criterionforum.org

So, despite Robert Harris ripping the Blu Ray and declaring the Criterion Edition DVD still definitive, Beaver takes the Blu over the Crit.

Glenn Erickson weighs in on Spartacus BD-gate.

For those keeping Ebert-style score, that's two thumbs up and two thumbs down.

I think one of those thumbs carries a little more weight, no?

Plus, one of the 'yeas' flatly states that A/V quality reviewing is not what he does.

Napier wrote:Glenn Erickson weighs in on Spartacus BD-gate.

Savant always sides with his pals in the studios' home video departments. Save perhaps colorization, he'll defend any piece of shit transfer out there, typically with plenty of condescension for anyone who expects a higher standard. If he seems diplomatic in this review, make sure to scroll down to his final footnote where he, once again, bashes the Touch of Evil 1.85 skeptics.

aox wrote:I think one of those thumbs carries a little more weight, no?

Actually, both of the "thumbs down" probably carry more weight than either of the "thumbs up", but one of those thumbs down is the clean-up hitter.

aox wrote:So, despite Robert Harris ripping the Blu Ray and declaring the Criterion Edition DVD still definitive, Beaver takes the Blu over the Crit.

Not exactly. While the "report card" at the bottom says: "Blu-Ray", the review says:

for the most part I'm not totally sold on the colors or transfer of the new Universal Blu-ray

It would have been marvelous to have Criterion do this title in 1080P but alas accepting the Universal's imperfect A/V seems not such a bad consolation in my opinion. A missed opportunity? - sure and the video transfer has issues but we still recommend specifically because of the offered price and audio.

and

People are speaking out against this title making a solid point that the majors won't get the point unless we are vehement in our dismissal. I believe they are right. Our recommendation is to own the Criterion DVD until this title is transferred correctly in the new format.

On first glimpse the blu-ray looks really fantastic but on closer examination it's waxy and haloed. Like it's been airbrushed.

Blu-ray can do a fine job of replicating film, but film doesn't always have the wow factor that certain studios seem to think modern audiences expect. So we get stuff like this with nasty digital manipulation.

from the Fear & Loathing in Las Vegas thread:

eerik wrote:Criterion's Blu-ray announced for April 2011.

Universal's Blu-ray was released in February 2010. So here's my random thought/speculation: Universal allows Criterion to do Blu-ray upgrades but at least a year after Universal's own release.

The million dollar question: will Spartacus follow, especially since the Universal disc is arguably flawed. Would Criterion even want to bother would be a companion question.

There's a Charles Laughton retrospective happening at Film Forum in February, and according to the calendar, while Spartacus isn't playing this time around, there's a new 4k restoration forthcoming. Hopefully this gets upgraded then, too!

http://www.blu-ray.com/news/?id=17170" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Spartacus coming to BD, though doesn't appear to be a criterion upgrade.
Looks like Universal are releasing it themselves.
This deserves a lot more extras than what is listed .

giovannii84 wrote:http://www.blu-ray.com/news/?id=17170

Spartacus coming to BD, though doesn't appear to be a criterion upgrade.
Looks like Universal are releasing it themselves.
This deserves a lot more extras than what is listed .

I wouldn't worry and I think most all of us will pass on this edition and wait for what is almost guaranteed to be a forthcoming Criterion.

Universal likes flooding the market with their own edition before allowing Criterion their special product. This has happened with so many Universal films already, its difficult to name them all (Dazed and Confused, Fear and Loathing, Brazil, Charade, Traffic, The Game (after the Criterion edition), Moonrise Kingdom, etc).

If some of those other examples set any precedent, then the Criterion version should be coming out within the next 6 months.

Minkin wrote:If some of those other examples set any precedent, then the Criterion version should be coming out within the next 6 months.

You mean six months after they first put out a BD five years ago?

swo17 wrote:

Minkin wrote:If some of those other examples set any precedent, then the Criterion version should be coming out within the next 6 months.

You mean six months after they first put out a BD five years ago?

I think Criterion wanted to put out a quality product, not whatever Universal did with the first transfer (also see Do the Right Thing).

RAH apparently said Criterion looked into doing the restoration themselves, but it was too cost prohibitive. I'd imagine they partnered with Universal on the latest 4k in some manner.

Robert Harris posted a set of 4K screenshots from the new restoration and Blu-ray.com user MisterXDTV made convenient one-on-one comparisons with the current Blu-ray.

I don't get this one: http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/138929" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The 2010 looks like he has terrible makeup blisters (like the bad sunburn on Clint Eastwood in The Good, the Bad, & the Ugly when he is paraded through the desert). But then on the 2015 version, the blisters are completely gone showing fine smooth natural looking skin.

There are no makeup blisters. Simply a case of the old version having extremely orange/red skin tones. A similar difference can be seen in all of the comparisons.

Is there a case that Criterion may ever release the Bluray of this film? I've just been to the Kubrick exhibition in London and they used a lot of the artwork and fonts that Criterion used and I realised that it would be great to upgrade my DVD for a Criterion Bluray.