criterionforum.org

Jeff wrote:I believe that John Kirk was actually referring to MGM's featureless DVD that has been available for several years. MGM home video released that disc while Kirk and Robert Gitt at UCLA were working on the restoration, which would then tour theatrically. The much later special-edition disc which MGM was working on before funding was cut would have used the restoration, and I'm sure the Criterion disc does too.

Many thanks for the reply and it sounds like good news !

Does anyone have an idea why this and other of Criterion's recent and upcoming blu-rays (Darjeeling Limited, Seven Samurai, The Red Shoes, Black Narcissus, and others) have suddenly stopped being available on Netflix on their release dates? They also were at one time listed with blu-ray details, but then were removed. The lag time for Eclipse sets is likewise interesting. Could it be that Criterion has some deal with Netflix to allow them to sell a certain number of copies before Netflix can rent them?

All the films you mention had previously been released on DVD. Don't count on Netflix ever bothering to stock the Blu-ray upgrades. They only seem to buy Criterion Blu-rays anymore if it's the first time the film's been released R1 in any format (i.e. House, The Magician, etc.)

swo17 wrote:All the films you mention had previously been released on DVD. Don't count on Netflix ever bothering to stock the Blu-ray upgrades. They only seem to buy Criterion Blu-rays anymore if it's the first time the film's been released R1 in any format (i.e. House, The Magician, etc.)

This isn't true for all such releases. Both the recent blu upgrades of The Leopard and Breathless (and probably a few others) are available, but it definitely hurts the chances of it coming to Netflix. The non-availability of Seven Samurai and The Red Shoes are baffling to me so The Night of the Hunter doesn't seem to have better chances because it's a big release.

heredity4me wrote:Both the recent blu upgrades of The Leopard and Breathless (and probably a few others) are available

Though the Breathless disc is Fox Lorber not Criterion, if that means anything.

Finished the film and watched half of the extras on the first disc. If you love this film as much as I do, you're simply going to be over the moon with Criterion's work on this release: the print is pretty much pristine (I noticed some minor scratches in only one shot for the entire film), pure blacks, and excellent contrast and shadow detail, which is ever so crucial for this particular film. I honestly can't imagine anyone seeing this gorgeous presentation and afterwards still think that the decade-old MGM DVD is a viable alternative (it looks good for its time but is clearly brightness-boosted and in the wrong ratio). This Blu-Ray is hands down the most immersive presentation of the film yet and brings out the most beautiful shots in the film (the farmhouse and its reflection in the river) in spectacular fashion: I could have paused and stared at some favourite images for hours. Considering that there is next to no damage in the print presented, I feel it'd be very churlish not to give this transfer a full 10.

I found the first few extras that I've watched quite informative and never dull to watch: especially intriguing to me was the contradicting statements from the cast and crew over who shaped the final screenplay; the two scholars in the first documentary are adamant it's all Agee, but Bob Mitchum and other actors attribute it to Laughton in the BBC piece. Simon Callow relates how Laughton's repressed homosexuality and the role of religion feature in the film, and it makes Lilian Gish's speech in the final quarter all the more moving and poignant.

A few years ago, Night of The Hunter made a 'top Children's film list' somewhere or other, which provoked a few raised eyebrows. I think I was around 8-9 when I first saw it, and I was haunted by the imagery, Mitchum's 'primal scream' and, for some reason, the line (as delivered) 'poor old Uncle Birdy'; oh, lots of stuff.

And yes, it is not just one of THE greatest films, it's a great children's film.

Despite the odd (sometimes very odd) negative comment (and thank you Finch for your post above), I'm confident I'll be blown away by Criterion's presentation.

Goddamn, Finch. That sounds spectacular. If I get this for Christmas, I will run laps around my house in my long johns.

This is my first post, but let me chime in and say that this is a remarkable release. I just finished watching my blu-ray copy and this is easily one of criterion's finest catalog efforts.

The commentary track is good and informative, and I usually don't bother with commentaries. One thing I noticed is that they rightfully praise Billy Chapin as the boy John, but pay little attention to Sally Jane Bruce as little sister Pearl, except to note that she had trouble with line readings.

I noticed 3 interesting moments involving Pearl which they ignored:

1) After John tells Pearl a thinly disguised bedtime story, Mitchum turns up, but they dismiss his arrival and go to sleep. Pearl turns so that we see her hair, but the doll's face is in place of her own. It's kind of a creepy moment and the camera holds on it for a few seconds. A lot can be made of that -- the inseparability of Pearl and the doll throughout the film, Pearl's vulnerability, a nightmare conversion right out of a fairy tale, and of course that Pearl becomes an object which Mitchum would willingly slice open to get the money.

2) When the children come up from hiding in the basement, they are smudged like coal miners. Pearl has a big forehead smear, but also some artful lines around her nose that look suspiciously like 2 whiskers on each side of her face. This seems to underscore Pearl's vulnerability and innocence and connect her with the vulnerable little animals (the rabbits, etc) we'll soon see when the children are fleeing down the river.

3) When they reach Uncle Birdie's digs, Pearl lies down in the same resigned death pose that her mother assumed just before The Preacher sets upon her. But John goes all Huck Finn and rescues them.

Of course, NotH is filled with such moments of repetition and foreshadowing and fairy tale wisps that it would be hard to note them all. But I thought Sally Jane Bruce was well cast and Laughton does some interesting things with her.

Thinking back on last night's viewing,
4) The Father essentially cashed in his life for the money.
Later we see Pearl asking for a refund, transforming the money into human figures with her paper-cutting.

Sally Jane Bruce has a haunting face. She looks like a little china doll, pretty, yet also unnervingly blank and unemotional. Your observation of her assuming her mother's death pose brings out how oddly complicit she is with Harry's "hunting" of them. Take, for example, that great moment in the kitchen when Harry shows them his knife. Her eyes widen and she jerks back in fear, but she then walks toward him as if hypnotized by the shiny weapon. That, to me, is one of her most effective moments. And later, when Harry shows up at Miss Cooper's farm, Pearl drops her doll and runs to him, arms open and blank-faced, once again in a kind of trance. She is as much taken in by Harry's charms as her mother was, and even as she watches him threaten to slit John's throat and after the entire chase, she still finds comfort in him.

I don't have the Criterion set yet, and it indeed looks to be one of the best releases of the year, but it would have been AMAZING if Criterion could have gotten interviews with Bruce and Chapin. I believe they're both still living. I wonder what they might have said about Laughton's methods, and what their relationship to the film is now.

Finally got my copy, and it is gorgeous. I'm probably going to pour myself over the extras in the next couple of days. The last time I saw this film was close to eight years ago though, and I'm amazed how much I missed in that first viewing. The movie feels just packed with visual treats. I first loved the film because of that menacing Robert Mitchum and how striking it looked, but seeing it today reminded me how much of a fairytale it was (with somewhat altered archetypes). The odd opening with Lillian Gish talking to floating heads could only come from a fairy tale, really.
I also found Pearl pretty annoying upon first viewing (that voice!), but this time I found her wide-eyed innocence a perfect fit and oddly endearing. She won me over.

Lemmy Caution wrote:The Father essentially cashed in his life for the money.

True, and this was pretty much confirmed from that extra from the Ed Sullivan show as well, when Ben Harper stressed how much Willa needs the money, etc.

Release of the year.

Feego wrote:Sally Jane Bruce has a haunting face. She looks like a little china doll, pretty, yet also unnervingly blank and unemotional.

Her generation's Lily Cole

Napier wrote:Release of the year.

Yes and even in a crowded year of good releases. The second disc has a two-hour film showing how Laughton directed the cast, looks blissfully good, don't know where Criterion got all this material from but you feel almost spoiled at how good a release it is.

I agree that this is the release of the year. It's a film I've never seen, but have wanted to for too long. "Charles Laughton Directs..." is also the best extra feature this year, IMHO. It's as riveting as the film. I wish I had more to say, but I plan to revisit the film again very soon, and maybe I'll have something more articulate to contribute than this.

I'd forgotten just how compelling The Night of the Hunter was until I watched it again this morning; first time in a while. I was still in the throes of sleepiness but I couldn't take my eyes off the screen: I remember Mitchum's Powell being scary at times, but he's an bestial, larger than life monster here (his howls of frustration that fade into the soundtrack as he wades through the riverbank is a particularly chilling bit). The shot of Pearl and John's mother at the bottom of the river, too ...yikes! I forgot how beautifully the film oscillates between a nightmare and a storybook so fluidly; the plot ends up as chiaroscuro as the mise-en-scene.

I didn't realize CC did a figure-8 for SD and a digi for Blu until it came in the mail yesterday; I was disappointed at first, but the SD package looks super classy.

In a year full of excellent releases, this may be at the top of the list. I'm looking forward to going through all the supplements today, and to some good discussion about the film on here. In any case ...bravo, Criterion!

What hits me each time is the tailspin of an ending that the film has and how gobsmacking it is - the story of two kids on the run from a killer becomes this macro vision of society folding in on itself. The mob violence, the 180 the prison warden does (I'll be happy to see this one hanged!) and how it pushes aside a tidy resolution of having the Preacher punished and the children safe with Gish, and instead has the Preacher's punishment become almost a side note in the wake of all the insanity.

NotH has one of the most interesting structures I've seen, a three-act story where the third pushes everything that came before into overdrive and never settles for convention. The only problem I have with the film is Shelley Winters, who is just terrible in it, but that's a rather minor flaw in the scheme of things.

Napier wrote:Release of the year.

I just finished the second disc and I changed my mind.

Spoiler

Best Criterion release ever.

Murdoch wrote:What hits me each time is the tailspin of an ending that the film has and how gobsmacking it is - the story of two kids on the run from a killer becomes this macro vision of society folding in on itself. The mob violence, the 180 the prison warden does (I'll be happy to see this one hanged!) and how it pushes aside a tidy resolution of having the Preacher punished and the children safe with Gish, and instead has the Preacher's punishment become almost a side note in the wake of all the insanity.

NotH has one of the most interesting structures I've seen, a three-act story where the third pushes everything that came before into overdrive and never settles for convention. The only problem I have with the film is Shelley Winters, who is just terrible in it, but that's a rather minor flaw in the scheme of things.

As someone young enough to discover the movie for the very first time, what I found interesting is how every negative thing is superficially attracted inside this small community, while every positive aspect will, at some point, being excluded of it. The father who steals (superficially bad) but for his children (in fact "good") will be mocked. The preacher (superficially good) which is a multi-recidivist killer and stealer (in fact bad) will be completely absorbed by the community. The children will have the same issue, when at the end, they will almost be lynched.

But the end, as you said, is really breathtaking. What, at first, seemed to me to be very generic archetypic figures started to become a wonderful depiction of a society alienating itself with appeal and superficiality, and what was at first a children alienated by seeing his father being taken away shemfully becomes a children alienated by the craziness around him.

Napier wrote:

Napier wrote:Release of the year.

I just finished the second disc and I changed my mind.

Spoiler

Best Criterion release ever.

My dad has never owned a Criterion release of anything, but he's a fan of this film and will be getting it for Christmas. I'm sort of eager to give it to him early, it's so good. It is easily one of the best Criterions I own, and I'm still only on Disc 1.

Still, I don't know if anything will feel as complete as the Straw Dogs release to me, that commentary is just too perfect.

Tom Hagen wrote:

onedimension wrote:I was thinking December would be fitting.

If they get it out by December, I promise to buy five copies as various gifts.

Also: bring on the Mitchum supplements we didn't get on Eddie Coyle!

I look forward for my "Gift".

PM me for my address.