criterionforum.org

david hare wrote:Yes, and the 1.66 proposal is an accommodation I would suggest for an original theatrical screening regime. It would be very welcome to me. These sorts of acknowledgements -FOR THE REASON THEY EXIST - is always worthwhile.

I concur.

6/4

Shane

The Odd Couple

Shane will be released in Academy Ratio of 1.37:1 Lou Lumenick reports.

From Warners:

"The street date for the George Stevens production of SHANE in Blu-ray has been moved from June 4, 2013 to August 13, 2013 in order to complete remastering in the original 1:37 aspect ratio."

Sliver, Snake Eyes (yay), and Jennifer 8 coming from "Paramount"/Warners in September

I know it's the De Palma I should excited about, but it is really swell to have Jennifer 8 in Blu.

Also 9/10/13:

Marathon Man (1976)
The Talented Mr. Ripley (1999)

Nice, was just going to buy Marathon Man from France, glad it'll pay to wait!

Is there something wrong with my eyes or has Svet become a lot more forgiving recently:

The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance UK Blu-ray

The transfer looks like a sharpened mess, yet gets a 4.5/5. I don't like judging by caps only, and maybe it's the case the film always had a, er, unique look to it, but I'm not sold on this disc at all.

More caps here, albeit of the German Blu-ray (though I imagine the content is identical)

The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance DE Blu-ray

I have the German Blu-Ray of The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance (I assume the UK version is the same), and it's a truly horrid viewing experience, but it's glaring flaws seem to escape many reviewers for whatever reason.

In motion, It's one of the most digitally processed looking films I own -- not only does it appear that there's some edge sharpening going on, but it also looks like there's been some smoothing applied beforehand. Any area that one would expect to contain minute detail like clothing texture, facial stubble, or wood grain is oddly pasty and flat looking (look at Andy Devine's coat and vest in that first caps-a-holic image). It's a grotesque presentation.

In addition to all of that, the image doesn't move like film, everything has a too-smooth, video like quality that makes you think MotionFlow is stuck in the on position on your TV. I also think the film is a shade to bright, but that would be forgivable if it weren't for all of the other digital mess going on.

As a total viewing experience, the tampering combines in a strange way that makes you too aware of the artificiality of the sets (beyond even what was intended) and completely removes you from the viewing experience.

Oh yeah, there also doesn't appear to have been ANY mastering done on the audio track, the levels can be wildly inconsistent and you can hear additional tape hiss cut in before some sound effects.

Of all of the many home video editions from which I have viewed this John Ford masterpiece, the Paramount Blu-Ray is without question the worst. I can only pray that Criterion will get a hold of this film and give it the treatment it deserves.

It's obvious the 2 disc DVD is the clear winner for that title...

I can't believe The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance could be done so poorly...is it possible it's just an up-res of the video master used for the DVD? If not, it's ridiculous to put more time and money into a reissue that is actually worse than a (more or less) zero cost regurgitation of pre-existing mastering/transfer work.

kingofthejungle wrote:I have the German Blu-Ray of The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance (I assume the UK version is the same), and it's a truly horrid viewing experience, but it's glaring flaws seem to escape many reviewers for whatever reason.

I agree completely. It now actually looks like it was shot yesterday with digital cameras.

SternDiet wrote:I agree completely. It now actually looks like it was shot yesterday with digital cameras.

Exactly! For a film so consciously steeped in the haze of memory, the look of this Blu-Ray presentation is beyond profane.

hearthesilence wrote:I can't believe The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance could be done so poorly...is it possible it's just an up-res of the video master used for the DVD? If not, it's ridiculous to put more time and money into a reissue that is actually worse than a (more or less) zero cost regurgitation of pre-existing mastering/transfer work.

I'm fairly certain that this is from the same digital master as the 2009 Centennial DVD, with the digital manipulation becoming more readily apparent in HD. This review of the Centennial DVD has some nice comparison caps between it and the earlier bare bones disc, and it's apparent even in SD that some serious scrubbing was going on between the two (notice especially the last frame of Stewart leaning back in his chair). I think the old disc might be a bit too dark, but all in all it's my favorite presentation of the film. At least until someone comes along and does it right.

Yes, the caps from the old DVD look much better than the Centennial caps. Not surprisingly the look of the Blu-ray conforms to the look of the Centennial DVD. How disappointing.

Glad I never bothered to upgrade from my John Wayne box set version

There's always still the hope that Criterion has this and so the eventual U.S. Blu release will be definitive.

domino harvey wrote:Glad I never bothered to upgrade from my John Wayne box set version

I just have the standalone that was spun off from that set, but yeah, glad I held on to mine too. Not a great transfer so it was tempting to unload it, but I never bothered because it wasn't worth it. (I'd be lucky to get a $1 for it.) Such a shame this is the best home video version out there.

Worth posting the Beaver Review.

Scroll down and look at grouping 6, where Stewart is facing Wayne, and look at Wayne's hat on the old DVD versus the new one. The new one loses so much detail on his hat.

I looked at the full-sized DVD Beaver screen caps before reading the comments above on this thread, and I also have serious reservations about the presentation on Blu-ray. I've seen worse, but it still looks heavily manipulated. If you look at the image screen caps closely, they have an odd, blotchy watercolor effect and not a sharply defined grayscale. Or am I just imagining things? I guess the key would be to watch the Blu-ray in motion...

jsteffe wrote:I looked at the full-sized DVD Beaver screen caps before reading the comments above on this thread, and I also have serious reservations about the presentation on Blu-ray. I've seen worse, but it still looks heavily manipulated. If you look at the image screen caps closely, they have an odd, blotchy watercolor effect and not a sharply defined grayscale. Or am I just imagining things? I guess the key would be to watch the Blu-ray in motion...

If you look at the screencaps from caps-a-holic, you will see that you are absolutely right. screencap 7, in particular.

EddieLarkin wrote:Is there something wrong with my eyes or has Svet become a lot more forgiving recently

No. I am not more forgiving, but after this long discussion we had on our site I find it quite strange that you came here to essentially repeat exactly the same things without having seen the disc.

EddieLarkin wrote:The transfer looks like a sharpened mess, yet gets a 4.5/5. I don't like judging by caps only, and maybe it's the case the film always had a, er, unique look to it, but I'm not sold on this disc at all.

And yet this is exactly what you did, Eddie. And you were looking at some comparison of the German disc and addressing the UK disc without having seen any of them.

Anyhow, I will just say what I mentioned to you elsewhere: I've said everything I wanted to say about this release.

kingofthejungle wrote: Any area that one would expect to contain minute detail like clothing texture, facial stubble, or wood grain is oddly pasty and flat looking...

If you log in on the site (to see 1080p resolution captures, not 720 as a visitor), it should be quite clear to see that what you have written isn't true - because I see plenty of very fine detail in the fabric on the bottom right.

kingofthejungle wrote:Oh yeah, there also doesn't appear to have been ANY mastering done on the audio track, the levels can be wildly inconsistent and you can hear additional tape hiss cut in before some sound effects.

I did not experience any such issues. And, in fact, Paramount very clearly noted on the main menu that the mono track is indeed RESTORED. The problem I had is that they presented it as a lossy track, while choosing a 5.1 mix as the lossless option.

pro-bassoonist wrote:

EddieLarkin wrote:Is there something wrong with my eyes or has Svet become a lot more forgiving recently

No. I am not more forgiving, but after this long discussion we had on our site I find it quite strange that you came here to essentially repeat exactly the same things without having seen the disc.

Don't read anything into it, I actually posted here first. I began a discussion with you directly only by chance, after I spotted you discussing it with another user on Blu-ray.com (the day after I already posted here).

pro-bassoonist wrote:

kingofthejungle wrote: Any area that one would expect to contain minute detail like clothing texture, facial stubble, or wood grain is oddly pasty and flat looking...

If you log in on the site (to see 1080p resolution captures, not 720 as a visitor), it should be quite clear to see that what you have written isn't true - because I see plenty of very fine detail in the fabric on the bottom right.

If you read my post carefully, you'll notice that I actually own the German Blu-Ray, so my observations come (painfully) from having watched it projected on my home set-up, not from looking only at caps. And I would argue that the cap you posted as evidence shows EXACTLY what I'm talking about. The coat at the bottom right looks ok because the texture involves distinct lines - look at the other coats with dappled texture. Flat and pasty. Most likely the software they've used is programmed to recognize edges (just like filters in Photoshop), but smooth over fine interruptions in contrast within certain perameters (like the dappled coat textures, or dirt on film).

pro-bassoonist wrote:

kingofthejungle wrote:Oh yeah, there also doesn't appear to have been ANY mastering done on the audio track, the levels can be wildly inconsistent and you can hear additional tape hiss cut in before some sound effects.

I did not experience any such issues. And, in fact, Paramount very clearly noted on the main menu that the mono track is indeed RESTORED. The problem I had is that they presented it as a lossy track, while choosing a 5.1 mix as the lossless option.

When I watched it, it was most likely on the default 5.1 setting. It would be nice if the mono track were superior, but the visual presentation is so poor, I will not be viewing this disc again.

david hare wrote:This disc has been cheaply available in Oz since last year when I bought it and first viewed it. I have absolutely no issues with the restored source material nor the transfer. It's completely fine and commenting on the basis of screens alone is not allowing for a fair assessment. And this is a movie I remember very well from 35mm prints.

I highly respect your opinion, but have to vehemently disagree in this instance. (Unless the German disc is appreciably different from the Australian one, which is possible). In this instance, I think the caps are pretty representative of the look of the disc.