criterionforum.org

That was normal British physique in the 30s/40s.

Even for women?

agnamaracs wrote:You know what I'm going to miss most about the Criterion Canals? The old, horribly loud Canal logo with drums and chanting and random numbers popping up everywhere. One of my two favorite logos ever to appear on a Criterion disc.

I love how it contrasts so obnoxiously with the Criterion logo. wwwwwwwACCCHOW!

agnamaracs wrote:You know what I'm going to miss most about the Criterion Canals? The old, horribly loud Canal logo with drums and chanting and random numbers popping up everywhere. One of my two favorite logos ever to appear on a Criterion disc.

(The other one is the Anglo logo from Peeping Tom, which Canal had better preserve for their Blu-ray release...)

Which reminds me, Nick , would you mind turning down the volume on the MOC 'projector reel' intro at the start of each dvd. Always too bloody loud. Any chance you could sync the volume with the start of the film? Gets me every time. [-X

HarryLong wrote:What was it with British studios & their fondness for buffed bodybuilders in their logos?

I was talking about this one...



Bizarre drawing, poor-quality music... what's not to love?

BTW, the framegrab is courtesy Hulu, which lists the film as being from Lionsgate yet mind-bogglingly has Criterion/Janus logos at the start (and this is the only soon-to-be-ex-Criterion listed as such)...

Amazon's all out of Pierrot le fou Blus

Damn good thing I already have all the titles from this list that I'd ever want.

domino harvey wrote:Amazon's all out of Pierrot le fou Blus

Ditto for Quai des Orfèvres
- thank God I secured it in time and don't have to pay outrageous prices to amazon sellers!

peerpee wrote:That was normal British physique in the 30s/40s.

Oh my, I hope that wasn't a slip of the tongue; a dead giveaway as far as your age is concerned, peerpee! :-$

peerpee wrote:That was normal British physique in the 30s/40s.

More proof I've lived in the wrong time... and the wrong country...

It appears that most of the soon-to-be OOP Criterions now show up as "In Stock" on their website. So hopefully a lot of those backorders start showing up sooner than we might have expected.

I recommend the Eclipse Saura set, if you were thinking about it, you should get it while it's gettable.

Blu-Ray.com review of Contempt (US release)

less than stellar. #-o ](*,)

aox wrote:Blu-Ray.com review of Contempt (US release)

less than stellar. #-o ](*,)

And yet this reviewer, like Svet Atanasov for the Optimum release, said that the film had never looked better and recommended it highly. I wish all reviewers would do away with these essentially subjective numerical ratings - at least this isn't Robert Parker's 100-point scale for wine - because they are useful only for marketing hype and tell the consumer little.

I have the Optimum disc. There is some color variation and black crush in the first 20 minutes (and the Criterion SD suffers from the same), but at 12 feet on a 50" plasma it doesn't detract from the film (unless you are really, really sensitive to these types of things). The rest of the film looks fine and the Capri scenes are lovely. Besides, the film is 47 years old, the DP is 85, Studio Canal owns the rights and is apparently satisfied, so this is as good as it's going to get for a number of years. But YMMV.

triodelover wrote:And yet this reviewer, like Svet Atanasov for the Optimum release, said that the film had never looked better and recommended it highly.

umm, yeah. It's not abyssal, and it is the only release in the US on Blu-Ray. He clearly talks about the problems with it. Something can not be perfect but worth buying. I don't know why it has to be one or the other.

Have you ever bought a Facets disc? Well, I recommend it if you want a copy of a movie you love that happens to be exclusive to Facets.

I have the Optimum disc. There is some color variation and black crush in the first 20 minutes (and the Criterion SD suffers from the same), but at 12 feet on a 50" plasma it doesn't detract from the film (unless you are really, really sensitive to these types of things). The rest of the film looks fine and the Capri scenes are lovely. Besides, the film is 47 years old, the DP is 85, Studio Canal owns the rights and is apparently satisfied, so this is as good as it's going to get for a number of years. But YMMV.

So, what you are saying is that the disc is less than perfect (not a 5/5), but not nearly abysmal (1/5, 2/5)? so it's about 3/5ish. That's what the reviewer essentially said and recommended it, as you did, because it is the only option in Region 1 for Blu Ray.

The disappointment is that Criterion could have possibly gotten rid of some of these issues, might have taken the time and money to do so, and potentially could have brought this disc to around around the quality of 4/5 like Pierrot Le Fou. That's been the argument for the entire thread.

aox wrote:Have you ever bought a Facets disc? Well, I recommend it if you want a copy of a movie you love that happens to be exclusive to Facets.

So you're equating this Blu-ray with the kind of garbage Facets turns out regularly? That makes sense.

aox wrote:So, what you are saying is that the disc is less than perfect (not a 5/5), but not nearly abysmal (1/5, 2/5)? so it's about 3/5ish. That's what the reviewer essentially said and recommended it, as you did, because it is the only option in Region 1 for Blu Ray.

What I say is that the disk is less than perfect for about the first 20 minutes and thereafter looks as good as any Blu-ray of a film this age I've seen. What I think are minor problems in the first chapters do not detract from the overall viewing experience and are not that noticeable in my viewing envoronment. You're free to attach whatever numerical rating to my opinion that makes you comfortable.

aox wrote:The disappointment is that Criterion could have possibly gotten rid of some of these issues, might have taken the time and money to do so, and potentially could have brought this disc to around around the quality of 4/5 like Pierrot Le Fou. That's been the argument for the entire thread.

Possibly, though Coutard indentified these same problems when supervising the Criterion SD transfer. Maybe they could have been fixed today with the tools available, maybe the cost would be prohibitive, or maybe a Criterion Blu would look a lot like this one. It's immaterial because we aren't going to get one. We do have the new SC and it's pretty damned good.

Some of what's been said about the color variation in particular I think could be considered nit-picking. Much has been made of the color of Palance's Alfa Spider when it's parked outside the screening room. The criticism is that it's too orange. For their European market, Alfa used a color called rosso cardinale during this time period. Like most cardinal reds, there was a subtle yellow/orange cast to it. It's not one of the "blue" reds. The Alfa in the film was filmed in bright sunlight when it was parked outside the screening room. You can see the sun reflected in the trunk (boot). I think it's just as likely that filming condition gave the result we see as problems in color grading in the transfer. At any rate, we're talking a few seconds. Surely this isn't enough to spoil the film for you?

My Facets comparison was an extreme example to make a point. I was showing that something even that shitty might be 'recommendable' since it is the only option. You placed so much emphasis on this reviewer 'still recommending' Contempt; essentially, implying that he was talking out of both sides of his mouth, when in my view, he was being perfectly sensible.

I plan to buy this disc eventually. This is my favorite Godard. But that doesn't mean the disc is beyond criticism and a possible opportunity missed. You are free to make the charge that I am spoiled by Criterion's track record relative to the Studio Canal's. That's fine! I am comfortable with that, since I love film, and like the best possible (realistically speaking) presentation since.... you know........it's a visual medium. At least Contempt appears to be nowhere near as bad as their release of Ran (according to numerous reviews). Maybe they are getting better?

aox wrote:an extreme example to make a point

The best way to make a point, really. Observe: aox is the Hitler of making points. There, have I made my point?

Godwin, bro.

aox wrote:You placed so much emphasis on this reviewer 'still recommending' Contempt; essentially, implying that he was talking out of both sides of his mouth, when in my view, he was being perfectly sensible.

It seems to be you who are placing too much emphasis on my saying both reviewers still recommend the disc. My issue was with the attempt to assign a subjective score to the video that might be seen as equivocal while making a considerably stronger statement in the text. I assumed, and perhaps wrongly, that it was the 3.5 video score that elicited your "less than stellar" comment with the attached emoticons.

I thought I had offered my own unambiguous opinion in language that made it clear that I wasn't just cheerleading for a particular review. After all, I own the disc, have seen it, and went back after this same discussion on the Beaver ListServ to view the supposedly problematic bits again. Then I formed the opinion I've posted here. Besides a bit of pissing and moaning on an internet forum, you've done...what it is, now?

aox wrote:I plan to buy this disc eventually. This is my favorite Godard. But that doesn't mean the disc is beyond criticism and a possible opportunity missed.

I'm pretty sure my bit about the first 20 minutes being less than perfect qualifies as criticism. The remainder of my comments were an attempt to put that criticism in perspective. Sorry that flew right over your head.

aox wrote: You are free to make the charge that I am spoiled by Criterion's track record relative to the Studio Canal's. That's fine! I am comfortable with that, since I love film, and like the best possible (realistically speaking) presentation since.... you know........it's a visual medium. At least Contempt appears to be nowhere near as bad as their release of Ran (according to numerous reviews). Maybe they are getting better?

Where did I say you were spoiled? But your statement implies you've compared both producers' output. So how many Studio Canal BDs have you seen? I agree the jury's still out, but I've at least seen Le mépris and Belle de jour, which I'm guessing is two more SC BDs than you've seen. Putting your snide and pointless Facets remark aside, where did you corner the market on love of cinema and the desire to have the best presentations possible? Is it proprietary? I need to know since if you own it I'll need to find a new love (and at my age, too).

Well, if there isn't enough to whinge about (or praise) already, Beaver's got most of the comparison for À bout de souffle up.

Hey, at least it's not picture-boxed! =D>

Napier wrote:Hey, at least it's not picture-boxed! =D>

Probably should have listed "praise" before "whinge" given the recent tenor of the conversation. #-o

the SC looks good. I'll probably end up getting it because it gives the wife another Belmondo in Blu. O:)

I'm trying to figure out exactly what aox and triodelover are disagreeing over. Whatever it is, it doesn't seem to be the quality of the BD.

It was triodelover whining about a review that he/she actually agreed with word-for-word and getting hung up on some dumb rating system.