MovieChat Forums > Jezebel (1938) Discussion > I WISH IT WAS FILMED IN COLOR

I WISH IT WAS FILMED IN COLOR


Honestly, wasn't Jack Warner aware that GWTW was to be made in color?
WB had an excellent technicolor movie in THE PRIVATE LIVES OF ELIZABETH AND ESSEX, also starring Bette Davis.
IMHO, this film, as most period pieces, would have been much better in color.
I really would have loved to have seen that red dress!

Or maybe it was just a feature-length screen test for Bette Davis for the role of Scarlett O'Hara as some have said.

BTW, from what I've read on IMDb message boards, colorization has improved greatly from the Ted Turner days.
Any chance this film might be colorized using new technology?

reply

I was just thinking the same thing about this film. If there is any candidate for a state of the art colorization process, this is the one. A pivotal part of the story is a red dress. Yes, it's amazing to see red shown in b/w with the contrast to the pure white dresses, but it would be cool to see a color version.

I also wonder why not color at the time? I realize 37/38 was right on the cutting edge of color, but everyone knew GWTW was going to be full color. It just seems a "big" movie like this would have been filmed in color.

Anyway, I am for a 2015 state of the art colorized version of Jezebel.

reply

I don't know if this affected the Jezebe production, but I believe GWTW roped in most of the technicolor cameras in Hollywood.

reply

At the time, color was considered more suitable for films with outdoor settings or adventure themes, such as ADVENTURES OF ROBIN HOOD, and that black-and-white was more suited to dramas (Selznick, being an investor in Technicolor, was the rare producer who used it for a variety of genres). This theory persisted into the 1960s, when it was decideed to film WHO'S AFRAID OF VIRGINIA WOOLF in B&W (to the disappointment of playwright Edward Albee).

As for myself, having grown up withe B&W television, I've never, ever, had a problem with a film being in B&W, and while it maybe nice to entertain the notion that a film such as this or MR.SKEFFINGTON might have been "better" in color (mainly to show off the costumes), I personally have no wish to see them altered by colorization (which, despite technical advances, never quite looks convincing).

"Forget it, Jake. It's the internet."

reply

It would be nice to see the red dress! It was so beautiful.

reply

I was thinking the same thing as you and others. Colorization has to have come a long, long way from the mess it was when it was first attempted on classic films.

This is one that would lend itself well to colorization, since so much of the story hinges around a red dress.

Don't get me wrong, Jezebel is beautiful in black and white and of course we can visualize the dress in red, but it would be fun to see this film in color. New Orleans, the red dress, the green of the plantation. The staidness of the antebellum south. Just for fun, and why not? It would not take away from the original, which will probably remain superior in b/w.

reply

Filming in color was very expensive. That's why b&w films were still being made well into the 60s (Baby Jane), when it wasn't for artistic reasons, of course.

reply

Incidentally, 1966 was the last year that the Oscars had separate 'color' and 'black-and-white' categories for Best Cinematography and Best Costume Design. By the latter '60s, color films were the great majority.

reply

I really would have loved to have seen that red dress!

Actually, the dress Davis wore was some shade of BROWN, because that color showed up better in B&W. The red was suggested and only in our minds.

Sets, costumes, and lighting were all adjusted for their best appearance in B&W.

Frankenstein's (monster) makeup was some shade of green, that showed up as deathly white in B&W.

Before color TV, I remember hearing that all men's white shirts were actually blue.

reply