criterionforum.org

Glad to see Hannah and Sleeper getting releases.


... but at this rate Stardust Memories won't be released until 2020.

Oh yeah, Crimes and Misdemeanors next would be awesome.

Anyone have Fargo on Blu-Ray? Skip to the chapter where Buscemi's character counts the ransom money for the first time. (The first thing you see is the burnt umber Ciera, parked by the side of an empty road.)

Check out the close-up of the money (the reveal that follows Buscemi's own close-up). For the first second or two, the image looks frozen. The movie's still playing, you can hear it on the soundtrack even though it's just wind and ambience, and I've seen the film enough times to know that Buscemi does pause for a bit at the beginning of this shot before touching the money, but I'm wondering why it's frozen like this?

I think a similar problem was mentioned on the new Universal Blu-Ray of Hitchcock's Frenzy - there's a moment just like this where it looks like the image has been paused/frozen. Do they do this on purpose in a misguided attempt to "hide" the grain? If anything, it makes the grain look more noticeable by freezing it in space instead of having it move around on its own as usual.

hearthesilence wrote:Anyone have Fargo on Blu-Ray? Skip to the chapter where Buscemi's character counts the ransom money for the first time. (The first thing you see is the burnt umber Ciera, parked by the side of an empty road.)

Check out the close-up of the money (the reveal that follows Buscemi's own close-up). For the first second or two, the image looks frozen. The movie's still playing, you can hear it on the soundtrack even though it's just wind and ambience, and I've seen the film enough times to know that Buscemi does pause for a bit at the beginning of this shot before touching the money, but I'm wondering why it's frozen like this?...

I checked this out over the weekend and I feel pretty certain that the Coens repeated the first frame of the shot several times for pacing purposes during editing. In other words, it's a freeze-frame that has always been part of the film. Given that Buscemi pauses to gaze at the money in the previous shot, I suspect that the action of reaching for the money in this subsequent insert shot happened too quick for clean continuity. Presumably, the Coens didn't have a suitable alternative take so they chose to freeze the image to prevent the reach for the money from seeming too abrupt.

swo17 wrote:

jedgeco wrote:TCF Hitchcocks (Notorious, Rebecca, Spellbound) are $10.49 (58% off).

Some Woody Allen films as well (at least Annie Hall, Manhattan, and Hannah and Her Sisters). These always seem to go on sale at the same time as the Hitchcocks.

Annie Hall and Manhattan are definitely worth it, but Hannah's Blu-Ray has gotten poor reviews (allegedly an inconsistent and occasionally noisy transfer) so beware.

hearthesilence wrote:Hannah's Blu-Ray has gotten poor reviews (allegedly an inconsistent and occasionally noisy transfer) so beware.

Where are those poor reviews? HTF gave the video 4/5 (generous IMO), Blu-Ray.com gave it 3/5 and most other reviews I've found are about the same. It's true the transfer is inconsistent and exhibits noise in places but it's by no means "poor" and a substantial enough improvement over the lacklustre DVD (though you could argue that the Blu-Ray is, on its own terms, lacklustre as well). I, for one, don't regret buying the disc. The only outright pan also disses the film (undeservedly) so in my book the reviewer in question can get stuffed.

Finch wrote:

hearthesilence wrote:Hannah's Blu-Ray has gotten poor reviews (allegedly an inconsistent and occasionally noisy transfer) so beware.

Where are those poor reviews? HTF gave the video 4/5 (generous IMO), Blu-Ray.com gave it 3/5 and most other reviews I've found are about the same. It's true the transfer is inconsistent and exhibits noise in places but it's by no means "poor" and a substantial enough improvement over the lacklustre DVD (though you could argue that the Blu-Ray is, on its own terms, lacklustre as well). I, for one, don't regret buying the disc. The only outright pan also disses the film (undeservedly) so in my book the reviewer in question can get stuffed.

Fair enough. I don't like the DVD either, I wouldn't buy it over the Blu-Ray, that's for sure, but the Blu-Ray disc is still a huge letdown for me.

FWIW, I don't put that much trust into 'official' reviews from review sites anymore, from my experience, they're too inconsistent, unless the disc is absolutely terrible. If there's something wrong with a transfer, from my experience, the best bet is to wait for a collective confirmation of that discovery - someone will pick up on it, post about it, and if they're right, a continuous stream of customers will confirm and post accordingly.

I thought the Amazon reviewer here gave a pretty good rundown of what I don't like about the disc:

Where should I start? The one word that sums up this entire transfer (that I can post here on Amazon) is INCONSISTENT from start to finish. Outdoor scenes fare the best but with less perceived resolution than a recent viewing from HD Net Movies. Indoor shots are a grain festival and NOT the good kind of grain either. In fact ,the grain gets so thick at times that all shadow detail is lost along with whatever the camera is focused on. I am talking REALLY BAD here folks. Believe me, I would like nothing more than to tell you this transfer is up to or close to the 'Annie Hall' disc which , while not reference material, is still very good and satisfying to watch.

Colors are all over the place. At time they are "normal" looking, other times you get pink faces, amber faces, grain obscured faces, everything but NORMAL looking faces. Yes I do know this is a Woody Allen film but I would tend to think this is NOT what he had in mind for the look of his film.

If you still are not convinced and purchase this anyway, FF to the Thanksgiving scene at the end for an example and be prepared to be very disappointed in what you see. (muddy, murky, overly grainy with image details breaking up all around)

Please remember, this is my all time favorite Woody Allen film and I am not trashing the video for any other reason than to save you a few bucks. The DVD released a few years back looks better than this Blu Ray disc at least when it comes to uniformity in brightness/contrast levels.

There are moments where things looks GREAT and you pray they will just keep looking that way. Then they take a sharp dip and you are back in super dark grain infested murkiness again. I can not believe for one moment Woody Allen saw and approved this disc. It honestly looks like it was slopped together from more than one source. At times there is no grain what-so-ever which of course means the DNR has been liberally applied in those spots, then it reverts back to a high fiber diet!

Good thing I kept my EPIX version on the DVR! MGM had it together for a lot of the HD transfers of Woody Allen's back catalog I have seen on TV lately. It is very unfortunate they were not involved in THIS particular release. As it stands, FOX has really messed this one up and I am so very disappointed with this transfer.

Thankfully, the simulataneously-released Sleeper looks quite excellent, film-like and sharp from start to finish.

Visually, hasn't Hannah and Her Sisters always been reasonably subdued? I've seen it many, many, many times (including 35mm just a few weeks ago) and just considering it in terms of cinematic style I'd call it Woody Allen's most restrained film, lacking saturated colors, rich shadows, and the "warm" autumnal tone he loves. It's also an odd Woody Allen film where the visual compositions never call attention to themselves, but the camera movements do. It was Woody Allen working with a new cinematographer after 10 years with Gordon Willis, and I think that has everything to do with it. He and Carlo Di Palma were warming up to each other, and Woody Allen was warming up to having more say/control over the visuals wherein (as I understand it) he relied a lot on Gordon Willis beforehand. I believe I've read a quote by Allen saying that he deliberately filmed Hannah in ways that Gordon Willis wouldn't approve of, or he'd take certain scenes in a visual direction that he believes Gordon Willis would've shot down, or something to that effect. I think the results are honestly a little rough around the edges, but at the same time Allen's liberating his shooting style, balancing what he learned from Willis and trying things like having the camera move around for the entire duration of a shot. It could also be that Di Palma was trying to light some of the interiors similar to how Willis did it (per Woody's direction), but did it a little differently so the image ended up with noticeable grain. My point is that I can't imagine the film looking "pristine," it's always been pretty grainy and perhaps we can attribute that to the conditions of the shoot.

5/7

The Great Escape (1963)

captveg wrote:5/7

The Great Escape (1963)

Bluray.com

Sounds like it should be avoided. Single disc (for a three hour film + supplements), DNR, etc. Was hoping for a Lawrence of Arabia outcome for this film, guess I'll be holding onto my DVD for several more years. Oh well.

DVDBeaver review shows it is clearly a different transfer from the SE DVD. It's apparently from a 4K digital transfer, but doesn't pop out as one as it should.

October 8:

Dirty Rotten Scoundrels

If only Universal would let the brilliant original, Bedtime Story, out of their vaults

A Chorus Line January 14

Why?

In the Heat of the Night
Robocop (Remastered)

are also coming in January.

2014 is MGM's 90th; so we'll probably see more releases than usual.

ianungstad wrote:2014 is MGM's 90th; so we'll probably see more licenses to Twilight Time than usual.

Fixed

Is In the Heat of the Night coming from MGM directly?

chatterjees wrote:Is In the Heat of the Night coming from MGM directly?

Yes, Amazon UK and CA have pre-orders up.

Here's hoping for Brannagh's Henry V to get it's 25th Anniversary / MGM 90th release

Amazon.com has pre-order up for the remastered Robocop.

Bonus Features:

• Remastered Theatrical Feature Blu-ray
• Q&A With the Filmmakers (2012)
• Flesh and Steel: The Making of Robocop
• 1987 Featurette: Shooting Robocop
• 1987 Featurette: Making Robocop
• The Boardroom: Storyboard with Commentary by Animator Phil Tippett
• Deleted Scenes
• Villains of Old Detroit
• Special Effects: Then and Now
• Robocop: Creating a Legend
• Paul Verhoeven Easter Egg
• Commentary with Director Paul Verhoeven, Writer Ed Neumeier and Executive Producer Jon Davison
• Theatrical Trailer
• TV Spot

Theatrical cut is listed under bonus features so I assume director's cut is the main feature.

Remastered RoboCop is already available at some Best Buys for $7.99 (as it currently is on Amazon.com) and comes with $7.50 "movie money" for the remake ticket. It also includes a showreel/trailer for MGM's 90th anniversary with scenes from (remastered) Rocky, Fargo, The Good, The Bad and The Ugly, according to posters on Blu-ray.com forums.

Pre-orders.
In The Heat of The Night
A Chorus Line