Confusing at best.

I guess one would have to determine what the original intent was of the filmmakers was back then.
Did they want it in B&W and the colorization was done later?
Did they colorize it because color film didin't exist or was too expensive back then, and they wanted it to be in color?
Did they find documentation years later that the filmmakers intended it to be in color originally?

I think that if it was always the intent of the filmmakers for the film to be in color (regardless of how or when that was achieved) that Color would fit.

If it was done just to colorize it, then Colorized would fit. Like how Turner went on a colorization craze back in the 1990's.

Just to make it even more confusing I found this on Wikipedia

Quote:
"Méliès sold black-and-white and color prints of the film through his Star Film Company"

.

So what now?

Going back, perhaps Colorized would be the best choice since on it's original release it was released in both B&W and in Color.

I don't know, it's just so confusing.

I would assign colorized for everything, which was shot in B/W but is presented with any kind of colors.

I would not distinguish based on technique or intention - this would heighten the complexity to an unbearable level.

What about film that was shot in color but made b&w in post? 

Quoting iPatsa:

Quote:
What about film that was shot in color but made b&w in post? 

Decolorized 

Does the BD also have the b&w version on the disc?  If so, the answer is Mixed.  If it only has the hand-colored version, per the rules that is Colorized.

Quoting GSyren:

Quote:
Edit: Wouldn't that be Multiple rather than Mixed?

Indeed.