criterionforum.org

I think the extras are fine for a lower tier little known film. I mean we got "a making of" which is rare for a film like this.

Do people really think Criterion are going to make money on these recent releases, when you consider they're up against the Warner Noir boxes which retail at practically the same price for 5 or 10 films?
A 'Forgotten Noir' eclipse box would be a must-buy but this year's releases simply look incredibly expensive next to their competition.

Cronenfly wrote:

HerrSchreck wrote:They didn't port over this brand new commentary by the director?

Could've been unavailable, or Criterion didn't think the movie warranted the bump in price up to $40 a commentary would bring on such a (relatively) obscure title (though it would've been nice of them to get it and pull a Crazed Fruit/Clean, Shaven, etc and price it at $30). Or Criterion though the commentary had too much overlap with the doc to be worth pursuing. The exclusion of the commentary may make this release fall short of being absolutely definitive, but it still looks like it'll offer a decent array of features (strange to be director-approved without the commentary, but I guess in most cases that only applies to the transfer anyways).

I'm absolutely SURE they could have made a few sheckels and brought the commentary over and charged the lower tier rate. I don't think Mr Barron (who I think they'd hafta approach in the first place, unless the dude signed it away entirely to the Deutschen co he recorded it for which would be silly since it's not even a primary-english speaking country... though it is at the top of English friendly countries).

Now its going to be a choice gleaming transfer and docu, or average/functional transfer and director commentary. I'm going to buzz some back channels here and find out what went wrong w the commentary.

Are there some cases where a commentary track belongs to the person who recorded it? If so, it certainly wouldn't make sense for this one not to appear, being director-approved and all, which makes me think there's some other reason. Can anyone remember other situations where a commentary was (by all indications readily) available but not used? In any case, I'll be interested to know if you turn up anything Shreck.

Commentaries are like anything else...intellectual property subject to copyright. So, the person physically doing the talking is not necessarily going to hold the copyright to it. For example, some corporation (or other business entity) may hold the copyright. It's possible (but entirely speculative) that someone (not necessarily the director) may have demanded a bit more than Criterion was willing to pay for a commentary.

Tribe

Thanks for clarifying, Tribe; I should've known that it's all about the copyright, no less so for commentaries than anything else.

One of the great American independent films - the last great classic noir and the first great neo-noir.

Skillman on Blast of Silence

Just saw this, what a great film! Was surprised to see Larry Tucker, who previously caught my eye in Shock Corridor and Advise and Consent -- does anyone know much about him? From his IMDb entry it looks like he didn't act much, but he's always incredibly fascinating in these films!

Yeah, he's a pisser (I mentioned a few posts above that you get another rare look at him here in this film). If anyone is best suited to be in a low budget strangeoid mid-century crime/moodish film like this or Corridor, even typify its atmosphere, it'd be him.

I usedta think he was related someway to (or was) the dude who played Lightning Louie in Fuller's sublime Pickup on South Street. But I don't think so.

I love fringe films like this circa the depression thru 60's, be they crime, exploitation, or sci fi.. Naked Kiss, Shock Corridor, Behind Locked Doors (major predecessor to Shock Corridor btw), Wild Weed, Chained For Life, The Brain That wouldn't Die, Bride of the Gorilla, some of the Mann/Alton's, The Scar, fringe cheapo sci fi like Phantom Planet, Missile To The Moon (also Catwomen of..), fringe almost porn like Rent A Girl, Aroused... Dwain Esper, and so so so much more. Definitely a major "comfort film" factor when films like this show their pedigree..

The best part is how much of this kind of stuff there is. This is why I love love love labels like Kit Parker/VCI, Image, Something Weird, etc.

Criterion's page on Blast of Silence is showing the trailer as no longer a special feature. That's too bad.

Oh since someone here sold me their German disc of this movie, I've heard the commentary and there's a very good reason it's not being ported over: It's nearly unlistenable. I was glad I heard it because I learned some info I needed, mainly about Larry Tucker, but whoever recorded it for Baron didn't edit it so he stops and restarts like three or four times at the beginning and it's all left in. Add to that long pauses and Baron's obvious unease at doing commentaries and it doesn't feel like as big a tragedy as it seemed.

I was also hoping a commentary would be insightful, but it all depends on the director. This is going to be a great release anyway, but I still would like to see the trailer back on so as to make it complete.

milkcan wrote:I was also hoping a commentary would be insightful, but it all depends on the director. This is going to be a great release anyway, but I still would like to see the trailer back on so as to make it complete.

Your wish... etc.

Yeah, I think it probably got taken off in the shuffle and they just had to update the page. But it is good news!

By the way, Erich Kollmar, who is listed as a cameraman and as the bellhop actor in Blast of Silence, is also listed as the cameraman on Cassavetes's Shadows.

DVD Beaver. The Criterion seems to show some extra information on the sides compared to the German disc.

I'm not sure why certain releases aren't pictureboxed, but I'm glad this one isn't. It looks terrific. Can't wait for this one!

Doesn't the Criterion website still list this as being windowboxed....What gives?

DVD Savant has some doubts about the aspect ratio.

zone_resident wrote:DVD Savant has some doubts about the aspect ratio.

I have no doubt that it was framed loosely enough that it could accommodate 1.66 or 1.85 mattes, but 1.33 is obviously Baron's preferred ratio. Since he approved the transfer and no picture information is being lost, I'm fine with it.

Savant's arguments are idiotic. "It's a 1961 film so surely it must be widescreen"

domino harvey wrote:Savant's arguments are idiotic. "It's a 1961 film so surely it must be widescreen"

I'm usually on board with Savant, but this isn't the first time he's said some things that didn't quite hold up.

The Onion's AV Club on Blast.

Critic's Choice: New DVDs