criterionforum.org

I feel like they should put "Warning: " in front of that top blurb

criterion10 wrote:Anyone else worried about the transfer being approved by Storaro?

I don't see him cropping a 1.66:1 film to 2.00:1, but kookier things have happened. (I can easily see the release being 1.78:1).

He only cuts films down from 'Scope

But if the 2:1 ratio is magical, why would it only be magical if you butcher the sides of an image and not the top and bottom?

And why don't you like magic, domino?

He approved the Arrow transfer and that was 1.66:1.

The Fanciful Norwegian wrote:He approved the Arrow transfer and that was 1.66:1.

Probably going to be practically identical then.

Does anyone know why KINO chose to put English intertitles in Metropolis instead of the original German? Seems kinda odd to me.

There's a lot of reasons, the most obvious being that a large section of their demographic prefers it and they don't want to spend the time authoring two versions of a movie. Supposedly there's something about television contracts, but I don't buy it personally.

knives wrote:There's a lot of reasons, the most obvious being that a large section of their demographic prefers it and they don't want to spend the time authoring two versions of a movie.

I find it hard to believe that most people who would actually buy a KINO release would prefer English intertitles over the original German ones with English subs.

I suppose when I get a blu ray drive I'll buy the MOC UK version so I can play it.

I assume they're not buying a Kino release so much as buying a Blu of a genre film they've heard of before.

knives wrote:I assume they're not buying a Kino release so much as buying a Blu of a genre film they've heard of before.

KINO release, Metropolis release, whatever the case my main point was that anyone who would want a 1927 silent movie would most likely want it in its original form. It doesn't exactly have the type of fan base of a summer blockbuster movie.

Metropolis arguably has more appeal among mainstream audiences than it does for silent aficionados.

swo17 wrote:Metropolis arguably has more appeal among mainstream audiences than it does for silent aficionados.

To be honest, outside of Internet forums I know of nobody that knows what that is.

For years growing up, long before I got seriously into film, that and Caligari were probably the only silent films of which I was aware.

I think the cutoff line for public awareness of silent film ends with Chaplin nowadays

Huge numbers of people who aren't cinephiles have an awareness of (if not intimate familiarity with) one or more of the following: Birth of a Nation, Nosferatu, the work of Buster Keaton, Le Voyage Dans la Lune, Metropolis, The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari, Nanook of the North, Un Chien Andalou. (I was made to watch that last one in high school in the midst of a culturally retarded public school education!) Those are easily up there with Chaplin's true silents such as The Gold Rush and The Kid, though Chaplin and the Tramp may be more familiar in everyday iconography. People around the world recognize the Tramp as a film character but they haven't necessarily seen any of the silent films.

Gregory wrote:Huge numbers of people who aren't cinephiles have an awareness of (if not intimate familiarity with) one or more of the following: Birth of a Nation, Nosferatu, the work of Buster Keaton, Le Voyage Dans la Lune, Metropolis, The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari, Nanook of the North, Un Chien Andalou. (I was made to watch that last one in high school in the midst of a culturally retarded public school education!) Those are easily up there with Chaplin's true silents such as The Gold Rush and The Kid, though Chaplin and the Tramp may be more familiar in everyday iconography. People around the world recognize the Tramp as a film character but they haven't necessarily seen any of the silent films.

Pretty much. I'd add Safety Last! to the list if only for the iconic single image of Lloyd on the clock face.

captveg wrote: Pretty much. I'd add Safety Last! to the list if only for the iconic single image of Lloyd on the clock face.

This reminds me of a smug classmate years ago who gleamed with the pride of a thousand suns and smirk of a million shits eaten, "oh the guy who hung from the clock," when the teacher started a lecture on Buster Keaton. The teacher deadpanned, "No."

Some of my (non cinephile) friends have seen Metropolis, and it's probably the only silent they've seen. Most sci-fi nerds i know have also seen it. I doubt these folks would have sat through it if it was silent AND had subtitles. Kind of disappointing Metropolis is one of the first silent a lot of people see. I've always found it a bit of a bore. So many other better silents out there

knives wrote:

captveg wrote:Pretty much. I'd add Safety Last! to the list if only for the iconic single image of Lloyd on the clock face.

This reminds me of a smug classmate years ago who gleamed with the pride of a thousand suns and smirk of a million shits eaten, "oh the guy who hung from the clock," when the teacher started a lecture on Buster Keaton. The teacher deadpanned, "No."

Ha! Awesome.

MongooseCmr wrote:I think the cutoff line for public awareness of silent film ends with Chaplin nowadays

knives wrote:

captveg wrote: Pretty much. I'd add Safety Last! to the list if only for the iconic single image of Lloyd on the clock face.

This reminds me of a smug classmate years ago who gleamed with the pride of a thousand suns and smirk of a million shits eaten, "oh the guy who hung from the clock," when the teacher started a lecture on Buster Keaton. The teacher deadpanned, "No."

In my high school film course, my teacher argued that The Circus was an obscure film no one had heard of and then mistook Lloyd on the clock for Keaton. And he was teaching the class. I felt bad for my classmates who were being introduced to these films by that buffoon

knives wrote:

captveg wrote:

Superswede11 wrote:
Pretty much. I'd add Safety Last! to the list if only for the iconic single image of Lloyd on the clock face.

This reminds me of a smug classmate years ago who gleamed with the pride of a thousand suns and smirk of a million shits eaten, "oh the guy who hung from the clock," when the teacher started a lecture on Buster Keaton. The teacher deadpanned, "No."

In my high school film course, my teacher argued that The Circus was an obscure film no one had heard of and then mistook Lloyd on the clock for Keaton. And he was teaching the class. I felt bad for my classmates who were being introduced to these films by that buffoon

I had a teacher who showed us Modern Times in high school and said Chaplin never did sound films because he was embarrassed by his voice, then later talked about The Great Dictator. I don't even understand how you mess up like that

I'm just so glad we have Eureka over here and not Kino. Watching Metropolis in the cinema on a huge near-IMAX-size screen, with the proper intertitles, was a great experience.

MongooseCmr wrote:I had a teacher who showed us Modern Times in high school and said Chaplin never did sound films because he was embarrassed by his voice, then later talked about The Great Dictator. I don't even understand how you mess up like that

I think the point is that the character of the Tramp never spoke on film. Perhaps you missed this subtle distinction, or your teacher neglected to make it?

No, it was definitely something about his voice being squeaky and unpleasant.

This is all off topic anyway