criterionforum.org

I think My Fair Lady came from a 65mm negative....

oldsheperd wrote:"Selected Scene Commentary" seems a little half-assed

Yes, especially since the BFI edition has a full-length Kemp commentary.

65mm transfers:

Warner
Battle of the Bulge (2.75:1 Ultra Panavision)
Ben Hur (4-disc) (2.75:1 Ultra Panavision) (new transfer is softer, less detailed than the previous cropped transfer)
Ryan's Daughter

Mutiny on the Bounty (1962) (2.75:1 Ultra Panavision) (coming soon)
Grand Prix (coming soon)
Brannagh's Hamlet (coming soon)
2001: A Space Odyssey (upcoming SE)
Is Around the World in Eighty Days from 65mm?

Fox
The Agony and the Ecstasy
Sound of Music (the latest transfer, though from 65mm, has been excessively filtered, but has far less edge-enhancement than the previous transfer)
Oklahoma! (Is the Todd-AO version from 65mm?)
The Bible ... In the Beginning (or was it from a 35mm reduction? 2.55:1 ratio)
Patton (new edition from 65mm? 2.21:1 ratio retained)

MGM
The Greatest Story Ever Told (2.75:1 Ultra Panavision)
Chitty Chitty Bang Bang's SE is in 2.21:1 and looks great and is probably from 65mm.
West Side Story is 2.21:1, but it's hard to tell if it's 65.

Criterion
Spartacus (Laserdisc and DVD) (Technirama is 2.25:1 anamorphic 8-perf horizontal 35mm; 2.21:1 65mm blow-up restoration negative was used)

Sony
Lawrence of Arabia

MPI's Baraka is from 65/70mm.

65mm films with good 35mm reduction transfers:
2001: A Space Odyssey (remastered version; 2.21:1 ratio retained)
My Fair Lady is from a 35mm reduction that retained the 2.21:1 ratio.
Khartoum
Cleopatra is 2.35:1, as opposed to the original 2.21:1 Todd-AO and the grain structure looks like a 35mm reduction.
Patton (original DVD)

65mm films with poor transfers:

Exodus (non-anamorphic 2.35:1, mono)
The Last Valley (Todd-AO 65mm 6-track; DVD from an average 35mm element and non-anamorphic and is in mono)
Custer of the West, from MGM is non-anamorphic from a decent 35mm element.
Krakatoa, East of Java, from MGM is non-anamorphic from a decent 35mm mono element.
South Pacific is 2.21:1, though non-anamorphic and probably not from 65mm.
It's a Mad Mad Mad Mad World (from 2.55:1 35mm reduction of shorter version)
The Alamo (original 65mm camera negative is unprintable; DVD is from 35mm interpositive of the shorter version)
War and Peace (1964-1968, Russia) (original 70mm negative could not be obtained from the Ukrainian archives, so Ruscico had to use a fairly good 35mm reduction, though the authoring is poor)

Gordon McMurphy wrote:65mm transfers:

You're the master, Gordon. Thanks for that info.

Kurosawa's DERSU UZALA (1975) was shot in 70mm but none of the dvd's out there have a great print of it....this would be a great Criterion release if they can do it.

Gordon McMurphy wrote:65mm transfers:

Is Around the World in Eighty Days from 65mm?

According to Steve Hoffman, all original Todd-AO prints are now faded beyond use, and the current DVD release is from the simultaneously shot 35mm edition.

Gordon McMurphy wrote:Oklahoma! (Is the Todd-AO version from 65mm?)

Pretty sure it is (30fps? Sure looks like it), but the print does suffer from some color density problems in places. Note the newer DVD has the simultaneously shot Cinemascope version on another disc, and apparently a poor anamorphic transfer of the Todd-AO version (looks worse than the first DVD?)...

Gordon McMurphy wrote:The Alamo (original 65mm camera negative is unprintable; DVD is from 35mm interpositive of the shorter version)

Wasn't the one extant print of the roadshow version used once for a Laserdisc version, then apparently destroyed through a bad restoration technique? I need to find where I heard this...

Go here for further discussion on 65mm and other large-format transfers. htom, repost your reply there and I shall respond in my usual long-winded, boring manner.

Narshty wrote:

Cinéslob wrote:Well, those are my hopes for a definitive Tati boxset scuppered, then.

Is a box really all that important?

Just to remind folks that the speculation about a Tati box set isn't mere speculation. Criterion themselves raised it as a possibility in their newsletter late last year. And we also know that Jour de Fete and Trafic are titles they've long been interested in releasing. Of course, the situation may have changed since that announcement. Nothing is certain at this time.

It would make perfect sense as a gift set instead, so they can toss in Holiday and Oncle as well.

-Toilet Dcuk

Indeed, I've actually been holding out buying the Tati in hopes that there will be a set. At least a COMPLETE HULOT set on the horizon.

The current discussion of windowboxing on this forum is troubling me. Are we to assume that Playtime will be windowboxed?

justeleblanc wrote:The current discussion of windowboxing on this forum is troubling me. Are we to assume that Playtime will be windowboxed?

I wouldn't necessarily assume that the "all-new restored high definition transfer" is actually a transfer different from the first "all new restored" transfer. If it is, however, it would depend on how long this new edition of Playtime has been in the works. The odds of a non-windowboxed playtime isn't bad, but we'll have to wait for more information.

According to the website DVDBEAVER the first Criterion edition was cropped by 17% so lets hope we see more of the picture this time around....

atcolomb wrote:According to the website DVDBEAVER the first Criterion edition was cropped by 17% so lets hope we see more of the picture this time around....

Well then if the old transfer is used, we'll lose 17% of the image. If a new one was made within the last year/18 months, we might gain more of that image and but then have it windowboxed, which begs an interesting question: given the choice between losing 17% of the image or roughly 17% of the resolution on flat-screen sets and monitors, which would everyone prefer?

I don't think there's any question whatsoever that for the upcoming release Criterion has used the restored elements from the Tati Foundationas the basis for a new transfer. If not, they could've re-released Playtime at the same time they re-issued the unaltered versions of M. Hulot and Mon oncle back in January 2004.

The original release of Playtime by Criterion was in May 2001; the restored version of the film didn't debut until a year later at Cannes.

FilmFanSea wrote:The original release of Playtime by Criterion was in May 2001; the restored version of the film didn't debut until a year later at Cannes.

Thanks for clarifying, I probably should have looked around a bit before posting. That would lead me to belive that the new transfer would NOT be windowboxed (due to the timing of the restoration), which makes my day.

Since I'd seen some questionable black space on the 1.66 releases it didn't occur to me until now that the wider films had been left alone. Seems I probably should have just kept my mouth shut on the whole Playtime question. Sorry all.

arsonfilms wrote:Since I'd seen some questionable black space on the 1.66 releases it didn't occur to me until now that the wider films had been left alone. Seems I probably should have just kept my mouth shut on the whole Playtime question. Sorry all.

Me too. I wonder why letterboxed films aren't windowboxed, if they were originally doing this party because of what happened on the Contempt commentary.

arsonfilms wrote:Since I'd seen some questionable black space on the 1.66 releases it didn't occur to me until now that the wider films had been left alone. Seems I probably should have just kept my mouth shut on the whole Playtime question. Sorry all.

I'm not quite sure how one can have a 1:66 film presented anamorphically WITHOUT some blank space on the sides. If it were taken to the edges we would lose some of the top and bottom of the image. Right? To me, it's more questionable that we have seen many a 1:66 film presented in straight 16:9 (1:78, is it?), with some cropping (not that this is an issue for Playtime).

unclehulot wrote:I'm not quite sure how one can have a 1:66 film presented anamorphically WITHOUT some blank space on the sides. If it were taken to the edges we would lose some of the top and bottom of the image. Right? To me, it's more questionable that we have seen many a 1:66 film presented in straight 16:9 (1:78, is it?), with some cropping (not that this is an issue for Playtime).

You are correct. Since I don't have a widescreen monitor either at home or at work (some company I work for, right?) I've never seen a 1.66 film either presented on a wide screen or as an anamorphic master, and there have been more than a few 1.66 films that I thought were anamorphic that were, in fact, not. The 1.66 films presented 1.78 are clearly just a misunderstanding of the format. Anyway, now that THATS all cleared up, I can't wait for this Playtime disc.

justeleblanc wrote:

toiletduck! wrote:It would make perfect sense as a gift set instead, so they can toss in Holiday and Oncle as well.

Indeed, I've actually been holding out buying the Tati in hopes that there will be a set. At least a COMPLETE HULOT set on the horizon.

Received this from that Matt Lipson character today in response to a question (question was: "hi; great news about the playtime disc! i recall there being mention of a tati box set... will playtime be included in that? if i buy playtime now, will i have to resell it when the box set comes out? any clarification would be appreciated. thank you")

Dear Chris,
We actually have no immediate plans for a Tati boxed set.
I hope this helps, and please feel free to contact us with any future questions or concerns.
Best,
Matt Lipson

cgray wrote:Dear Chris,
We actually have no immediate plans for a Tati boxed set.
I hope this helps, and please feel free to contact us with any future questions or concerns.
Best,
Matt Lipson
The Criterion Collection

Well, it's nice to know that they're not really committed to anything they casually announce.

matt wrote:Well, it's nice to know that they're not really committed to anything they casually announce.

Well, to be fair, what they said in the October 2005 Newsletter was "we are indeed planning to release a new edition of Playtime—either individually or as part of a Jacques Tati box set—sometime in 2006." Obviously they decided to go with the individual route.

They'll do a Tati boxset a couple of years after Jour de Fete comes out, just like with the Kurosawas, Hitchcocks and Oliviers.

Ah, okay. I withdraw my snide comment.

Narshty wrote:They'll do a Tati boxset a couple of years after Jour de Fete comes out, just like with the Kurosawas, Hitchcocks and Oliviers.

I was hoping they'd release a box after Traffic for a complete Hulot set.