criterionforum.org

As the initially heterosexual characters lose their inhibitions, they experiment pleasurably with gay sex, lesbian sex and sex with cripples. [...] In short, his movie condones many practices which the vast majority of people would find disgusting and degrading.

flyonthewall2983 wrote:Three Reasons

domino harvey wrote:I can only laugh and shake my head at the accusations earlier in the thread that Ebert was somehow erotically conservative or against sex even though he liked this film. Though he's becoming sainted in memory, it's a good reminder that so many cinema "fans" went out of their way to distance themselves from Ebert at his heights, even though his tastes, outside of a few idiosyncrasies, were pretty in line with most movie lovers. And Ebert (and, actually, especially Siskel) loved "sexy" movies when they met their metric of also being good films. There's one Siskel and Ebert special where they recommend "Guilty Pleasures" and Siskel chose Emmanuel and Summer Lovers on the grounds that he found them sexy and both were filled with beautiful women, and he went on to argue that more critics should be honest instead of dancing around praising something they found arousing. Yeah, what a prude!!!!!

Jeff wrote: Siskel and Ebert were many things, prude they were not.

Orlac wrote:

Jeff wrote: Siskel and Ebert were many things, prude they were not.

Their behaviour over Betsy Palmer in Friday the 13th was prudish/reactionary.

Also, I can only laugh and shake my head at the accusations earlier in the thread that Ebert was somehow erotically conservative or against sex even though he liked this film. Though he's becoming sainted in memory, it's a good reminder that so many cinema "fans" went out of their way to distance themselves from Ebert at his heights, even though his tastes, outside of a few idiosyncrasies, were pretty in line with most movie lovers. And Ebert (and, actually, especially Siskel) loved "sexy" movies when they met their metric of also being good films. There's one Siskel and Ebert special where they recommend "Guilty Pleasures" and Siskel chose Emmanuel and Summer Lovers on the grounds that he found them sexy and both were filled with beautiful women, and he went on to argue that more critics should be honest instead of dancing around praising something they found arousing. Yeah, what a prude!!!!!

[Director of Photography, Peter Suschitzky] supervised the grade and came, in person, to Hamburg to work on and finally approve the pre-grade prepared for him. We also conducted a nice interview with Peter - he was in town (Hamburg), so the friendly guys from Alsterfilm taped the session. I have seen the final version recently and I am tempted to say that it looks gorgeous. Not because we made it, but because Jan & Ben from LSP (who did the grade) worked so hard on getting the shots right. I've not seen many transfers where shadows kept so much detail. Also the cleanup was 100% manual, so we have a very natural image, no DNR, nice grain. We'll now get together materials (further bonus etc.) and then start working on a disc.

Turbine wrote:Unless something unexpected happens, [Cronenberg's Criterion] commentary is going to be on our release. Of course.

We're in touch with director Harley Cokeliss for this one. He'd love to see it re-done in 4K, he'd love to see it featured on this release. The problem is... the BBC doesn't understand what this undertaking is about. They've redirected us to Getty Images, who are doing clip sales for the BBC. We've pulled a couple of strings, but it seems there's no way to access this, except for the Getty Images thing. The "problem" with these companies is that they do not differentiate between the use case. So we'd be paying a very high sum to be able to use this, but his sum is simply out of the scope for a home video release.