Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: 007 only 1.0?

my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home

»	Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE » Community » Film-Yak » 007 only 1.0?

Author

Topic: 007 only 1.0?

Michael Schaffer
"Where is the
Boardwalk Hotel?"

Posts: 4143
From: Boston, MA
Registered: Apr 2002

posted 08-30-2002 06:11 PM

Last night I watched the DVD edition of "Goldfinger". While the disc is nicely done - they even put on a director`s commentary after so many years - the soundtrack was only in mono. Since the Bond movies were (and still are) major productions, I wonder if there was no stereo soundtrack?
Michael

| IP: Logged

Claude S. Ayakawa
Film God

Posts: 2738
From: Waipahu, Hawaii, USA
Registered: Aug 2002

posted 08-30-2002 06:57 PM

"DR NO", "FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE", "GOLDFINGER" were released in a flat aspect ratio and the remaining ones with Sean Connery and the only one with George Lazenby in "ON HER MAJESTY'S SECRET SERVICE" were released in scope but only in mono sound. Stereo was used for the fist time when Roger Moore became Bond. It is possible to turn a mono soundtrack into stereo as long as there are seperate sound elements for music, dialogue and sound effects. This method however do not sound very good if the music was recorded in mono. If the music track was in multi track stereo and new sound effects tracks was created, the results can be stunning. It is very expensive to do this so this is the reason why many films that had a mono track when they played in a theatre is released in mono on DVD. A classic example how great a mono sound film can be in remixed stereo is the original "TERMINATOR.

-Claude

| IP: Logged

Michael Coate
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1904
From: Los Angeles, California
Registered: Feb 2001

posted 08-30-2002 06:58 PM

quote:
Last night I watched the DVD edition of "Goldfinger". While the disc is nicely done, the soundtrack was only in mono. Since the Bond movies were (and still are) major productions, I wonder if there was no stereo soundtrack?

The first three 007 movies (Goldfinger being the third) were not really "big" productions. The budgets and scale of the productions didn't increase until movie number four (Thunderball). *Most* movies in the 1960s were mixed and released in mono. In addition, movies in the action-adventure genre weren't considered to have much "prestige" (has the genre ever?). So, yes, Goldfinger is mono. However, there *are* people who believe Goldfinger and some of the other 007 productions (pre-Dolby Stereo era) were in stereo.

quote:
they even put on a director`s commentary after so many years

The commentary tracks on the DVD originally appeared on the Special Edition laserdisc version released in the mid 1990s.

The DVD versions and their original language soundtrack (Region 1):

Dr. No - Dolby Digital 2.0 Mono
From Russia With Love - Dolby Digital 2.0 Mono
Goldfinger - Dolby Digital 2.0 Mono
Thunderball - Dolby Digital 5.1
You Only Live Twice - Dolby Digital 2.0 Mono
On Her Majesty's Secret Service - Dolby Digital 2.0 Mono
Diamonds Are Forever - Dolby Digital 2.0 Mono
Live And Let Die - Dolby Digital 2.0 Mono
The Man With The Golden Gun - Dolby Digital 2.0 Surround
The Spy Who Loved Me - Dolby Digital 5.1
Moonraker - Dolby Digital 5.1
For Your Eyes Only - Dolby Digital 5.1
Octopussy - Dolby Digital 2.0 Surround
A View To A Kill - Dolby Digital 5.1
The Living Daylights - Dolby Digital 5.1
Licence To Kill - Dolby Digital 5.1
GoldenEye - Dolby Digital 5.1
Tomorrow Never Dies - Dolby Digital 5.1
The World Is Not Enough - Dolby Digital 5.1 (Surround EX)

This is how it may have happened theatrically:

Dr. No - mono
From Russia With Love - mono
Goldfinger - mono
Thunderball - mono
You Only Live Twice - mono
On Her Majesty's Secret Service - mono
Diamonds Are Forever - mono
Live And Let Die - mono
The Man With The Golden Gun - mag stereo
The Spy Who Loved Me - mag stereo
Moonraker - Dolby Stereo
For Your Eyes Only - Dolby Stereo
Octopussy - Dolby Stereo, 70mm Six-Track Dolby Stereo
A View To A Kill - Dolby Stereo
The Living Daylights - Dolby Stereo
Licence To Kill - Dolby Stereo SR
GoldenEye - DTS, Dolby Digital
Tomorrow Never Dies - DTS, Dolby Digital
The World Is Not Enough - DTS, SDDS, Dolby Digital (Surround EX)

But then....

* Mag stereo may have been used as early as From Russia With Love.

* Thunderball and You Only Live Twice *might* have had some 70mm six-track prints internationally.

* Moonraker, For Your Eyes Only, A View To A Kill, and The Living Daylights *might* have had some 70mm six-track Dolby prints (domestically and/or internationally).

| IP: Logged

Brad Miller
Administrator

Posts: 17775
From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall)
Registered: May 99

posted 08-30-2002 07:06 PM

This does NOT belong in this forum. Please check the forum descriptions. Moving

| IP: Logged

Darryl Spicer
Film God

Posts: 3250
From: Lexington, KY, USA
Registered: Dec 2000

posted 08-30-2002 10:34 PM

Don't forget Never Say Never Again released around the same time as Octopussy. A remake of Thunderball I do believe. Released by Warner bros. not MGM, but still a Bond film none the less.

| IP: Logged

Michael Coate
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1904
From: Los Angeles, California
Registered: Feb 2001

posted 08-30-2002 10:41 PM

quote:
Don't forget Never Say Never Again

I (and many 007 fans, as well) don't consider Never Say Never Again to be an "official" 007 movie. But, if you insist....

Never Say Never Again
DVD: Dolby Digital 2.0 Surround
Original theatrical release: Dolby Stereo, 70mm Six-Track Dolby Stereo

And, since you brought it up:

Casino Royale
DVD (to be released October 15): Dolby Digital 5.1
Original theatrical release: mag stereo, 70mm six-track stereo

| IP: Logged

Paul Linfesty
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1383
From: Bakersfield, CA, USA
Registered: Nov 1999

posted 08-30-2002 10:57 PM

Was the Spy Who Loved Me released in mag in the US? I know the laser disc had a full directional dialog mix, but unfortunately, when I saw it at the Egyptian in 1977, it was only mono.

| IP: Logged

Michael Coate
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1904
From: Los Angeles, California
Registered: Feb 2001

posted 08-31-2002 01:00 AM

quote:
Was the Spy Who Loved Me released in mag in the US?

Don't know; probably not. (But then, United Artists had some mag prints of A Bridge Too Far in release at the same time, so anything is possible.) The London premiere was a 35mm four-track mag presentation. I wouldn't be surprised if that was the only print prepared.

In cases where mag prints may have been prepared, the number of engagements was probably extremely limited (and not just for 007 movies, but any mag stereo release). I knew my list would raise additional questions. Which is why I posted it, to see if the topic could be discussed in further detail.

| IP: Logged

Claude S. Ayakawa
Film God

Posts: 2738
From: Waipahu, Hawaii, USA
Registered: Aug 2002

posted 08-31-2002 01:38 AM

I have seen all of the pre Dolby James Bond films in theatres that had mag stereo sound systems including the Waikiki Twins but none of Bond film I saw in these theatres were in stereo. I am not saying there were no mag prints of any of the films mentioned by others on this thread but if there were, they did not play here in Hawaii. I am almost positive that "YOU ONLY LIVE TWICE" was released in mono everywhere because the laserdisc was in stereo but it was mixed from a mono sound source and was not very good. The DVD is in mono.

-Claude

| IP: Logged

Paul Linfesty
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1383
From: Bakersfield, CA, USA
Registered: Nov 1999

posted 08-31-2002 02:09 AM

I saw one of the mag stereo prints of A BRIDGE TOO FAR at the UA Cinema Center in Westwood. Unadvertised, though. I took the chance assuming that since the film was advertised in stereo in Northern California, then it would play in an LA firstrun in stereo as well. Same with THE DEEP at the Vogue.

| IP: Logged

Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."

Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001

posted 08-31-2002 12:15 PM

I think the differing aspect ratios is one of the weird, inconsistent things about the Bond films. The first three were flat and the rest of Connery's efforts were 'scope. The first two Roger Moore versions ("Live and Let Die" and "The Man With The Golden Gun") were flat --the photography work on those films was in spherical form and not framed for Techniscope. All of the Bond movies made since then have been shot in Panavision anamorphic.

| IP: Logged

Michael Schaffer
"Where is the
Boardwalk Hotel?"

Posts: 4143
From: Boston, MA
Registered: Apr 2002

posted 08-31-2002 04:28 PM

I believe I once read that there was also a Bond movie before "Dr.No", but I don`t remember the title.
Michael

| IP: Logged

Paul Linfesty
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1383
From: Bakersfield, CA, USA
Registered: Nov 1999

posted 08-31-2002 05:06 PM

Bobby Henderson wrote:

quote:
I think the differing aspect ratios is one of the weird, inconsistent things about the Bond films.

I think Michael Coate's point about the low budget nature of the first three Bond films have something to do with them being shot flat. After the large success of the first two and the huge success of the third, budgets shot up starting with Thunderball, hence, "scope" photography. I'm guessing here, but perhaps the dissappointing returns on Her Majesty's Secret Service (without Connery) caused them to cut the budget again for the next non-Connery Bond films with Roger Moore that followed the Conery return in Diamonds Are Forever.

quote:
the photography work on those films was in spherical form and not framed for Techniscope.

I'm not sure why they ever would be "framed" for Techniscope. Usually Techniscope was used on films with much smaller budgets than even the first few Bond films, and usually, they would frame for the entire "scope" like image of the two-perf pulldown format.

Michael Schafer wrote:

quote:
I believe I once read that there was also a Bond movie before "Dr.No", but I don`t remember the title.

You may be thinking of a TV special of CASINO ROYALE made in the late 50's. This is to be included in the Region 1 release of the 60's feature this Fall.

| IP: Logged

Hillary Charles
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 748
From: York, PA, USA
Registered: Feb 2001

posted 08-31-2002 07:55 PM

The tv version of "Casino Royale" appeared on an episode of a CBS anthology show called Climax (or Climax Theater), and aired in 1953. It starred Barry Nelson as an American(!) James Bond, and Peter Lorre as the villian LeChiffre.

| IP: Logged

Bill Gabel
Film God

Posts: 3873
From: Technicolor / Postworks NY, USA
Registered: Jan 2002

posted 09-03-2002 09:47 AM

Remember the first three Bonds: "Dr. No", "From Russia with Love" and
"Goldfinger" were 1.75 ratio. And United Artists gave these pictures
a regional release, here in the states. "Dr. No" and "From Russia with
Love" got the series going, but "Goldfinger" got the public asking
for more. Also remember UA had Bond almost every year, till the
budgets and pictures got bigger. United Artists gave "Dr. No", I think the B position on double bills when it was released. (Like what UA gave to "The Magnificent Seven". UA placed "Mag.7" also a B feature in the regional drive-in market, it did poorly. It opened in Europe and became a big hit. UA re-released in the states and it became a hit here). During that time UA would dump pictures as part of a double feature in walk-ins or drive-ins.

The first 12 Bond look at the years.

"Dr. No" 1962
"From Russia with Love" 1963
"Goldfinger" 1964
"Thunderball" 1965
"You Only Live Twice" 1967
"On Her Majesty's Secret Service" 1969
"Diamonds Are Forever" 1971
"Live and Let Die" 1973
"The Man with the Golden Gun" 1974
"The Spy Who Loved Me" 1977
"Moonraker" 1979
"For Your Eyes Only 1981"

The Director of "On Her Majesty's Secret Service" and Editor of the
first 6 and Best Bonds. Peter Hunt passed away last week in Santa Monica, California.

| IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

Printer-friendly view of this topic

The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.