I was not aware of these hearings. Very interesting and thorny moral issues involved. Very impressed by Woody Allen's elequent argument against someone other than the director colorizing his original work. Also impressed by Senator Leahy's knowledge of movies and his challenges to the director's arguments, particularly noting Woody's doctoring historical footage ( Calvin Coolidge ) in the movie Zelig. Also had always thought it hypocritical of John Huston to object to having his movies tampered with while largely making films based on novels who's story line he would change. However Sydney Pollack countered with a fair argument that the novel itself was not tampered with, just the adaptation of it to a different medium. Very interesting and complicated moral and artistic freedom issues involved. Thank you for posting this.
@@Tolstoy111 thats still extremely sicks. And she was child of woman he married. Thats his step daughter. He s sick man. Amazing how people defend celebrities
In the end it was none other than old blue eyes himself who stuck a knife in the heart of colorization of old black and white films They tried colorizing one of his films, and the computer got frank's eye color wrong. When he found out he was beyond furious and launched a scathing attack on colorization of classic films (he called it "cultural vandalism") and that was the end of it.
What none of these esteemed directors considered was the likely emergence of a technology that would allow well-trained consumers to colorize movies themselves, supported by an emergent culture that had zero interest in respecting copyright *or* public domain. Sad. We have met the enemy, and it’s the audience.
I love black and white movies and the way directors used shadows and camera angles for great effect. Thankfully, the originals were left alone so the B&W versions are still available. Still, I think colorization is pathetic and unnecessary.
Woody Allen expresses himself beautifully. Thank you for posting this!
3:42 "If members of the public had the right to demand alterations to suit their taste, the world would have no real art." Well said and so true!
Why so?
@deanrowan2457 If artists prioritize public approval over authenticity, they risk creating work that is diluted, safe, and unremarkable-a "product."
The Founder Fathers never envisioned a politician such as this to be seated in office in 2023, 36 years after this testimony was given.
I was not aware of these hearings. Very interesting and thorny moral issues involved. Very impressed by Woody Allen's elequent argument against someone other than the director colorizing his original work. Also impressed by Senator Leahy's knowledge of movies and his challenges to the director's arguments, particularly noting Woody's doctoring historical footage ( Calvin Coolidge ) in the movie Zelig. Also had always thought it hypocritical of John Huston to object to having his movies tampered with while largely making films based on novels who's story line he would change. However Sydney Pollack countered with a fair argument that the novel itself was not tampered with, just the adaptation of it to a different medium. Very interesting and complicated moral and artistic freedom issues involved. Thank you for posting this.
"We enjoy your films, particularly the early funny ones". Stardust Memories
Perfect.👏🏻
Incredible that they have to defend black and white in court. Anybody know what happened after this?
14:40 Current Roald Dahl controversy
Roald dahl today….
It's great to see Woody being serious. And just in case you didn't know, Mia herself is the child abuser!
I would think man having sex w his under age step daughter qualifies as abuser. Pretty sure
@@Johnnyrocks34 She was not his step daughter. He began his relationship with her when she was in college.
@@Tolstoy111 thats still extremely sicks. And she was child of woman he married. Thats his step daughter. He s sick man. Amazing how people defend celebrities
I love Wooody Allen he's an interesting brilliant man.
I am astonished how many of Gen Z will literally not even LOOK at a black and white film.
You may be astonished how many will.
@@a.champagne6238 I hope so.
It’s sad, and unconscionable. Consider the proliferation of colorized clips on TH-cam. I find it tiresome. The idiots seemingly won.
Does colouring it make the black and white one no longer available?
Articulate as ever uncle Woody.
In the end it was none other than old blue eyes himself who stuck a knife in the heart of colorization of old black and white films
They tried colorizing one of his films, and the computer got frank's eye color wrong.
When he found out he was beyond furious and launched a scathing attack on colorization of classic films (he called it "cultural vandalism") and that was the end of it.
Good Bless Woody Allen
What none of these esteemed directors considered was the likely emergence of a technology that would allow well-trained consumers to colorize movies themselves, supported by an emergent culture that had zero interest in respecting copyright *or* public domain. Sad. We have met the enemy, and it’s the audience.
Humphrey Bogart wasn't in "Public Enemy". I guess that is part of the joke about the cretinous businessman.
I love black and white movies and the way directors used shadows and camera angles for great effect. Thankfully, the originals were left alone so the B&W versions are still available. Still, I think colorization is pathetic and unnecessary.
Key Largo is way better in color.
The argument is only partly valid.. The directors didn´t have the technology. It was not a choice.
Woody ...yawn... Allen. Zero critical sensibility. Exclusively self-interested. Once upon a time he was a comedian, so I've heard.
Did they testify against child predators?? Id think that’s more important. Woody go home!
He was innocent. Every single investigation determined that.
@@Tolstoy111