Should Under the Cherry Moon be re-released in Color?

Reply #31 posted 08/10/22 7:41am

JorisE73 said:

LoveGalore said:

Except shooting it in color WAS cheaper, you dumb ass. And why wouldn't it be cheaper considering movies weren't typically shot on b/w film in 1986? You think b/w film is cheaper than color and LOOKS cheaper? You're dead wrong, as usual.

Exactly, and how come there is color footage in the hands of some then if it wasn't shot in color?

Of course it was shot in color, that's exactly what I said. Learn to read.
It was shot in color, lightened in color, because it was originally meant to be released in color. That's logical.

- E-mail - orgNote -

Reply #32 posted 08/10/22 7:45am

Poplife88

avatar

paisleyparkgirl said:

GaryMF said:

Can someone explain how Jerome can act like such a HUUUUGE Queen and no one calls him out on that???

Yeah I noticed it too.

OMG, YES! They both acted like huge queens in this!

The bathtub scene?? Jerome throwing flower petals in the bath? lol rainbow

- E-mail - orgNote -

Reply #33 posted 08/10/22 7:46am

lurker316

avatar

LoveGalore said:
Except shooting it in color WAS cheaper, you dumb ass. And why wouldn't it be cheaper considering movies weren't typically shot on b/w film in 1986? You think b/w film is cheaper than color and LOOKS cheaper? You're dead wrong, as usual.

@Rodsterling does actually have a point.

Filiming in black-&-white vs color isn't simply about putting a different roll of film into the camera. It entirely changes the way you light a set. It also changes some of the color palate for costumes and scenery because colors can be decptive in black-&-white (for example, green can come acros as grey).

So generally speaking, in the film industry, they would not shoot something in color if the know all along the end result is to be black-&-white. To get the end product you envision, you have to shoot it that may and manage all of the little details as you go.

Granted, in today's digital age with the ability to do color grading, it would be easier to shoot to something in color, converty it to black-&-white, and then make corrections. But that option didn't exist in '86.

- E-mail - orgNote -

Reply #34 posted 08/10/22 7:54am

LoveGalore said:

Except shooting it in color WAS cheaper, you dumb ass. And why wouldn't it be cheaper considering movies weren't typically shot on b/w film in 1986? You think b/w film is cheaper than color and LOOKS cheaper? You're dead wrong, as usual.

You're just an insulting troll.

Insulting is not aegumenting, it just show your lack of arguments.

Ask David Lynch, Darren Aronofski, Christopher Nolan, etc.
Why they shot their first movie in B&W instead of color.

Because shooting in B&W is way cheaper and faster than in color. Everybody knows that. When you have low budget, it's too risky to shot in color.

We tried to make a movie with students friends more than 10 years ago, it was never even an option to shoot it in color. B&W is cheaper, faster, and make it look like it's an intenporal fable. It adds some kind of a "cachet", but it's in fact just because it's cheaper.

When you shoot in color, everything must be lighten up and on the good place : objects, costumes, the environment, like the sky, the sea, etc.

You have to pay a lot of people to adjust everything to make it look like a real movie.
Whereas in B&W, you don't have to worry about so many details.

When Chaplin shot the Countess of Hong Kong in 1967 in color, it was a real pain in the ass for him. He had to pay attention to too many details that detracyed him to take pleasure in this movie.
Problems he absolutely didn't have in B&W.

Looking at the beautiful stills of UTCM in color, it just show that everything was done to make a beautiful, normal, color movie.
[Edited 8/10/22 7:56am]
[Edited 8/10/22 7:58am]

- E-mail - orgNote -

Reply #35 posted 08/10/22 7:57am

Poplife88

avatar

Btw, I get why he wanted B&W to get tht old movie vibe. But why film in the French Rivera and not take advatage of that beauty in COLOR? It would've been the best part of the movie! lol

- E-mail - orgNote -

Reply #36 posted 08/10/22 8:11am

Poplife88 said:

Btw, I get why he wanted B&W to get tht old movie vibe. But why film in the French Rivera and not take advatage of that beauty in COLOR? It would've been the best part of the movie! lol

To me, it was always obvious the turning of the movie in B&W was a last minute attempt to save the movie from disastrous first screenings.

Turning it into a B&W movie was a disastrous way to advertise it as an UFO-movie in every way, to add some intenporal side to it.
Like " Well, the movie is terrible, but it was intented that way".

Moreover, and that's what is important here, is that making it a B&W movie made Prince like a cartoonish, silent movie character, to distinguish from the real Prince singer/actor we see in Purple Rain.
The guy we saw in UTCM was absolutely not to tarnish the guy who was trying to sell Parade, the album.

I m not saying the movie is terrible- I personally love it as it is- but the critics and the audience were harsh with the movie.

So, to me, it was always obvious it was a last minute decision for the studio to make Prince escape from that very likely box-office bomb.
Whether Prince was aware of that or not, he surely liked the idea to turn it into a B&W movie.

But there's no way that during all the months of shooting in color that Prince thought inside his head " I m gonna filuck the studios who lent me millions of dollars, let's pretend it's a color movie in front of all the staff, amd then I will make them a big surprise when I edit the movie "

No way, or else the guy is a genius psychopath 😜

- E-mail - orgNote -

Reply #37 posted 08/10/22 8:25am

LoveGalore

lurker316 said:

LoveGalore said:

Except shooting it in color WAS cheaper, you dumb ass. And why wouldn't it be cheaper considering movies weren't typically shot on b/w film in 1986? You think b/w film is cheaper than color and LOOKS cheaper? You're dead wrong, as usual.

Please don't encourage him.

- E-mail - orgNote -

Reply #38 posted 08/10/22 8:49am

StrangeButTrue

avatar

DonRants said:

LoveGalore said:
GaryMF said: The picture above shows a man wearing a silk top exposing the small of his back and silk pants in a matching print and you're worried about Jerome?

Both Prince and Jerome were behaving like Queens...one reviewer even said that the "Chemistry" between Prince and Jerome was more palpable than the Chemistry between Prince and his female co-star.

lol

if it was just a dream, call me a dreamer 2

- E-mail - orgNote -

Reply #39 posted 08/10/22 9:48am

mb71

avatar

There are still some people who believe that the south of France is actually black and white. They're completely oblivious to the fact that it's colour.

[Edited 8/10/22 9:48am]

Formerly TheDigitalGardener etc.

- E-mail - orgNote -

Reply #40 posted 08/10/22 11:41am

paisleyparkgir
l

avatar

Poplife88 said:

paisleyparkgirl said:

Yeah I noticed it too.

OMG, YES! They both acted like huge queens in this!

The bathtub scene?? Jerome throwing flower petals in the bath?

But Jerome was even MORE of a Queen than Prince in that movie. With Prince he was being overly extra while Jerome was a total natural.

- E-mail - orgNote -

Reply #41 posted 08/10/22 3:11pm

blacknote

avatar

paisleyparkgirl said:

Poplife88 said:

OMG, YES! They both acted like huge queens in this!

The bathtub scene?? Jerome throwing flower petals in the bath?

But Jerome was even MORE of a Queen than Prince in that movie. With Prince he was being overly extra while Jerome was a total natural.

"HONEY, DON'T YOU KNOW I'LL SLAP THE WAVES OUT YO HEAD!!!!!"

- E-mail - orgNote -

Reply #42 posted 08/10/22 5:42pm

PJMcGee

avatar

It felt similar to Purple Rain in that Morris, for all his womanizing in the film, often doesn't come across as terribly masculine. Look at his first scene, vacuuming in a doo-rag.

- E-mail - orgNote -

Reply #43 posted 08/10/22 6:04pm

LoveGalore said:

lurker316 said:

LoveGalore said:

Except shooting it in color WAS cheaper, you dumb ass. And why wouldn't it be cheaper considering movies weren't typically shot on b/w film in 1986? You think b/w film is cheaper than color and LOOKS cheaper? You're dead wrong, as usual.

Please don't encourage him.

Please, have some arguments here.

Just explain us, why in the world the studio paid for a more expensive color movie, and why they ended up in a B&W movie instead, that would have cost less from the start.

Oh no, you're just an insulting troll without arguments, so you ll die with the silly idea a movie studio paid for a B&W movie, shooting it in color, with actual real people paid to shot the movie in color.

- E-mail - orgNote -

Reply #44 posted 08/10/22 6:18pm

lurker316 said:

LoveGalore said:

Except shooting it in color WAS cheaper, you dumb ass. And why wouldn't it be cheaper considering movies weren't typically shot on b/w film in 1986? You think b/w film is cheaper than color and LOOKS cheaper? You're dead wrong, as usual.

Thanks to be just logical. That's a rarity here.

I still think everything was done from WB to protect Prince career from that announced box office bomb.

Still, Prince the singer, didn't really suffer from it .

35 years later, it's amazing to see how they got out Michael Keaton from the WB new DC expanded universe. All the movies he was supposed to be appeared in as THE Batman have been cancelled in theaters.
The guy was supposed to appear in Aquaman 2 : his cameo was replaced by Ben Affleck because in screening tests, most people didn't understand Keaton was playing Bruce Wayne.

Batgirl, a movie of 90 millions dollars is completely cancelled.

And The Flash will be, at best, released in streaming services, despite its cost of 200 millions. The main actor is responsible for burglary, beating minor people, etc.

What did Keaton made in these scandalous movies?
He refused Batman Forever for like 20 millions dollars.

- E-mail - orgNote -

Reply #45 posted 08/10/22 6:43pm

IanRG

No - It will make it more realistic and remove the feel that was orginally meant.

- E-mail - orgNote -

Reply #46 posted 08/10/22 8:05pm

sexton

avatar

RODSERLING said:
That's beyond stupid to think the studio would pay for a more expensive film, just to reprocess it after to make it look cheaper. That would have been a hell of a job for the director of photography, a useless pain in the ass. [Edited 8/10/22 4:25am]

And yet, that's exactly what happened. Prince had always intended the movie to be in black and white. Warner Bros. convinced him to film in color (their preference) and it could be processed later in black and white like he wanted, apparently hoping Prince would at some point change his mind and then they would still have their color print of the movie. But of course Prince never changed his mind.

- E-mail - orgNote -

Reply #47 posted 08/10/22 8:46pm

DonRants

sexton said:

RODSERLING said:
That's beyond stupid to think the studio would pay for a more expensive film, just to reprocess it after to make it look cheaper. That would have been a hell of a job for the director of photography, a useless pain in the ass. [Edited 8/10/22 4:25am]

And yet, that's exactly what happened. Prince had always intended the movie to be in black and white. Warner Bros. convinced him to film in color (their preference) and it could be processed later in black and white like he wanted, apparently hoping Prince would at some point change his mind and then they would still have their color print of the movie. But of course Prince never changed his mind.

All the more reason why they should release the colored version now.

To All the Haters on the Internet
No more Candy 4 U

- E-mail - orgNote -

Reply #48 posted 08/10/22 8:56pm

GaryMF

avatar

Poplife88 said:

paisleyparkgirl said:

Yeah I noticed it too.

OMG, YES! They both acted like huge queens in this!

The bathtub scene?? Jerome throwing flower petals in the bath?

They were boht queening it up, but Jerome has these lines:

"Honey I'll slap the waves out yo' hair!"

and another line he starts with "Girl....." the way gay men and especially Black gay men talk to each other.

Prince always was androgynous in his dress and mannerisms, but Jerome is like auditioning for the Men On Film skit on In Living Color!

[Edited 8/10/22 20:56pm]

- E-mail - orgNote -

Reply #49 posted 08/10/22 9:24pm

paisleyparkgir
l

avatar

GaryMF said:

Poplife88 said:

OMG, YES! They both acted like huge queens in this!

The bathtub scene?? Jerome throwing flower petals in the bath?

They were boht queening it up, but Jerome has these lines:

.

.

"Honey I'll slap the waves out yo' hair!"

.

.

and another line he starts with "Girl....." the way gay men and especially Black gay men talk to each other.

.

.

Prince always was androgynous in his dress and mannerisms, but Jerome is like auditioning for the Men On Film skit on In Living Color!

[Edited 8/10/22 20:56pm]

Jerome was never known to be androgynous was he ? Did they think that's how male gigolos acted in the 1940's ? It's a fun movie to watch.

- E-mail - orgNote -

Reply #50 posted 08/10/22 10:30pm

sexton said:

RODSERLING said:

That's beyond stupid to think the studio would pay for a more expensive film, just to reprocess it after to make it look cheaper. That would have been a hell of a job for the director of photography, a useless pain in the ass. [Edited 8/10/22 4:25am]

Clearly : is there interviews from Prince in 1985 telling he expressly wanted the movie to be B&W, or is that just your own interpretation of all that things turned out ?

- E-mail - orgNote -

Reply #51 posted 08/10/22 11:20pm

bozojones

you know shit is slow in Prince world when people are clashing over whether or not a 36 year old movie should ever have a colorized version lol

- E-mail - orgNote -

Reply #52 posted 08/10/22 11:31pm

bozojones said:

you know shit is slow in Prince world when people are clashing over whether or not a 36 year old movie should ever have a colorized version lol

Always the same insulting trolls : Lovegalore, Joris something... The guy who boasted he had access to " Insiders informations" Of D&P SDE as early as October 2020...No joke. Two years after, he is still wondering where is that boxset, and I think he could still wait another two years for it, at least.

- E-mail - orgNote -

Reply #53 posted 08/11/22 12:34am

RODSERLING said:
JorisE73 said:

Exactly, and how come there is color footage in the hands of some then if it wasn't shot in color?

Of course it was shot in color, that's exactly what I said. Learn to read. It was shot in color, lightened in color, because it was originally meant to be released in color. That's logical.

Oh stop crying newbie.

- E-mail - orgNote -

Reply #54 posted 08/11/22 12:46am

RODSERLING said:
lurker316 said:

@Rodsterling does actually have a point.

Filiming in black-&-white vs color isn't simply about putting a different roll of film into the camera. It entirely changes the way you light a set. It also changes some of the color palate for costumes and scenery because colors can be decptive in black-&-white (for example, green can come acros as grey).

So generally speaking, in the film industry, they would not shoot something in color if the know all along the end result is to be black-&-white. To get the end product you envision, you have to shoot it that may and manage all of the little details as you go.

Granted, in today's digital age with the ability to do color grading, it would be easier to shoot to something in color, converty it to black-&-white, and then make corrections. But that option didn't exist in '86.

Thanks to be just logical. That's a rarity here. I still think everything was done from WB to protect Prince career from that announced box office bomb. Still, Prince the singer, didn't really suffer from it . 35 years later, it's amazing to see how they got out Michael Keaton from the WB new DC expanded universe. All the movies he was supposed to be appeared in as THE Batman have been cancelled in theaters. The guy was supposed to appear in Aquaman 2 : his cameo was replaced by Ben Affleck because in screening tests, most people didn't understand Keaton was playing Bruce Wayne. Batgirl, a movie of 90 millions dollars is completely cancelled. And The Flash will be, at best, released in streaming services, despite its cost of 200 millions. The main actor is responsible for burglary, beating minor people, etc. What did Keaton made in these scandalous movies? He refused Batman Forever for like 20 millions dollars.

Keaton was supposedly replaced in Aquaman 2 because The Flash got pushed back again and now Aquaman 2 is released before The Flash. It had nothing to do with test screenings.
He would have been introduced in The Flash and would then appear in Aquaman 2 and then Batgirl.
Zaslav is still confident in the Flash movie despite Miller's behavior, but I also think it'll either be cancelled or direct to streaming because reshooting with a different actor is just be more money wasted. Plus all the Snydercut fans are already boycotting evrything DC, especially that Black Adam garbage and now that Dwayne Johnson is one of the main advisors to the DCEU.

- E-mail - orgNote -

Reply #55 posted 08/11/22 12:49am

RODSERLING said:
bozojones said:

you know shit is slow in Prince world when people are clashing over whether or not a 36 year old movie should ever have a colorized version

Always the same insulting trolls : Lovegalore, Joris something... The guy who boasted he had access to " Insiders informations" Of D&P SDE as early as October 2020...No joke. Two years after, he is still wondering where is that boxset, and I think he could still wait another two years for it, at least.

lol Newbies...

- E-mail - orgNote -

Reply #56 posted 08/11/22 12:50am

mediumdry

I wonder if they edited in colour or B/W. If the first, it should be relatively easy to get a colour version, if the latter, it would be cost prohibitive..

To me, it would be a wonderful addition to a Parade Super Deluxe. It's not that I don't care about Prince's vision (it is unknown if he changed his mind after the shooting and simply said he wanted B/W all along or if it was meant to be in B/W from the start, but why then shoot in colour? I guess we need some interviews about it with people involved with lighting and camera in the beginning), but the colours I've seen from stills and pictures from the set make me want to see the lush colours they had.

Plus we can finally see which of Prince's suits is blue!

[edit]

And we need the original ending, not the one that they used where Christopher gets his "just desserts".

Also, on a side note, as much as UTCM isn't a very good film, it is the best Prince film. Apart from the music, Purple Rain hasn't aged well and it is very hard to watch for me with the blatant mysoginy and even worse acting than in UTCM. SOTT is a lipsync fest with weird bits in between (not too dissimilar from the Undertaker, which doesn't lipsync and is better for it), about on par with the worst of the worst, Grafitti Bridge. So, any extra we can get from UTCM is a bonus in my book.

[Edited 8/11/22 0:56am]

Paisley Park is in your heart - Love Is Here!

- E-mail - orgNote -

Reply #57 posted 08/11/22 1:04am

mediumdry said:

I wonder if they edited in colour or B/W. If the first, it should be relatively easy to get a colour version, if the latter, it would be cost prohibitive..

.

To me, it would be a wonderful addition to a Parade Super Deluxe. It's not that I don't care about Prince's vision (it is unknown if he changed his mind after the shooting and simply said he wanted B/W all along or if it was meant to be in B/W from the start, but why then shoot in colour? I guess we need some interviews about it with people involved with lighting and camera in the beginning), but the colours I've seen from stills and pictures from the set make me want to see the lush colours they had.

.

Plus we can finally see which of Prince's suits is blue!

.

[edit]

And we need the original ending, not the one that they used where Christopher gets his "just desserts".

.

Also, on a side note, as much as UTCM isn't a very good film, it is the best Prince film. Apart from the music, Purple Rain hasn't aged well and it is very hard to watch for me with the blatant mysoginy and even worse acting than in UTCM. SOTT is a lipsync fest with weird bits in between (not too dissimilar from the Undertaker, which doesn't lipsync and is better for it), about on par with the worst of the worst, Grafitti Bridge. So, any extra we can get from UTCM is a bonus in my book.

[Edited 8/11/22 0:56am]

I don't think we'll ever get it unless someone leaks it from there personal collection.
there are rumours of a color workprint and dailies/rushes in the hands of more serious collectors/archivists.
I wouldn't doubt WB has it in there vault and maybe they'll release it eventually to milk Parade eventually.

- E-mail - orgNote -

Reply #58 posted 08/11/22 1:10am

LoveGalore

RODSERLING said:

sexton said:

RODSERLING said:

That's beyond stupid to think the studio would pay for a more expensive film, just to reprocess it after to make it look cheaper. That would have been a hell of a job for the director of photography, a useless pain in the ass. [Edited 8/10/22 4:25am]

Clearly : is there interviews from Prince in 1985 telling he expressly wanted the movie to be B&W, or is that just your own interpretation of all that things turned out ?

You are so clueless and intent on remaining clueless. It's funny as fuck. You are brand ass new to Prince fandom and think you know fuck all because you stare at charts all day. You've been disproven time and time and time again. Who knew that once we got rid of a Bart, another annoying serpent would take his place.

- E-mail - orgNote -

Reply #59 posted 08/11/22 1:22am

LoveGalore said:
RODSERLING said:
Clearly : is there interviews from Prince in 1985 telling he expressly wanted the movie to be B&W, or is that just your own interpretation of all that things turned out ?
You are so clueless and intent on remaining clueless. It's funny as fuck. You are brand ass new to Prince fandom and think you know fuck all because you stare at charts all day. You've been disproven time and time and time again. Who knew that once we got rid of a Bart, another annoying serpent would take his place.

Annoying as Bart is he at least comes with facts, Roddie is just newbie who makes up facts about things he didn't even experience.

- E-mail - orgNote -