Stanley Kubrick Collection

[Darth Lavender]

That's kind of a relief. My own HD copy of Eyes Wide Shut is in the mail (from DVDPacific, which has excellent prices, very fast, cheap shipping, and fine customer service.... but an absolutely terribly returns/replacement policy) and I was already feeling a bit annoyed at myself for selling my old 4:3, uncensored, DVD (although, realistically, superior framing or not, how often am I likely to sit down and watch a 2 and a half hour film on DVD, when I have it on HD?)

Held on to my Australian cut of "The Shining" (the shorter, two-hour cut is pretty interesting in its way, mainly for the way certain details are revealed (ie. without certain earlier scenes, the first we hear of Jack's violence to Danny is in his "momentary loss of muscular coordination" speech to the Bartender, and, for that matter, it's also the first we see of the ballroom) but, come to think of it, I might get rid of that DVD for the same reason (when am I ever likely to say to myself; "I don't feel like sitting down and watching the full 150 minute Shining in High Definition, I think I'll just watch the 120 minute version today...")

[manicsounds]

The NOW PRINTING on the Life In Pictures documentary, is the non-finalized coverart

As for LOLITA and BARRY LYNDON, both are still non-anamorphic, with the same VoB files as the older releases, just repackaged.

[Gigi M.]

Strange move by Warner changing the covers without previously advertising it.

[Jeff]

Strange move by Warner changing the covers without previously advertising it.

They didn't change them exactly. The covers pictured above are a box set exclusive. The previously announced covers are still found on the individual versions. I haven't heard of anybody getting that "A Life in Pictures" cover in their set though -- apparently, because it's "now printing" (WTF?).

[Romat]

The Spanish Boxset at least has a uniform box design to go with the individual covers. Which is a little better, IF you like that design.

Also if you look closely, according to this online art and description, the "Life in Pictures" doc may not be in it's own case in the Spanish version. It's listed as the 2nd disc in the Full Metal Jacket case.

Spanish Full Metal Jacket

??? .....interesting

[Quot]

Guess I'm alone in preferring the minimalist covers of the set over the individual discs (tho I'm glad to see them before making the purchase, so thanks for posting).

[flyonthewall2983]

Guess I'm alone in preferring the minimalist covers of the set over the individual discs

No you're not.

[denti alligator]

I wish the HD versions looked like that. I, too, prefer these "minimalist" covers.

Denti A,
who is still waiting for Warner to ship him his HD Kubrick discs...

[Gigi M.]

Strange move by Warner changing the covers without previously advertising it.

They didn't change them exactly. The covers pictured above are a box set exclusive. The previously announced covers are still found on the individual versions. I haven't heard of anybody getting that "A Life in Pictures" cover in their set though -- apparently, because it's "now printing" (WTF?).

I guess you're right, but they never advertised special covers designs for the box set. I also prefer these covers.

[Gregory]

Following the Beaver comparison of A Clockwork Orange,

Is it just me or does the older Warner still look better then the new disc? Granted it's not anamorphic but the new edition just looks that bit softer to me eyes.

I was thinking the same, I actually wondered at first if they might have been displayed the wrong way around until I remembered that going anamorphic often seems to have that softening effect.

Can someone please explain why that would be the case? I don't understand why if I watch the new DVD, with an anamorphic transfer and thus higher resolution, on an upconverting DVD player it should look softer than the non-anamorphic transfer from more than six years ago.

[ivuernis]

Following the Beaver comparison of A Clockwork Orange,

Is it just me or does the older Warner still look better then the new disc? Granted it's not anamorphic but the new edition just looks that bit softer to me eyes.

Can someone please explain why that would be the case? I don't understand why if I watch the new DVD, with an anamorphic transfer and thus higher resolution, on an upconverting DVD player it should look softer than the non-anamorphic transfer from more than six years ago.

I was just referring to the DVDBeaver screen grabs. To my eyes the new Warner looks softer in these images. As to why this may be the case I have no idea, but certainly in these images the old Warner looks superior, non-anamorphic transfer aside.

[Rsdio]

And from a technical point of view I wouldn't have a clue, as you say it shouldn't be happening at all in theory. It's just something I've often noticed when reading reviews of discs on DVDBeaver and the like.

[Gregory]

Thanks for the replies. I thought there might be some technical reason for this, apart from Warner's baffling lack of concern about the quality of one of their major releases of the year. The new SD Eyes Wide Shut also looks a little too soft to me in the Beaver caps. I wonder if there's any chance that they're not making much of an effort to get sharp SD transfers because they're invested in increasing high definition format sales and they want the average person to be able to see a really clear difference between the the two. Whatever the reason, given the choices I have now I'll just go without these particular Kubrick films for a couple more years. I've seen them all 3-6 times each anyway, except for 2001 (which I did really want to revisit).
This whole thing is really strange. I've been looking forward to a special edition of Barry Lyndon for a couple of years now and sold my older non-anamorphic DVD in anticipation of it. And it took all this time to get... an exciting amaray case with the same old DVD inside? Lyndon and Lolita aren't as popular as Clockwork Orange and 2001, but I thought ALL these Kubrick titles were a really big deal in this business. And here it is the end of the week and the only site I can find with reviews of the new Kubrick releases is DVDBeaver. Odd.

[Der Müde Tod]

To my eyes the new Warner looks softer in these images. As to why this may be the case I have no idea, but certainly in these images the old Warner looks superior, non-anamorphic transfer aside.

When you download Beaver's images and compare the file sizes, the new Warner ones are significantly smaller. So, the softness can very well be the result of the jpeg compression. Beaver should use lossless png compression.

[Gregory]

When you download Beaver's images and compare the file sizes, the new Warner ones are significantly smaller. So, the softness can very well be the result of the jpeg compression. Beaver should use lossless png compression.

This is good to note, but my own reaction was not only to the appearance of the caps but also to Gary's assessments in his reviews of The Shining, EWS, and Clockwork Orange that the earlier releases were sharper and more detailed than these, whereas they seem to have done a good job with 2001. This isn't to say his observations are infallible, of course, but I have lots of concerns about how they've handled this whole project, so I wouldn't be surprised if they indeed failed to even match the image sharpness of the previous releases of these.

[ivuernis]

For me anyway, the previous WB collection will continue to be the only Kubrick set sitting on my shelf for now. Maybe I'll get 2001 someday whenever I go down the HD route and depending on forthcoming reviews I may still get ACO for the anamorphic transfer. I still remember what a great experience seeing ACO on a limited theatrical release in 2000 was in this part of the world where it was withdrawn for so long until after Kubrick's death. In fact having never seen a Kubrick film in the theatre until 1999 with EWS I then had the joy of seeing a Kubrick film in the theatre for 3 consectutive years, EWS in '99, ACO in '00 and 2001 in its eponymous year.

[HerrSchreck]

Although I don't buy into the Kubrick Is God mindset that is so omnipresent in cineaste circles (though I do think ACO & 2001 are masterpieces), his film truly are not fully experienced until viewed in the cinema, even flawed stuff like THE SHINING. These films have a magical effect on the space surrounding the screen, the air.. his better films bleed offa the screen and make the cinema a part of the set. in a very curious and uniquely druggy way that even the most cinematic of pictorial films rarely do. Being content with dvd's for Kubrick is a major mistake.

And every high school age kid should go see ACO in a midnight show with his friends, and come stumbling out onto the deserted city streets high and dazed and on the brink of breaking windows & attacking passerby and talking crazy shit like Alex & co.... damn near obligatory!

[miless]

And every high school age kid should go see ACO in a midnight show with his friends, and come stumbling out onto the deserted city streets high and dazed and on the brink of breaking windows & attacking passerby and talking crazy shit like Alex & co.... damn near obligatory!

and these same individuals should see Eraserhead several years later (at midnight, of course), stumbling into the streets terrified at what they might encounter on their voyage home (or even in their own home).

[you gotta be kidding me]

And every high school age kid should go see ACO in a midnight show with his friends, and come stumbling out onto the deserted city streets high and dazed and on the brink of breaking windows & attacking passerby and talking crazy shit like Alex & co.... damn near obligatory!

I find CO one of his two or three least films, primarily because of this effect it seems to have on people who "identify" with Alex. These are generally the same crowd who watch FMJ and yell out stuff like "Kill the bitch!" at the end as the soldiers look down at the wounded sniper. Obviously Kubrick is not responsible for underestimating his audience, but... he certainly could've made Alex a more unseemly character. I do appreciate the last scene, though, which basically says that good and evil are, if not meaningless, then at least not rewarded accordingly. Alex knows that.

In the end, it seems Kubrick excuses individual menace and irresponsibility just to point out the same behavior by larger powers, groups, like the media and government.

[greggster59]

From The Digital Bits:

Warner has issued a statement regarding the missing theatrical version on its new Eyes Wide Shut discs. Here's what they have to say...

On October 23, 2007, WHV released the Special Edition of Eyes Wide Shut on standard definition DVD, and on HD DVD and Blu-ray Disc, and as part of the 6-Title Stanley Kubrick Collection. It may be that some members of the press were inadvertently informed that the Special Edition release of Eyes Wide Shut included both the rated and unrated versions of the film and/or only the rated version of the film. In addition, some initially shipped product also was inadvertently labeled as containing both the rated and unrated versions of the film. The Special Edition release of Eyes Wide Shut contains only the unrated version of the film. WHV has taken steps to correct any possible misunderstanding in the marketplace by affixing to the packaging stickers stating "This package contains ONLY the Unrated Version of Eyes Wide Shut." and "Not Rated: Includes Unrated Version Only."

[HerrSchreck]

And every high school age kid should go see ACO in a midnight show with his friends, and come stumbling out onto the deserted city streets high and dazed and on the brink of breaking windows & attacking passerby and talking crazy shit like Alex & co.... damn near obligatory!

I find CO one of his two or three least films, primarily because of this effect it seems to have on people who "identify" with Alex. These are generally the same crowd who watch FMJ and yell out stuff like "Kill the bitch!" at the end as the soldiers look down at the wounded sniper. Obviously Kubrick is not responsible for underestimating his audience, but... he certainly could've made Alex a more unseemly character. I do appreciate the last scene, though, which basically says that good and evil are, if not meaningless, then at least not rewarded accordingly. Alex knows that.

In the end, it seems Kubrick excuses individual menace and irresponsibility just to point out the same behavior by larger powers, groups, like the media and government.

... not to mention the rock And roll. And this ozzy who should have been in jail years ago owing to All Those Killings!

Well well well... you mean as far as high school teens are concerned, bad is good? YOU GOTTA BE KIDDING ME!

[you gotta be kidding me]

Whatever, contrarian drama queen.

[HerrSchreck]

"The movie sucks because young people think the bad guy's cool.. and dammit that just gets me inna snit!"

What're ya left with to get down with over there... Annette Funicello Skippy commercials? Why let misguided youth deter you from enjoying films that you as a (cough) mature adult can more fully comprehend?

WHo cares what kids think about it? Kids will always be kids. You sound a little like those folks who get a boner over the fact that NIBELUNGEN was Hitlers favorite film and so therefore wanta knock it wholesale off the table.

[you gotta be kidding me]

Well well well... you mean as far as high school teens are concerned, bad is good? YOU GOTTA BE KIDDING ME!

Dude, you're the one who brought it up, and you seem to miss my point... or your own point, for that matter.

[HerrSchreck]

No no You brought this up, friend! You quoted me and started a conversation by challenging my point! You asked for my attention and now you got it. Now I'm answering the charge twice, now three times over.. and I'm skirting the point?

I keep trying to point out from multiple angles--sometimes humorously, I admit, because its kinda funny-- that your reactions to reactions are not reactions to the artwork. However you feel about the movie should be how you feel about the movie. How you feel about the kids who stomp around like Alex (because they think he's cool) is another thing.

Your response has been to tag me with a colorful gag razz, and to talk about Talking About Stuff.

But I've lost interest. You've had two tries... I'm watching an ep of JUDEX and going to bed.

Feuillade again? You gotta be kidding me.