criterionforum.org

Just to push people a little further the film is going cheaper on Amazon.

The disc looks outstanding. I was repeatedly floored by the video presentation. Stunning detail and clarity. There is some really outstanding editing in the piece that I wouldn't have expected for a film of this age. I wish we could have had some video or audio extras, I would like some context on the film. I haven't read my PDF booklet yet, though, hopefully there's lots in there.

Yup - there's LOTS in the booklet.

peerpee wrote:Yup - there's LOTS in the booklet.

I figured as much

Blu-ray.com review.

I'll definitely pick this up.

Beaver. A rave, although he says the picture is "1.37 matted to 1.78", which it isn't.

I just received mine, and I fully expect it to win end of year prizes. Bravo.

tojoed wrote:Beaver. A rave, although he says the picture is "1.37 matted to 1.78", which it isn't.

It is on the Blu-ray - as it should be.

MichaelB wrote:

tojoed wrote:Beaver. A rave, although he says the picture is "1.37 matted to 1.78", which it isn't.

It is on the Blu-ray - as it should be.

Is that according to Leon Vitali's instructions?

All Blu-rays are 1.78, all other aspect ratios are pillarboxed/letterboxed within, no?

That's correct, Dom. They're developed for widescreen teevees and are matted that way. That's why if you play a Blu on a CRT for an academy film it looks severely windowboxed.

1.37 matted to 1.78

I presume this is done to force people to watch films unstretched on their widescreen TVs, which is probably a good thing.

The content within that frame is not in 1.78:1 though, which I think tojoed was getting at. As such the "matted to 1.78" bit on DVD Beaver is irrelevant.

swo17 wrote:

1.37 matted to 1.78

I presume this is done to force people to watch films unstretched on their widescreen TVs, which is probably a good thing.

It's done this way as it can't be done any other way with HD content on Blu-ray (I think).

I can see how the wording might cause confusion, but he certainly means "an image of 1.37:1 presented in full within the confines of a standard 1.78:1 frame, with thick black bars at the sides."

As mentioned above, while DVDs come in 4:3 and 16:9 varieties, high-definition formats are fixed at 16:9 - so every different aspect ratio is effectively "matted to 1.78:1", using the Beev parlance.

Thanks for the info. I knew the AR was presented as 1.37, with black bars either side.
It seems a bit confusing to mention 1.78 at all, but now I know.

Is there any Eureka Offer yet so I can buy this (and Pigs etc.) directly from them? My old links are either dead, or no offer at this time.

Thanks.

Not at the moment. It's cheaper than they sell their usual Blus at Amazon right now though.

Thanks. I'll wait then, no rush. And I prefer to always buy from them. No intermediaries. I guess (hope) they retain more $$.

We just hope it sells so we can do more like this, and they don't get consigned to history as "bad sellers". We're looking closely at doing more Epstein, but a lot depends on how this sells.

Any news of how this has sold? Really hoping this won't be a one off and that there will be more Epsteins to follow.

It's only been out a month! -- We'll reassess in early 2012, but meanwhile we'll continue to pursue further Epsteins (which are a long way away unfortunately).

peerpee wrote:It's only been out a month! -- We'll reassess in early 2012, but meanwhile we'll continue to pursue further Epsteins (which are a long way away unfortunately).

Are you at liberty to divulge what obstacles there are to Epstein's titles?.. be it rights issues/ estate and legal complications/ poor elements etc.
Gaumont's attitude to their titles seem to be mainly marketing uneasiness if I'm not mistaken.

The majority have not had decent HD scans yet. So it's a long process of assessing the original materials and working out what to scan... then once scanned, great cost in preparing the materials... and it needs a bunch of people to put money into a pot. Bit of a nightmare really (as usual with all these things).

Confirmed my suspicions, though the superb broadcast transfer of Finis Terrae might be the best place to start (or was this not done in HD?).

I would love it to death if Finis Terrae could be the next Epstein on the slate assuming all goes well.

zedz wrote:Confirmed my suspicions, though the superb broadcast transfer of Finis Terrae might be the best place to start (or was this not done in HD?).

It does indeed look superb (and would be a great next step). It was 720p.