The Unbearable Lightness of Being

[Lino]

This is old news but since there is bound to have some sort of discussion come the date of its release.

Cover art and specs



Out on February, 7th.

[tavernier]

I just saw this set: the movie is spread out over both discs (1:55 on disc one, 58 minutes on the second disc). It looks good, an improvement over the old Criterion disc.
As near as I can tell, the commentary is the same (Phil Kaufman makes reference to doing the commentary ten years after the film's release - which would be 1998). The only other extra is the 30-minute making-of doc, "Emotional History," which is interesting.
I'm not a big fan of the film - the book is one of my favorites, so I'm prejudiced - but I love the use of the music of Janacek, one of the greatest composers ever.

[souvenir]

the movie is spread out over both discs (1:55 on disc one, 58 minutes on the second disc)

This seems like a colossal mistake. Why would Warner's think people want to break up the rhythm of the movie to change discs? After reading about the similar situation with Ryan's Daughter, I hope this doesn't become a trend.

[tavernier]

It is very annoying on this disc; at least on the Lean DVD, the break comes at the intermission.

[Arcadean]

I think they did it before with Once Upon a Time in America, with the break coming at a particularly bad moment.

[ben d banana]

Yup, that was ridiculous. Are they doing this just to convince us of the greatness of Blu-ray/HD DVD?

[Lino]

I just saw this set: the movie is spread out over both discs (1:55 on disc one, 58 minutes on the second disc). It looks good, an improvement over the old Criterion disc.

This film didn't originally have an intermission, did it? And where exactly does the break occur?

(the mind boggles at this Warner decision; what were they thinking?)

[Narshty]

I think I'll stick with my Criterion disc. It may be seven years old now, but it still looks beautiful (I'm also pretty sure it was one of the few high-definition transfers Criterion did in the tail-end of the laserdisc era, hence the anamorphic DVD). If the documentary's only 30 minutes, I can't imagine it covers much that the commentary doesn't, which is still one of the very best ever recorded.

[tavernier]

There is no intermission - the break occurs right after Day-Lewis and Binoche make love: fade out, change your disc!

[Gordon]

Flipper? For a 172-minute film? It seems a bit pointless. I hope that they have maximized the bitrate throughout the encoding, at least.

The side-break on Once Upon a Time in America remains would of the worst DVD fuckups; I hope that Warner have not topped themselves here.

JFK (Director's Cut) - 206 minutes
Barry Lyndon - 184 minutes
Amadeus (Director's Cut) - 180 minutes
The Aviator - 170 minutes

Each on a single DVD-9. Amadeus and The Aviator both look gorgeous with no encoding problems and were also afforded a second disc for the extras so I'm not what Warner are up to here. Many other great transfers of 160+ minute films have been carefully encoded on a single DVD-9 recently, so this is quite surprising. One of this film's great strengths, is its natural, flowing narrative, so it will be a bugger having to flip the disc after an hour.

But this, aside, it seems to be a great edition of a superb film.

[Lino]

I don't care what Gary says, I'm keeping my OOP Criterion.

The Warner image is very similar to the MGM, the only difference being it's much sharper but overall I prefer the Criterion palette of colors. Not to mention that I won't have to switch DVDs in order to see the whole movie...

Once again, what were you thinking, Warners?

[denti alligator]

Those acreen caps at the Beaver seems to pretty clearly show that the image of the Criterion is superior in every way. The only reason to go for the new Warner disc is the cover.

[tavernier]

The only reason to go for the new Warner disc is the cover.

Yes, even those of us who aren't fans of the film absolutely love that new cover!

[Gordon]

Well, I would say that the real reason to go for the Warner edition is that the Criterion is OOP! The Criterion transfer indeed looks the best, though.

[kieslowski_67]

Gary made a mistake. The Criterion disc, like lots of its earlier releases, is NOT anamorphic. That is the single biggest reason that I sold the Criterion DVD and bought the new Warner release.

BTW, I am fine with studios releasing one movie on 2 DVD in order to get the best transfer (max bitrates).

Also, highly recommend the new Warner release of "Ryan's daughter". The picture quality is amazing! It's even better than some of the best Criterion transfers (I compared it to "Fanny and Alexander", "L' Eclipse", "Le Samourai", to name a few).

[thomega]

Gary made a mistake. The Criterion disc, like lots of its earlier releases, is NOT anamorphic.

That's not true: the criterion disc is anamorphic.

That is the single biggest reason that I sold the Criterion DVD and bought the new Warner release.

Did you check your criterion?

[jorencain]

Gary made a mistake. The Criterion disc, like lots of its earlier releases, is NOT anamorphic. That is the single biggest reason that I sold the Criterion DVD and bought the new Warner release.

I'm not sure where you got your copy from, but my Criterion ULoB is without a doubt anamorphic. It says on the packaging "Enhanced for 16:9 Televisions". I just watched it last week, and I can positively say that it is anamorphic.

[kieslowski_67]

I ordered my Criterion disc from probably Amazon when it was first released in 98 (?). Anyway, I sold it weeks ago and ordered the Warner disc. I must have made a mistake even if I checked the back and I did not see 16x9 enhanced for widescreen on the cover art.

Anyway, I did check out some of the early Criterion releases and lots of them are not anamorphic transfers (Andrei Rublev, salo, sid and nancy, night porter, dead ringers, amarcord, picnic at hanging rock, silence of the lambs, autumn sonata, vagabond, Red Beard, Sanjuro, to name a few).

[nick]

Red Beard would be anomorphic as well.

Look here

[Gigi M.]

[kieslowski_67]

Thanks for the clarification.

[Tommaso]

I finally watched this again after having seen it in the cinema when it came out in the late 80s, and am not entirely sure what to make of it now. Yes, the acting is wonderful, and so is Sven Nykvist's photography and the re-building of Prague in the studio, but as a whole it seems to lack a little in focus. I don't know how far the Kundera novel is responsible for this, but the film is trying to tell too many stories at once. The connection between Tomas' easy-going way with women (as a kind of rebellion against the oppresive regime, as the making-of explains) and his sudden and somewhat involuntary change to an opponent against the Soviet invaders seems forced, the idyllic way-out in form of the farming life is almost pathetic (does anyone really believe a highly qualified brain surgeon would become happy mowing the fields in almost no time whatsoever?), and the - in my view much more interesting- story of Sabina is almost totally forgotten after two thirds of the film. And a particular irritation was the curious attempt of actors from the USA, France and Sweden to speak English with a mock-Czech accent. Either do the film in Czech or do it in English, but this way it's plain ridiculous, a misguided attempt to provide some 'Old Europe' exoticism for American audiences. I was tempted one or two times to switch over to the German dub in between (which, thankfully does not have this problem, but of course is unconvincing as well).

Not having seen the Criterion, I bought this Warner 2-disc edition primarily because I tend to have my general doubts about the colour schemes on early Criterions. Well, while it does not have the ugly pinkish skin tones of so many early CC's, I had the impression that on the Warner the colours were too warm in places, and considering the film is spread on two discs, there is too much compression visible, and sharpness as well could have been better.

Hmmmm..... it's a nice film nevertheless, but still I can't help it.... I remembered it to be better.

[dx23]

According to this thread over at DVDTalk, this WB release is going OOP.

[Felix]

I finally watched this again after having seen it in the cinema when it came out in the late 80s, and am not entirely sure what to make of it now. Yes, the acting is wonderful, and so is Sven Nykvist's photography and the re-building of Prague in the studio, but as a whole it seems to lack a little in focus. I don't know how far the Kundera novel is responsible for this, but the film is trying to tell too many stories at once.

Hmmmm..... it's a nice film nevertheless, but still I can't help it.... I remembered it to be better.

Always a danger to revisit the past but always a temptation. I couldn't resist seeing Veronique for one last time at the cinema but I have resisted revisiting the breathtakingly beautiful parts of Scotland around Torridon and Shieldaig which I last saw 40 years ago because the memory could never be the same and the memory is so sweet I want to keep it that way.

I won't quote your whole post but just mention a couple of general points.
I think most of what you say has merit but I think the film still shades it, objectively, and for me, personally, it is a favourite for personal reasons having seen it at a key stage in my life when it first came out.

I had started reading the book and then saw the film was coming so followed the advice to see the film first and I think that was a benefit. I saw it twice in the first two weeks and a couple of times since, and again quite recently on the Criterion with the commentary, which was excellent, and makes the accents a lot more justifiable, to me anyway. But I know what you mean...

Remember, what Kaufman is doing is very brave here, filming the unfilmable, as one review back then said. The book is incredibly multi layered and complex and so very literary as well. But is is also a romance, with Sabina and Teresa, and with Czechoslovakia and Central European culture in general.

The film is also very long, though it stands out less for that reason these days, and it does falter to be sure, but as I have argued before, all great art is flawed and the flaws give it its humanity. But when one bit that falters, the slow section before the invasion, ends the way it does with Teresa rushing out and tha tanks rushing in then it has that much more power (though, just for once, I will be unequivocal about the effect of seeing it in the cinema and feeling the tanks before you hear or see them) I can forgive it and more. The music is gorgeous and so is Binoche who never looked this good again.

I don't think some of the other things you mention are so absurd either. and yes I can believe that he would find rural happiness. High pressure jobs and fighting bureaucracy, especially that all pervading sort, would do that to a lot of people even outside of Czechoslovakia and he isn't downsizing, his hand is being forced. It isn't being in the fields that makes him happy, it is being out of the maelstrom. And he is happy because he is with Teresa; love has conquered. In the book when Sabina hears of her death the letter tells her how they would travel once a month to a nearby town for a dance and stay over and return the next day, and she is happy for them because she knows that means they were happy (oh fuck I can feel the tears starting...).