Much has been talked and written about black & white movies versus color movies. Colorized movies are a different issue. The recently restored version of Alfred Hitchcock’s glorious “Rear Window” is a separate issue because it is a restoration NOT a colorized movie. It will be discussed later. The popular misconception among many movie goers is that black and white movies “cheat us”, and deprive the director of his artistic intent. Nothing could be further from the truth. Even though the first color film was “Becky Sharp” in 1932, most directors, even to this day, would rather have the option of filming a movie in black and white rather than just being forced by studio executives to film in color. Quite simply, black and white is harder to film than color films. But black and white films can also add a dimension and quality that color films cannot do. But that is only part of the issue. Black and white films have a more surreal and dream like quality which leaves so much more to the imagination than color films. In actuality, black and white is really a misnomer because it is about shades of gray. The lighting is more meticulous. Have you ever noticed late at night when switching channels, that you are more apt to pause when seeing a black and white movie to see what’s going on, yet passing a color movie by much faster? Black and white movies represent, not only a dreamlike world, but also represent an ethereal view of the world. Color represents “reality”. And, movies, as artistic endeavors besides being just entertainment, quite often attempt to delve into the inner mystery of the world and reality. Black and white movies allow light and shadows to work in an almost dreamlike fashion on our psyche. Color movies represent the immediate present, but black and white represent a certain timelessness. And black and white movies have a documentary feel to them. Many of the great movie classics that have endured from famed directors Billy Wilder, Akira Kurosawa, Alfred Hitchcock, Ingmar Bergman, Federico Fellini, and David Lean were all done in black and white. But these directors also created fabulous color movies on their own volition. It is only when studio executives imposed on these superlative directors the directive and withheld financial support because they insisted that the public wanted color movies were they forced to alter their artistic integrity. It was the advent of color TV in the 1960s that frightened and altered movie executives perceptions of what the moving going public wanted. After all, movie executives financed the movies as financial investments rather than as art. Even contemporary directors like Martin Scorsese, arguable American’s best active director created his best movie in black and white – the Academy Award winner “Raging Bull.” Woody Allen’s 1979 “Manhattan” is unequivocally his best movie. Director Steven Spielberg’s critically acclaimed movie “Schindler’s List” another black and white movie, was financed by studio executives only after he was “forced” to make the juvenile and disappointing color movie “Jurassic Park.” While it is true that color film only came about in the 1930’s, black & white films can add much to a movie’s composition. We forget about the color and, instead focus on the themes and motives of the movie as determined by the director. In particular, those familiar with film noir movies of the 1940s and 1950s, realize that this genre could not have existed if these movies had been made in color. Would “Citizen Kane” have been a better movie if done in color? Hardly! And yet, why is it considered to be the greatest movie of all time? No, not only because it was done in black and white, but, because it has an everlasting quality. Black and white movies have the ability to transcend time. And, would the original ”King Kong” be the same movie if it had been done in color? Why is the color remake such a pale comparison? Would Casablanca be as much loved today if we had focused on color as opposed to its themes, dialog, or characterizations? Have you seen the recently re-released glorious black & white “A Hard Days Night” by the Beatles? It is timeless in its ability to capture a spirit, a mood and a time. Their follow-up “Help” done in striking color is a disappointment and is almost forgotten. In John Kobal’s fascinating book of 1988, titled “The Top 100 Movies”, in which he asked movie critics around the world to list their favorite movies, of the top 100 movies (including foreign movies), only one color movie – “Singin’ In The Rain“ made the top 15. This brings us to the recently restored “Rear Window”. The question has been asked if this is really a colorized movie? No, absolutely not! Alfred Hitchcock intended this movie to be in color and filmed it that way. The restoration was the best attempt to preserve the initial intent and integrity of the director’s vision. That Paramount Studios allowed the original master to “rot” in their vaults was not due to the director’s oversight, but rather to the movie studio’s inability to preserve a true work of art and, therefore, to treat it as such. The $700,000 restoration project by various individuals and organizations was a tribute, not only to the genius of director Alfred Hitchcock, but also to the attempt to preserve a piece of art. The work was very meticulous and time consuming. Frame by frame had to be worked on to create the restoration. The technical aspects will not be discussed here, but various resources were used and consulted to bring this classic to its original state of magnificence. The latest technological advances and scholarly sources were used in an attempt to bring it back to life as it was originally filmed. No, it is not perfect, but, it might be the best chance we will have to see this movie as one of the greatest directors of our time intended it to be seen.
Source: http://www.filmcriticnoir.com/Featured%20Arcticles/B&W,%20Color,%20Restorations.pdf
gikonomova 