criterionforum.org

First pass through the AE box leaves me pleasantly surprised...

AE's SATANTANGO confirmed at the bbfc website as being uncut. Yippee!

peerpee wrote:AE's SATANTANGO confirmed at the bbfc website as being uncut. Yippee!

That's very good news - but I was pretty relaxed, as all the signs are that Tarr handled the cat scene as conscientiously as he possibly could have done given the subject - and, crucially, was able to prove it.

The BBFC also doesn't seem to have had a problem with Michael Haneke's Benny's Video, despite its close-up (and much-repeated, and dramatically essential) footage of a pig being slaughtered for real. But I assume that got round the Animals Act by dint of Haneke filming an event that would have happened anyway.

MichaelB wrote:

peerpee wrote:AE's SATANTANGO confirmed at the bbfc website as being uncut. Yippee!

That's very good news - but I was pretty relaxed, as all the signs are that Tarr handled the cat scene as conscientiously as he possibly could have done given the subject - and, crucially, was able to prove it.

The BBFC also doesn't seem to have had a problem with Michael Haneke's Benny's Video, despite its close-up (and much-repeated, and dramatically essential) footage of a pig being slaughtered for real. But I assume that got round the Animals Act by dint of Haneke filming an event that would have happened anyway.

And the horse whose throat is cut open in Time of the Wolf. How did that get past the BBFC??

The Animal Act doesn't outlaw killing animals per se, even if done specifically for the camera -- it outlaws the infliction of "pain or terror" and "the cruel goading of any animal to fury." This has apparently been interpreted to mean that you can kill animals so long as it's done quickly and "humanely"; the throat-slitting in Time of the Wolf was presumably OK because if done "correctly" (for example, by a trained shochet) the blood to the head is cut off and the animal undergoes near-instant brain-death. The chicken beheading in Caché was passed for much the same reason.

Remind me - I may be mistaken - wasn't the horse in "Time of the Wolf" shot first?

adnankhan wrote:Remind me - I may be mistaken - wasn't the horse in "Time of the Wolf" shot first?

Even if it was, that may be OK, as I agree with The Fanciful Norwegian's interpretation of the Act.

Speaking as someone who's actually had to deal with the BBFC on this subject on two occasions (the first time round we got away with it, the second time two small cuts were imposed), my impression is that they really really really don't like cutting films for animal cruelty reasons - not least because they know full well that they'll get all the blame, when all they're actually doing is obeying the law (the 1984 Video Recordings Act charges them specifically with ensuring that no BBFC-approved videos breach other laws).

So unless the cruelty really is completely indefensible, by which I mean the animal is obviously in pain, there are no other mitigating circumstances (the Act provides two possible escape routes), and the distributor can't provide proof that everything was simulated, they do genuinely bend over backwards to avoid requesting cuts.

In the case of the first title I mentioned, they even said how relieved they were that they didn't have to cut it - as they appreciated that the scene in question, while unpleasant, was dramatically essential. (And I'd guess the same is true of the equivalent in Satantango.)

Just heard back from AE about the still forthcoming Tarkovsky companion dvd that includes the Marker 'One day in the life' doc. They're hoping to "revive" it for April of next year.

2 disc edition of Dersu Uzala from Art Eye scheduled for 26th February.

That sounds like a Ruscico port to me, especially given AE's recent release of Ruscico's War and Peace.

There are quite a few Ruscico transfers coming onto the UK market in the not too distant future - Nouveaux are releasing The Cranes Are Flying, Ballad of a Soldier and The Star in January. I've seen all three discs: they're basically the Ruscico PAL transfers with fewer language options (and compulsory English subtitles if you pick Russian dialogue, boo hiss).

Just to say that AE's ROHMER/EARLY WORKS is a nice 2 disc package...

Half (LA BOULANGERE DU MONCEAU & LA CARRIERE DU SUZANNE plus shorts NADJA A PARIS & CHARLOTTE ET SON STEAK) are already covered in CC's SIX MORAL TALES package...

However the other half is new to DVD - Rohmer's first feature LE SIGNE DU LION (100 min/1962) plus his documentary LES FRERES LUMIERE (66mins/1968), which features Jean Renoir & Henri Langlois...

MichaelB wrote:That sounds like a Ruscico port to me, especially given AE's recent release of Ruscico's War and Peace..

That's to be feared, yes. I only hope they will put the film one ONE disc. I never understood Ruscico's policy of butchering longer films in two and putting the extras on both discs. "Stalker" and "Dersu" are most blatant examples, both running less than 150 min. Or Kozintsev's "Lear", just over two hours only but spread over two discs. Awful!

I think it's partly to keep the bitrate as high as possible, bearing in mind that most Ruscico discs offer at least three soundtracks and a dozen sets of subtitles (the extras are usually very brief, so they wouldn't make much difference) - but given that longer Russian films were often screened in two parts anyway, they must have thought that this would be considered perfectly normal.

I remember when I saw Stalker for the first time, in 1981, at the Academy Cinema (RIP) in London's Oxford Street - that print had a division between the two parts, though they ran it together for their screenings.

In much the same way, they probably didn't think there was anything remotely unusual in offering an English voiceover translation of Hamlet as an option, though I cannot imagine any native English speaker would want to listen to it for anything other than a laugh. (It doesn't help that the speaker in question clearly isn't a native speaker himself: Shakespeare in a strong Russian accent really doesn't work!). But in Russia, voiceover is a very common method of translation, presumably because it's cheaper than either subtitling or dubbing.

MichaelB wrote: I remember when I saw Stalker for the first time, in 1981, at the Academy Cinema (RIP) in London's Oxford Street - that print had a division between the two parts, though they ran it together for their screenings.

Stalker is indeed a "two-part" film, but the reasons for this have nothing to do with Tarkovsky's vision and everything to do with the baroque complications of Soviet film financing. And, if I recall correctly, this is also tied up with the loss of the first version of the movie. Basically, there was a cap on the funding of films unless they were classified as extra-long "two-part" films, so when the first version of the film was lost, Tarkovsky's only option for obtaining additional funding with which to complete it was to pretend that the project had evolved into a "two-part" film. Thus Stalker has what may be the most arbitrary division imaginable, and I think it even comes before the end of the first hour. Maybe Ruscico's approach is the residue of these old regulations?

MichaelB wrote:But in Russia, voiceover is a very common method of translation, presumably because it's cheaper than either subtitling or dubbing.

Indeed, that's what they've gotten used to, no matter how strange it sometimes seems to people used to dubbing and subtitling. For anyone who wants to see an example of how utterly ridiculous (from this American's perspective) the voice-over translating can get, take a look at this clip from the Russian version of South Park.

Hilarious! But that "voice-over" translation have been used in Sweden too.

I'm from Mexico and currently live in El Paso Texas, and dubbing is extreme in Mexico, any movie or show shown on television is dubbed. Most of the time its annoying but certain shows (like the Simpsons) have great dubbing that actually improves the crappy writing of the most recent seasons, since they replace English jokes that wouldn't make sense in Spanish with great stuff that only Spanish speakers (and sometimes only Mexicans) would understand. Also there is the rare movie that the Spanish dubbing is great, even if the movie is just ok (I'm looking at you dubbed Back to the Future)

Still, i always see films in their original language, or the one preferred by the director (like Fitzcarraldo where Herzog prefers the German even though it was recorded in English.)

Sorry for getting a little out of topic.

Just to say again disc 1 of ROHMER - EARLY WORKS is superb, LE SIGNE DU LION really stands up, an exististential portrayal of alienation in Paris, before latterly paying hommage to Renoir's BOUDU & LOWER DEPTHS in its denouement...

LES FRERES LUMIERE is simply incredible, Rohmer interviewing Renoir and Langlois, with all the films interpsersing - it's basically the birtrh of cinema analysed and critiqued by 3 masters...

Disc 2 is fine and demonstrates how much restoration work the CC must have done - prints in rougher condition...

The Commissar appears to be being released by AE a month later than Dersu Uzala. A port of the RusCiCo, perhaps?

foggy eyes wrote:The Commissar appears to be being released by AE a month later than Dersu Uzala. A port of the RusCiCo, perhaps?

Since elsewhere it's been stated that Kino will be releasing a port of the Ruscico, I think it's safe to say that AE will be doing the same.

ellipsis7 wrote:Just to say again disc 1 of ROHMER - EARLY WORKS is superb, LE SIGNE DU LION really stands up, an exististential portrayal of alienation in Paris, before latterly paying hommage to Renoir's BOUDU & LOWER DEPTHS in its denouement...

LES FRERES LUMIERE is simply incredible, Rohmer interviewing Renoir and Langlois, with all the films interpsersing - it's basically the birtrh of cinema analysed and critiqued by 3 masters...

Disc 2 is fine and demonstrates how much restoration work the CC must have done - prints in rougher condition...

Thanks for the assessment, ellipsis7, i'm going to get this for Le Signe du Lion. Now we only need a better Perceval, a Four Adventures & a Rendez-Vous....

Colin MacCabe's obit in the Independent for Andi Engel , founder of Artificial Eye.

Are they still going to release A Man Escaped at some point or is that off?

I spoke to them a while ago - basically they are waiting for the materials from France, probably a port in of the French transfer... They were hoping for this last autumn/fall... But nothing doing as yet... So until we see signs of the French release of the 3 films (A MAN ESCAPED/LANCELOT DU LAC/LE DIABLE PROBABLEMENT) it is unlikely they will appear on AE... Hopefully things will move on swiftly...