criterionforum.org

The Vincendeau introduction is described as "new", but if it is the same as on the Optimum edition, wouldn't that be stretching it a little?

The other documentary is not on the Optimum though; it may be the one from the StudioCanal release.

I admit that having this film on Blu-Ray is an intriguing prospect; those long over-decorated halls and the sharply delineated shapes in those grand gardens might look superb on the format, if the transfer is up to par.

Florinaldo wrote:I admit that having this film on Blu-Ray is an intriguing prospect; those long over-decorated halls and the sharply delineated shapes in those grand gardens might look superb on the format, if the transfer is up to par.

I expect it will be, and I'm particularly interested in how Resnais has altered the contrast compared to prior releases (though, from the sound of it, it does sound somewhat similar to the differences we saw in the Optimum release). I'm fascinated by the "unrestored" audio track, as noise reduction, compression gates and the like - though never abused by Criterion - typically do much more harm than good. Still, Criterion generally does an excellent job on the audio, removing those transient nasties ("pops" and "cracks") without placing a muffling veil over the rest of the soundtrack.

It's been a little while since I pulled out my Optimum disc, mostly due to the prospect of an imminent hi-def release, but I do recall that it has ungainly, almost ridiculously large subtitles that really obscured the image and which cannot be turned off (at least on my Oppo player). Given how repetitious the narration is, even we far-from-fluent speakers barely need them, and it would be great to be able to keep the frame unobscured. Perhaps I misremember, but I recall being very disappointed by the Optimum release in this regard.

Rich Malloy wrote: I'm fascinated by the "unrestored" audio track, as noise reduction, compression gates and the like - though never abused by Criterion - typically do much more harm than good. Still, Criterion generally does an excellent job on the audio, removing those transient nasties ("pops" and "cracks") without placing a muffling veil over the rest of the soundtrack.

I don't know how the two tracks can compare, but Criterion didn't restore the audio (at the behest of William Greaves) for Symbiopsychotaxiplasm: Take One at all, and I think it added a lot to the film. Of course, I expect that they're quite different films, but it was a wonderful layer of texture.

kaujot wrote:Of course, I expect that they're quite different films

I'd never thought to compare the two, but they'd actually make a pretty good double feature

This film and Primer are good movies if you want to have an anyeurism. Not criticizing though. I like both films.

Yes, the huge, burnt-in Arial subtitles definitely mar Optimum's otherwise nice release. I'm excited about the release, but I'll probably stick with the Optimum until Blu players get cheaper, as I'd love to have this in HD.

Pinch me. On June 23rd 2009. This is my second most favourite film that I've never seen, behind Out 1. The fact that it merely exists contributes greatly to the meaning of my life. We must start a Top Ten Films That You've Never Seen thread.

I've never seen the Sistine Chapel ceiling either. But I think about it. Every day.

Noiretirc wrote:We must start a Top Ten Films That You've Never Seen thread

It'd never work

domino harvey wrote:

Noiretirc wrote:We must start a Top Ten Films That You've Never Seen thread

It'd never work

Stealing my ideas again, the Bastards. (Domino, I still love you.)

domino harvey wrote:

Noiretirc wrote:We must start a Top Ten Films That You've Never Seen thread

It'd never work

A blast from the past! I'm delighted to see that my opening post is now largely obsolete.

I have to say I'm a bit disappointed that none of the extras seem to involve Robbe-Grillet other than his intro to the published screenplay. I could be wrong, the new documentary could involve him in some way.

Anyone knows why this has not turned up on Amazon.ca yet? Are there rights issues regarding Canada?

richast2 wrote:I have to say I'm a bit disappointed that none of the extras seem to involve Robbe-Grillet other than his intro to the published screenplay. I could be wrong, the new documentary could involve him in some way.

Unfortunately Robbe-Grillet passed away more than a year ago, so it depends on when the documentary was made. They might have been able to use older interviews, though.

I was lucky enough to attend a lecture by him several years ago. Although he spoke entirely in French, he communicated well and I could understand almost everything he said. He came off as a fairly prickly personality, but he was nice enough to sign my copy of Dans le labyrinthe.

We just got a 60-inch Pioneer plasma and Blu-ray player installed at my workplace (for classroom screenings). I can't wait to see how the new Blu-ray looks on it!

According to the press release it's not being released in Canada. I'm guessing another distributor in Canada owns the rights. .ca should still have it at some point, though, since they usually just import titles from the States in cases like that.

cdnchris wrote:According to the press release it's not being released in Canada. I'm guessing another distributor in Canada owns the rights. .ca should still have it at some point, though, since they usually just import titles from the States in cases like that.

Thanks for that info. I can't seem to locate press releases on the Criterion site; they may not archive them there.

It'll be easy to find other suppliers that will ship this to Canada, just less direct (and without the free shipping...).

I have the R2 release but will gladly double dip for the bluray release. I bet this looks amazing in 1080p.

I do wish they would have chosen a different cover.

cdnchris wrote:According to the press release it's not being released in Canada. I'm guessing another distributor in Canada owns the rights. .ca should still have it at some point, though, since they usually just import titles from the States in cases like that.

Both editions are now listed on Amazon.ca; I checked 2 days ago and they weren't there.

is it just me, or does the Criterion look even more horizontally stretched than the other two?

EDIT - I think it's just an illusion from the image being slightly larger.

Take a look at the picture frames/artwork on the walls of the first comparisons. It might just look horizontally stretched because there is more information.

edit:I think that is what you meant by 'slightly larger'

lol @ DVDBeaver's "If it's director approved, it must be okay" statement. I guess that Facets Satantango is now the one to get, eh

Is it just me or the do the black levels on the Optimum seem more, uh, black? The Criterion looks very grey.

lol @ DVDBeaver's "If it's director approved, it must be okay" statement. I guess that Facets Satantango is now the one to get, eh

Of course, I didn't say anything like that at all. Where did I state "It must be okay"???

quote:

It appears hazier than the PAL edition but comparing the 1080P rendering should give us more information but it would be hard to critique the Criterion in which the 'transfer was supervised and approved by director Alain Resnais'.

I certainly didn't say it would be impossible to critique.

Further:

I'd like to reserve more specific comments on the image until we add the Criterion Blu-ray to this comparison.

but it would be hard to critique the Criterion in which the 'transfer was supervised and approved by director Alain Resnais'

Uh, that disproves what I said how?

Antoine Doinel wrote:Is it just me or the do the black levels on the Optimum seem more, uh, black? The Criterion looks very grey.

Here's what the Criterion blog says about the transfer:

Lee Kline wrote:We watched the whole film together in HD, and he definitely wanted it to be brighter and less contrasty. Before he came in, I had been going in the other direction, since the print I viewed appeared to have a fair amount of contrast. But Resnais was clear that it should not be a very cold-looking film, and he liked going from dark to light very dramatically. The added contrast was only taking away from the needed warmth. As for the overexposed footage, we nailed that one right on the head.

It looks to as if that may be what he was referring to.

At any rate, I'm starting to doubt whether computer frame grabs are really the best way to judge a DVD's transfer quality. Isn't their appearance affected by what software program and video card you're using? Also, I've noticed a tendency for the image contrast to be weaker on frame grabs (viewed both at work and at home) than on actual TV monitors.

The comparisons probably mean something, but the proof is in the playback.