criterionforum.org

Why does this one have a 4K restoration? Did it tour somewhere that I'm not aware of?

Mungo wrote:Why does this one have a 4K restoration? Did it tour somewhere that I'm not aware of?

It had a 30th anniversary re-release in the UK last August - a cinema run prior to the StudioCanal BD later that month.

This is Cox's commentary from the BFI disc, correct? All of his commentaries are absolutely wonderful.

One big omission I wish could've been included is the music video for Strummer's "Love Kills". Also, it was made just after Repo Man, but Cox also made a mesmerizing video for The Pogues' song "A Pair of Brown Eyes" that I'd love to have in HD.

Mungo wrote:Why does this one have a 4K restoration? Did it tour somewhere that I'm not aware of?

It's a brand-new 4K restoration that Criterion did themselves, so, obviously, no tour.

I've been moderately curious about this film since I first started getting interested in criterion, at the time it was one of the few out of print titles, and like Salo tended to sell for over a 100$, hence my vague curiousity. I never sought it out, actually I kind of forgot it was in the collection until it was announced this week, but I'm looking forward to finally getting around to it.

I'm in the same situation as I've long wanted to plug the gap in my collection with Sid & Nancy! I'm glad that they've added the more recent 2001 commentary to the extras as well, making this more of a new edition than a re-release.

Here's a bit of context on that infamously awkward Bill Grundy interview (NSFW: Language!) I've always thought it strange that so much is made of the 'shocking' outburst of escalating swearing and yet whoever was producing must have at least allowed one of the band to go on an early evening talk show wearing a T-shirt with a pair of breasts on it!

This was one of the films that blew me away when it first came out in theatres. I saw it several times. But later revisits out of adolescence diminished my appreciation somewhat.

This comes out in less than a month, yet the Criterion site still says "More!" in the Special Features. Have they ever come this close to the release date without revealing the Special Features fully?

Unless they go ahead and just print More! on the case

Beaver's review lists the following Bonuses that aren't accounted for on the Criterion site:

• 2016 Interview with Alex Cox (24:02)
• Excerpts from 2016's Sad Vacation (14:27)

Here's a link to the review.

barnyard078 wrote:Have they ever come this close to the release date without revealing the Special Features fully?

Yes, La poison also still has a "More!" listed in the extras.

I think sometimes they just forget to update the specs.

I think I see one more too:

•The London Weekend Show - November 1976 (13:34)

Looking forward to this!

God help us when Dr. Svet of all people is now pontificating about exactly what a credible film about "the punk era" is. His critique is so vaguely defined and easy to make that even Cox himself already completely agreed with it years ago. Guess I missed where anyone had claimed this was an untouchable "serious classic film" let alone an "authentic documentary" (to use two of Svet's categories). Not that I'm coming to the film's defense either, and I haven't seen it in over a decade.
Per usual, it seems like Svet didn't know a great deal about the film beforehand or the context and then didn't even glean what the supplements had to offer. Not trying to defend Sid & Nancy from any tired criticisms of inauthenticity but some of the other Blu-ray.com reviewers are just much better at trying to fill the "authority on the context of the era" shoes.
Yeah, I saw them in ’76 at the Lesser Free Trade Hall, they weren't such a big deal.

It gets stuck somewhere between being an authentic documentary and a punk romantic drama and the closer one examines it, the clearer it becomes that it has some very serious credibility issues. There is no doubt in my mind that this is the very reason why Johnny Rotten has openly dismissed it.

Given that Rotten now shills for margarine or whatever, I suspect the reason Rotten has dismissed the movie has more to do with the amount of payment he isn't getting from it

As wa often write here, blu-ray.com movie' reviews aren't often particulary interesting but clearly, on top of that, the worst part of this is when Svet tries to do a contextual review, being something more "cultural" like for Sid & Nancy or more political like for Dheepan.
I'm not sure if it has something to do with his writing style too, but it probably doesn't help.

FrauBlucher wrote:bluray.com

I would have accepted "Svet and Nancy" =D