questionscolorized movies...are you a fan?


I am not a fan, for the same reasons as you.


I agree with @carl669 and @rprebel, though I have an anecdote to add...

When I was little, and being taught that colorizing was bad, one example that was used was White Christmas. The colors being oversaturated and cartoonish, it was easy to see why such things were evil.

Of course, lo and behold, with the availability of movie technical data thanks to another Amazon company (IMDb), I now know it was actually shot in technicolor, and apparently just had really bad processing. Funny that.

(cue the "The more your know...." jingle)


I would be if they colorized them in a purposefully wrong, and funny way.


@dmaz: hey do you have steam? if so send me a message, I owe you a gift and I'm finally getting around to cashing in on that. Steam: Mynameisjohndaker


@cowboydann: Cool deal! Just made an account. I've been long overdue to get involved in Steam anyhow :) ....your friend limit is exceeded though, guy. See if you can find me. I'm WangMangler.
PS: Sorry Carl for all of my off-topic jibber jabber


I'm not a fan. I like to think that movies are like books and that directors are like authors. I want to see the original artist's vision - not something manipulated and reworked after the fact. Just like you wouldn't change a great literary work, I despise it when they go back and re-edit films, colorize them, or change endings. Once the film is made, it should be left untouched, I believe.

I love Star Wars, but I still haven't bought it on DVD or BluRay because every new release is different. I don't really care who shot first, but Lucas needs to decide what kind of film it is and just stick to it.

I guess Spielberg finally figured this out - he said so much in an interview after the re-release of ET, where he had made some edits. For the subsequent releases (like the new release of ET on BluRay), he put out the original theatrical version.


Not a fan. If it was done in B&W then leave it that way.
That would be like them releasing the original Clerks in color. Would ruin the movie.


Yet another person chiming in saying no to colorization. I'll also say no to 3d-izing a movie that wasn't shot in 3D - even if the director is involved and it's for the original release.

But I am OK with the remastering they've done on Seinfeld. They went back to the original film, scanned it in high resolution, but cropped it to 16:9 instead of 4:3. They did an excellent job of it, and very rarely was a shot too close-cropped to look good at the new ratio. And keep in mind, that show wasn't shot in any especially artistic way. It's a sitcom and the visuals aren't as integral to the story.

Oh, that reminds me. I'm also against watching 4:3 material stretched to fill a widescreen TV. People, fix your TV settings.


@dmaz: it was worth it just because your Steam name is WangMangler.


I remember when they colorized "Night of the Living Dead." The dramatic zombie reveal in the graveyard was ruined by the zombie's skin being colored almost lime green, meaning that Barbara and her brother should have been able to see something was wrong from several yards away.

Not a fan.


@omnichad: Here here! I HATE when I'm at a friends house and something 4:3 is on stretched to fit 16:9. I remember one distinct time I fixed a friends to show black bars on a 4:3, and when the came back, complained that it didn't fill the TV and told me to switch it back because they hated black bars..... so I punched him in the face and ran away....


Not so much. I don't really notice movies in color are "in color" and I don't really notice b&w movies are in "black and white". But, I do notice with a B&W movie has fake color.