Restored My Fair Lady in theaters

[Steve C.]

Posted: 10/25/15 at 6:47pm

Has anyone seen the restored My Fair Lady that is currently being shown in certain cities. What did you think? Is it that different and has the color been restored correctly? It hits town here on Wednesday and I'm still trying to decide to go or not. The Gavotte at the racetrack has always been one of my favorite scenes, the gorgeous costumes, and then at the Ball. It is well worthy of its' Oscars. Thanks

[Fantod]

Posted: 10/25/15 at 10:06pm

Here is the Blu-Ray.com review of the restoration:

 

What a difference a restoration makes. As far as "undesirable" transfers go, My Fair Lady's 2011 Blu-ray debut wasn't the worst in the world. Hardly crumbling around the edges or destroyed by grossly excessive noise reduction, the image definitely showed room for improvement but made for, at worst, a watchable picture of a classic film. But the difference between "watchable" and "practically perfect" is striking.  My Fair Lady has undergone a full restoration courtesy of Blu-ray.com member and Film Historian/Preservationist Robert A. Harris, whose recent work on Spartacus is nothing short of a treasure. That holds here, too.  My Fair Lady's restored 1080p transfer is a revelation. The 2.20:1-framed image (as opposed to the 2011 release's 2.39:1 framing) reveals the movie like never before, yielding a picture so pristine that watching is practically like seeing the movie for the first time.  

The transfer is home to a gorgeously fine grain structure, a constant companion that's exacting in evenness across every frame and dazzling in its ability to preserve and convey that desirable pinpoint filmic texturing. The details underneath are terrific. The 65mm source photography has been restored in 4K from an 8K scan, resulting in a fastidious image that reveals every fine appointment throughout the film, whether in Higgins' warmly furnished home, the dreary gray-dominant London streets, or the sunny bright racetrack. Clothing textures are meticulously presented and are substantially sharper and more refined than seen in the previous release. The transfer reveals practically every stitch and seam and each costume's unique textures. There couldn't be a finer tribute to Cecil Beaton's Oscar-winning costumes. The racetrack sequence is particularly special, even as there's not a lot of color variety. White, black, and gray dominate, but the variations in contrasting shades of white and gray are striking and, again, revealing of the costumes' finest textures that make the biggest difference in one's visual enjoyment of all the sequence has to offer. The transfer expectedly handles the brightest costumes remarkably well. Primaries pop beautifully, with lavish pinks and purples amongst the highlights. The Henry Higgins interiors are beautiful as well, yielding an inviting warmth that's substantially more nuanced and exacting in this release. 

Even the bleak and dark London street sequences at the beginning look amazing. Overhead shots, for example, reveal the finest intimate textures on the brick street, impressive considering the black and gray dominant colors and source lighting. It's in the open where the most demanding viewers might find reason to pause. A slight "blooming" or "glow" appears on bright white shirts contrasted against black jackets and satin collars. It was in these scenes that Mr. Harris encountered his biggest challenge. He told Blu-ray.com, "The single most difficult factor in both films, was holding pure blacks and whites...from a faded element. Even more so is the bit of air above the pure black in tuxedoes, vs the black of the satin collars...it's filtration, moving toward the look of pre-panchromatic film stock. In some ways, especially the way in which Mr. Hyde-White's shirt 'glows,' it takes us back to Al Jolson's gloves in the Orthochromatic days of The Jazz Singer. Harry Stradling, the (My Fair Lady) DP, began his career in the '20s, with orthochromatic stock, and probably liked some of the attributes, which he continued to use via filtration."

[Roscoe]

Posted: 10/26/15 at 11:02am

This is one of those cases where I'm glad they've done the restoration, but there's just no f*cking way I'd ever sit through this ever again -- one of the very very worst films ever made.

[Fantod]

Posted: 10/26/15 at 11:12am

I think worst film of all time is a bit harsh, no? Have you ever had the misfortune of watching Plan 9 From Outer Space or The Room?

[henrikegerman]

Posted: 10/26/15 at 11:39am

 "one of the very very worst films ever made."

Ok, I'll bite.  Why would anyone say that?  Other than for effect?  Also, why, if you really feel that way, would you be glad they did the restoration?

Updated On: 10/26/15 at 11:39 AM

[Roscoe]

Posted: 10/26/15 at 11:51am

Well, folks like it, so why not restore it.

As for the rest -- yeah, it's a pretty dreadful film.  Lifeless, miscast, and ploddingly dull in execution.  

[best12bars]

Posted: 10/26/15 at 3:47pm

Here's 40 screenshots on Blu-ray.com. Looks like a fantastic restoration. I'm so glad they fixed the ratio as well. I thought everyone looked slightly squatty in the first release (and nearly all previous releases). That seems to have been fixed here.

 

And who wants a squatty Audrey Hepburn anyway? You have to work hard to make her look squatty.

 

Blu-ray.com screenshots/

[ChgoTheatreGuy]

Posted: 10/26/15 at 4:58pm

Worst film seems to be harshly critical.  You have someone recreating their Broadway role and the only criticism I would have would be Jack Warner decision to not use Julie Andrews in the film (she got the last laugh by winning the Oscar for "Mary Poppins".  I would have loved to have seen her in the film.  I think that this film is one of the best movie musicals ever.

[MichelleCraig]

Posted: 10/26/15 at 4:59pm

It has scored a 96% on Rotten Tomatoes; that's the critics weighing in. However, the film has a 90% consumer rating on Rotten Tomatoes which is an average of 186,295 people like you and me voting. One of the worst films of all time? Hardly.

Is Rotten Tomatoes the last word in movie ratings? No...but it's a pretty good barometer.

[Steve C.]

Posted: 10/26/15 at 5:12pm

Thank you all for of the varying "degrees" of opinion; and thanks for the screenshots B12B. I read the lengthly review and I'm kind of going with that. I bought my tickets for   Wednesday night. I never realized that someone would actually hate this movie. I would think you could enjoy the songs, beautiful costumes and sets if other parts felt uneven to you. I've met Marni Nixon at Strathmore and she was lovely and only had lovely things to sat about AH. I still think it's a special film that would never ever be made in today's movie universe. I too agree about the Julie Andrews thing but you have to admit this is such a departure for Audrey Hepburn and I think she is great.

[Wilmingtom]

Posted: 10/27/15 at 2:06am

Why, I wonder, would someone who evidently loaths this film click onto this thread?

[henrikegerman]

Posted: 10/27/15 at 8:02am

^He explained that: because he hates the film but is gladdened by its restoration.  

[MichelleCraig]

Posted: 10/28/15 at 11:19am

Interesting piece on MY FAIR LADY! Crazy to see how long some of these films stayed in theatres before the age of home video...

http://thedigitalbits.com/columns/history-legacy--showmanship/my-fair-lady-50th

[ChgoTheatreGuy]

Posted: 10/28/15 at 1:55pm

I went to see the 1994 re-release in theatres with someone I was dating at the time, the film went into the intermission and he turned to me and said, "This is one of the best films I have ever seen!".  He was also not one to really get into musicals either...

[best12bars]

Posted: 10/28/15 at 5:13pm

I saw it in Century City in Los Angeles for the 1994 restored re-release. The theatre was full for a matinee, and Spielberg, Capshaw, and their kids all sat in the row in front of us.

 

I was starstruck, but mostly by the stars on the screen. This was a huge 70mm presentation, and the big surprise seeing this film in front of the large audience was how much it belonged to Rex Harrison. Audrey was lovely and her charisma was larger than life, but Rex got all the audible laughs, groans, chuckles, and growls. Comedies play differently (usually better) with an audience in the movie theatre, and this one was a revelation.

 

I had previously considered it "Audrey's movie," when watching it on TV, which was how I had been introduced to it. But that day in the movie theatre, it was "Rex's movie," hands down. I've never looked at it the same way since.

[DAME]

Posted: 10/28/15 at 5:26pm

OMG..   I WAS THERE!

[Mr Roxy]

Posted: 10/29/15 at 12:19am

To Michelle

 

In the 60's, roadshows were the big thing.  Two showings a day, reserved tickets, big screen. Movies had overtures, intermissions and end music. Some of the big picture palaces were still up in Times Square. The Capitol even had the last  10 rows removed and a full fledged Japanese garden with wooden bridges , ponds and fish were put in its place.Sadly it all came down when the theater was torn down.

 

 

Those were the days

Updated On: 10/29/15 at 12:19 AM

[degrassifan]

Posted: 11/4/15 at 2:28pm

I saw My Fair Lady in theaters a few weeks ago and it was a great experience!! Watching it on the big screen, I realized that Rex Harrison was truly the star of the picture! Has anyone realized that Eliza does not say one word from "Move your bloomin' arse" to "Here are your slippers!"? It's crazy! Also, I've seen it so many times, but I didn't realize how hilarious the movie was and how sexist Higgins was. Watching it with an audience changes your point of view. Another thing I realized was how stagey the film was. It was begging to be opened up visually. Moreover, while Audrey was great, I wish we could see what Julie Andrews would've done with the role on screen. How loverly it would've been for Andrews to do Mary Poppins, My Fair Lady, and The Sound of Music! 

 

Anyway, it was a great film! If it comes to your city, definitely go see it. I saw Oklahoma! last night on the big screen and that was a great experience as well. 

[Someone in a Tree2]

Posted: 11/4/15 at 10:47pm

"I saw it in Century City in Los Angeles for the 1994 restored re-release."

 

I happily join DAME and Best12Bars in saying I was there too! I had just moved to LA in April '94 and the treat of seeing perhaps my favorite film musical of all time in a well-restored (for the era) 70mm print was the best of all possible worlds to me. What a strange subterranean space that movie theater was that shared a mini-mall plaza with the Shubert Theater! (All long gone now and replaced with the CAA Headquarters.)

 

And that's why I rushed out to see this new restoration the first weekend it was out in theaters here in LA. Gotta tell you the image was demonstrably more rich and clear than last time-- just the best it's ever looked since it's release in 1964 (which yes, I was also lucky enough to see in the movie theater at the time). And thanks to Bestie for posting those ravishing screen grabs.

 

Just seeing those sets and costumes onscreen again inspired me to shell out the $14 on amazon for the canny little book written by Cecil Beaton called "Beaton's Fair Lady". Anyone obsessed with the look of that film would do well to check out his witty, detail-laden day-by-day diary of the designing and fabricating of those gorgeous sets and costumes. (Of course, Beaton took far too much credit for the sets, which were in fact executed by his superlative Art Director Gene Allen, a genius at Art Direction who just passed away a couple of weeks ago, and never got the respect he deserved for those pitch-perfect designs.)

 

[CarlosAlberto]

Posted: 11/9/15 at 3:48pm

Gene Allen did get the respect and ultimately the credit for his work on the film's set designs. I clearly remember them addressing this in one of the documentary's that were produced for the 1994 restoration and included with the home video release. 

 

As talented as Beaton was that was really a bitchy move. Sure the credit was contractual, but still....