http://www.amazon.com/gp/search/ref=...FFMOQSP&page=1
When is the next B&N sale?Amazon had a good price for World on a Wire a few weeks back so I pre-ordered it.
Also, after checking out the DVD/Blu-ray caps on some older movies, I think I may just go the DVD route. Cheaper, and not that much of a difference...at least to my eyes.
If you sent them an email when Three Colors first came out, be sure to check for that email.
What was wrong with the White disc? I never heard anything about it.Originally Posted by XShagrath
I sent Jon Mulvaney an email about 3-4 weeks ago about the audio issue with the White blu-ray (from the Three Colors trilogy). I just got a reply from him that the new discs are in, and in order to get a replacement, you need to send in your disc. They'll send out a corrected one, along with a $10 GC to criterion.com.
If you sent them an email when Three Colors first came out, be sure to check for that email.
It was mentioned in the other thread, but the problem was that the audio on White was in 2.0 surround, rather than stereo.What was wrong with the White disc? I never heard anything about it.
I'll probably be swinging by the post office today to get a little disc mailer and pop that bad boy in the mailbox tomorrow.
I'm keeping my fingers crossed for a Criterion release of The Warriors. No, seriously.Well Criterioncast posted a link to the wiki page for Coney Island showing about 30 films it could be.
Meanwhile, the 2012 release I'm hoping finally makes it out the door is Godfrey Reggio's Qatsi Trilogy, especially Koyaanisqatsi. Here's hoping!
FnordChan
Did they explain their decision? It just seems like a really stupid decision when they are all about preserving film in its true, intended form.Originally Posted by pizzaroll
No, their print has a shredded edge. (ie, it's damaged)
Yet they still knowingly released it when a modern transfer exists that has all sides in tact, they just chose not to use it.
Isn't that other "better" version cropped as well, just on a different side? I seem to remember Criterion saying that their print showed a lot more on the top and bottom, and was just showed a little bit less on the one edge.Originally Posted by pizzaroll
No, their print has a shredded edge. (ie, it's damaged)
Yet they still knowingly released it when a modern transfer exists that has all sides in tact, they just chose not to use it.
Here's dvdbeaver's page with screenshots from both discs.
http://www.dvdbeaver.com/film/DVDReview3/harakiri.htm
To me, the Criterion transfer looks better (clarity-wise), even though it is missing quite a bit of material on the left side. I don't think that's going to detract from the film though, and definitely not enough to be a "horrible transfer" as some have stated in the past.
Seems like there is more on both sides in the other transfer but yes, Criterion's looks nicer. I do wonder how that other tranfer, run through Criterion's supervision, would look.Originally Posted by XShagrath
Isn't that other "better" version cropped as well, just on a different side? I seem to remember Criterion saying that their print showed a lot more on the top and bottom, and was just showed a little bit less on the one edge.
Here's dvdbeaver's page with screenshots from both discs.
http://www.dvdbeaver.com/film/DVDReview3/harakiri.htm
To me, the Criterion transfer looks better (clarity-wise), even though it is missing quite a bit of material on the left side. I don't think that's going to detract from the film though, and definitely not enough to be a "horrible transfer" as some have stated in the past.
And "you're the only one that cares about it icarus" is not an acceptable answer.
Something about they felt their transfer had superior clarity (it doesn't) because it was giving more detail to less image or something (???)Originally Posted by Nappucino
Did they explain their decision? It just seems like a really stupid decision when they are all about preserving film in its true, intended form.
Basically, spin.
The transfer has the rough look of a stereotypically old transfer. Which isn't surprising, because it is an old transfer. Digitally overprocessed appearance, complete with EE, blown out whites, and crushed blacks.Originally Posted by XShagrath
To me, the Criterion transfer looks better (clarity-wise), even though it is missing quite a bit of material on the left side. I don't think that's going to detract from the film though, and definitely not enough to be a "horrible transfer" as some have stated in the past.
Shochiku transfer looks nice, natural, and filmic. Which is a given, because it was done in 2011. The Criterion transfer is from 2005.
The Shochiku transfer appears to have a very very slight amount missing from the top, you can see it in the subtitle sample comparison image. (the set with "Jinnai look who's talking" etc)
I hope you're not suggesting that you'd like to see Criterion to digitally muck around with a fine looking transfer. O__OOriginally Posted by Nappuccino
Seems like there is more on both sides in the other transfer but yes, Criterion's looks nicer. I do wonder how that other tranfer, run through Criterion's supervision, would look.
It captured the voice and angst and uncertainty of a generation.
52 to choose from.any good italian flicks in this "criterion collection" ?
My three favorite: I Fidanzati, Fists In the Pocket, Divorce Italian Style.
I guess to me the other version feels too smooth, as if someone has taken all the detail in clay and rubbed their hands over it, flattening it. So it seems like there is less detail.Originally Posted by pizzaroll
Well, they have the "pop" associated with contrast boosting, but there's also the lost detail to consider as well.
Again, i probably would have to see both in motion to make any final conclusion... but that is what i get from the stills.
That's because of the EE on the Criterion version. It's not detail, you could achieve the same effect by ramping up the sharpness setting on your TV. (but you shouldn't! :<)Originally Posted by Nappuccino
I guess to me the other version feels too smooth, as if someone has taken all the detail in clay and rubbed their hands over it, flattening it. So it seems like there is less detail.
I just put a Shochiku/MoC screenshot through a sharpening filter so you can see what I mean: click
Compare that with the Criterion and then the untouched Shochiku/MoC on DVDBeaver.
hm..Originally Posted by pizzaroll
That's because of the EE on the Criterion version. It's not detail, you could achieve the same effect by ramping up the sharpness setting on your TV. (but you shouldn't! :<)
I just put a Shochiku/MoC screenshot through a sharpening filter so you can see what I mean: click
Compare that with the Criterion and then the untouched Shochiku/MoC on DVDBeaver.
out of curiosity, what do you think of Criterion's transfers on the blurays of Seven Samurai and Yojimbo?
Both are very good, and the best available [to consumers] versions of the movies.Originally Posted by Nappuccino
hm..
out of curiosity, what do you think of Criterion's transfers on the blurays of Seven Samurai and Yojimbo?
Their High & Low transfer is great too.
sweet!! thanks.Originally Posted by Cosmic Bus
52 to choose from.
My three favorite: I Fidanzati, Fists In the Pocket, Divorce Italian Style.
Ah, finally! Was going to buy the DVD earlier this year but I'm glad I waited.
is the new release of it in the uk cropped? i watched three or four of his movies last year and they are pretty perfect.Originally Posted by icarus-daedelus
Why haven't they released [an uncropped unshitty version of Landscape in the Mist]?
And "you're the only one that cares about it icarus" is not an acceptable answer.
my italian three (cosmic's list is pretty perfect)
1. Indiscretion of an American Wife
2. Senso
3. Rome Open City
indiscretion of an american wife/terminal station should be seen by more people.
http://www.criterion.com/my_criterion/32910-altulster
If anyone wants to do a Criterion blu-ray trade of sorts, I am wanting to trade The Leopard and The Thin Red Line. Still thinking about Black Moon but I think it is growing on me more and more.
Le Havre is all sorts of terrible by the way.
:o I had no idea it even existed! I was only aware of the old, cropped, OOP New Yorker release and a subtitled Greek release overseen by the director that's supposed to be definitive (but which I wasn't able to track down.)is the new release of it in the uk cropped? i watched three or four of his movies last year and they are pretty perfect.
I will have to investigate this. And yeah his movies are pretty damn awesome from what I've seen.
You and me both, brother.Still waiting for the Mean Girls collection.
| Thread Tools | |