a sandstorm! I've never seen so much grain in a print! Apparently, blu-ray does not handle mist or smoke well --- and there's mist throughout nearly all of the pre-New York sequences (most of the film). I noticed the same problem with "The Island of Lost Souls" blu-ray. Horrible, even though it's Criterion! I guess I'll have to stick with my laser discs. Both films look astounding on laser.

In reply to an earlier post on Apr 2, 2014 7:13:29 AM PDT
you are correct one of the worst blurays I ever seen there is so much grain the picture is unwatchable

In reply to an earlier post on Apr 2, 2014 7:16:17 AM PDT
sorry skull island took a voyage to the bottom of the sea in son of kong but maybe peter jackson will do a remake of son or maybe king kong vs godzilla

Posted on Apr 2, 2014 7:58:22 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on Apr 2, 2014 10:36:55 AM PDT
Charlie says:
Other than the fog scenes on the ship, the grain just isn't that bad. I suspect that those who find it "unwatchable" have your TV set to vivid" or "sports" or some similar high-contrast setting, and/or have the sharpness cranked up. The sharpness control adds nothing but video noise to a hi-def picture -- it should be set very low or off completely. Watched on the "movie" or "cinema" setting (which is most accurate TV setting) at a normal viewing distance it's an excellent disc.
Do bear in mind that this is an 80 year old film with massive amounts of FX work and no surviving original negative. However, even brand new it would have had grain and other picture anomalies caused by the FX methods of the day.
Judging by the amount of detail in the picture -- check out some of the jungle footage! -- this is easily the best this film has ever looked on home video. The DVD and laser disc had less visible grain because they had less visible EVERYTHING. The level of detail just can't compare.

Posted on Apr 2, 2014 11:26:25 AM PDT
Oh I see I happen to like the Blu-ray also because it has everything on one disc the film and the great special features the grain like you said on skull island is very bad you would think that they would of used some dnr there thanks for your input.
‹ Previous 1 Next ›
[Add comment]
Add your own message to the discussion
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Prompts for sign-in


This discussion

Discussion in:  King Kong forum
Participants:  12
Total posts:  21
Initial post:  Aug 25, 2010
Latest post:  Apr 2, 2014

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.
Tracked by 5 customers

Search Customer Discussions
This discussion is about
King Kong (Special 60th Anniversary Edition with Documentary) [VHS]
King Kong (Special 60th Anniversary Edition with Documentary) [VHS] by Fay Wray (VHS Tape - 1999)
4.7 out of 5 stars   (604)