elf (04/08/83)
Lance Norskog points out that part of the charm of Laurel and Hardy is the contrast in their body shapes. He cleverly used the word "contrast". I think it's a moot point whether or not B&W is the ideal medium to emphasise these distinctions. Why? What you lose in going from B&W to colour may be offset by other advantages of colour. Who's to say since it hasn't been tried? In the long run, I agree that it's aesthetically silly to suggest that all b&w films be coloured, but some might benefit. Remember as well that the process can easily generalise to other more appealing applications like touching up prints, blending animation with film footage, etc. The ultimate in poor taste would be to suggest that movies filmed intentionally in b&w, like Last Picture Show, or Manhattan, be coloured. Hah! Wouldn't that send Woody for a spin! Eugene Fiume U of Toronto utcsrgv!elf
alain (04/15/83)
Manhattan can be coloured solid black, as far as I am concerned. Being subtle in colour takes a lot of time and talent. It took maybe twenty years for colour movies to forget about being coloured, and get down to the business of being good (slight exaggeration). Television took its sweet time too. Of course bad colour technology had something to do with it. But then again, the Parthenon used to be painted (in three colours, I was told), and finally mull over this one: it is precisely when in the United States coloured people started being called black that blach & white television became coloured. Now put that in your frame buffer, Eugene. Alain (Noir & Blanc) Fournier. utzoo!utcsrgv!alain.
dave (04/21/83)
The Elephant Man was definitely a much better film for being done in stark b&w.