criterionforum.org

Can someone please tell me what the strange R2-D2 sound is that occurs about half way through the film? I think it may be a bird, but I have never been sure.

thethirdman wrote:Can someone please tell me what the strange R2-D2 sound is that occurs about half way through the film? I think it may be a bird, but I have never been sure.

Lucas got his hands on the negative and realized it wasn't "A New Hope" after he made a few changes.

Someone was listening to Sweet's FOX ON THE RUN in the background and turned it Up then Off right at the end of the intro where the synth titters.

Another mis-translation I prefer is High and Low, which I think makes for a subtler title than the Japanese original (Heaven and Hell). Kerpan and I argued once about An Autumn Afternoon versus The Taste of Pike Mackerel--while I don't think An Autumn Afternoon is a particularly interesting title, I can understand why they decided to translate it that way, and I think a literal translation doesn't serve much purpose either.

That said, the best thing that can be said about the title The Bicycle Thief is that it has spurred so many conversations (and undergrad essays) about the significance of the plural in the title (and what it says about us Americans that we would prefer the singular, or that the distributor would prefer it on our behalf), which probably no one would have thought twice about otherwise.

It is not just translations of foreign film titles. Think of all the British films that had their titles changed for the US:

the classic Hammer film Dracula to the clunky Horror of Dracula (as opposed to the 'Enjoyable sit down and chat with tea and biscuits with Dracula');

A Matter of Life And Death to Stairway to Heaven;

The Quatermass Experiment (or Xperiment) to The Creeping Unknown and Quatermass and the Pit to Five Million Miles to Earth;

Brighton Rock to Young Scarface;

the Philosopher's/Sorceror's Stone change in the first Harry Potter (though that seems more the fault of the book publishers)

colinr0380 wrote:the classic Hammer film Dracula to the clunky Horror of Dracula (as opposed to the 'Enjoyable sit down and chat with tea and biscuits with Dracula');

Actually, I suspect the US distributors were simply playing safe, given that Universal had already threatened to sue Hammer if their Frankenstein bore any resemblance to the 1931 version. So it's possible (indeed, probable) that changing the title of this and Dracula for the US release, which Universal's lawyers would have taken the keenest interest in, was a simple arse-covering exercise.

HerrSchreck wrote:

jon wrote:I don't think it is surprising. It is a commonly known misnomer. Criterion would be torn up on the if they used The Bicycle Thief over Bicycle Thieves.

I don't think they'd take any shit. They in the past stuck with the translated status quo for CHILDREN OF PARADISE (S/B ... of the "gods" i e the supercheap seats in a theater way up where the oxygen is thin, the whole idea of this being a charming cartoon about the scum of the street/poverty flies over many folk's head because of that), as well as THE GRAND ILLUSION (makes it sound like some kind of majesterial mysterious something, whereas it very simply means "The Big Lie").[/url]

Well, how do you think this forum would have responded to the American title instead of the properly translated title.

jon wrote:Well, how do you think this forum would have responded to the American title instead of the properly translated title.

Probably no different than our responsed to the same situation viz the releases of CHILDREN OF PARADISE or GRAND ILLUSION. A couple of bubbles by sticklers like me & a few others just to point it out.. but general all-around rejoicing that the damned thing is being released by them inna first place.

Whining over such stuff is veritable bitching the Golden Goose's honky quack.

montgomery wrote:I thought the title was a particularly clever and mysterious one. It struck me as both ambiguous and specific. Yes, there is more than one thief in the movie. It is clear there are many bicycle thieves, not even taking into account the end of the film. But as I watched it, I thought it was interesting how the title referred to someone who wasn't really much of a character in the film. At the end of the film, of course, the title takes on a different meaning, referring to someone else. Because of this, I don't think the implication is that there is only one thief in the film, or that it refers to either of them specifically. For me, it was consistent with neo-realism, because it ends up being ambiguous, referring to no one in particular, but also by being more specific, implying that anyone in the film could be "The Bicycle Thief," someone who is forced to steal because of the economy.

It's for these reasons that I've also been more interested in the mistranslation. I like that the end makes you reconsider who the title refers to as I'd never experienced that before or since.

But I do agree with Criterion for honoring the original title, as I squirm whenever someone refers to William S. Burroughs' Junk as Junky.

And for those concerned with the price, I would stay on alert for one of deepdiscountdvd.com's Criterion sales. As of now, they have it listed for $31.88 and it should drop to around $25 if they have the sale around February when it's released.

HerrSchreck wrote:Whining over such stuff is veritable bitching the Golden Goose's honky quack.

I didn't start the argument. I'm happy about the title

No comments on this release for six weeks?! Have to say that the extras still look quite dull. I won't be upgrading my Italian San Paolo edition.

Back cover:

The Image license is a great indicator of what may be on the way.

Oh...crap

This appears to be one of the collection's essential releases. Granted I haven't recieved my copy yet or anything, but three docs and a book for perhaps the most "important" film announced so far this year by Criterion is going to be hard to beat.

I'm surprised beev doesn't have this up. I could have grabbed a copy yesterday. But I DIDN'T see the Robeson available (though I wont be going for it.)

DVD Beaver review is up (sort of)

Windowboxed again.

My Image disc really doesn't stand all that bad against the CC, granted it was a pretty solid DVD to begin with.

Gigi M. wrote:Windowboxed again.

Damnit. I had a strong feeling it would be. When is Criterion going to stop this crap? Watching a windowboxed DVD on a widescreen TV really blows.

skuhn8 wrote:My Image disc really doesn't stand all that bad against the CC, granted it was a pretty solid DVD to begin with.

I concur. It doesn't have the nice even black levels and sharpness but it's pretty close. Also I don't know why Gary didn't make mention of the criterion being slightly cropped-- the Image disc seems to do the best in that regard from looking at those comparisons.

By now it's probably safe to say that they'll continue to window-box. They seem to want to maximize profit by specializing standard-def dvds to standard-def TVs, making the crossover to HD even more desirable and worthy of upgrading.

I knew I shouldn't have wasted my money on this. The image really doesn't supercede the Image disc all that spectacularly (I always usedta wonder what was so wrong with this disc when folks would tear it to shreds relentless), the extras only briefly illuminate the film specifically and are more a general prgram on Neorealism & Zavattini. The booklet and the 25 minute featurette with the screenwriter & Staiola are the high points. To be a picky dvd-o-phile (which I am not, which is why I should have just stuck with the original Image since this stuff doesn't bother me much):

I found the sound cleanup to be a bit weak as you can still hear magnetic wheel turning, etc, via the primitive sound unit in the background. It's very prevalent for example in the scene where Antonio & the cop are up in the theif's apt looking for the bike.

Are people really not happy with this?

I appreciate that the image is only a slight improvement over the previous versions but as has been mentioned, they were in pretty good shape to begin with.

Short of adding a commentary (and of course, not picture-boxing) I'm not sure what more CC could have done.
The box and artwork are splendid, the book is exemplary and the extras are informative and interesting.

I for one am a happy camper.

I could imagine someone who didn't previously own the film being completely and duly overwhelmed. The film is just so perfectly conceived and executed, and the complaints regarding the "sentiment" of the film always take me aback. I find it just so much the perfect piece of purposeful melodrama. Like a football play the tears welled up on cue as usual watching it yet again on the CC. But the feeling of the usual overwhelming contrast between the "old grade B dvd" and the "new CC" home video versions is just not there in this case. The difference between the old and new CC SEVEN SAMURAI's is greater than the dif between the old Image BICYCLE TH and the new CC, for example.

Since we're on the subject one thing I noticed is some of the wry cynical humor of Zavattini's script is missing in some of the subs. A good example of some of the nasty grabassing I'm talking about which is less expressively rendered is, when they first enter the market with the sanitation crew trying to hunt up the bike. You get these two guys opening up a table arguing with each other. On the image one guy says something close to "Ayy back off, I'm poison this morning," and on the CC he says something like "leave me alone, I'm in a bad way". The image disc has some instances of those urban, cranky paisan-isms which always have my pissing my clothes in laughter whenever I watch (like the ride in the rain in the trash truck with the dude endlessly complaining) that don't seem to be as colorfully captured on the CC. But this is just one man's opinion.

I personally find this release marvelous. The extras a great; the booklet is fantastic. The only thing missing here is a commentary. After owning the Image disc for quite some time this package is the way to go in my book.

HerrSchreck wrote:I could imagine someone who didn't previously own the film being completely and duly overwhelmed.

I agree with this statement but unless there is a version I am unaware of, it looks like my Arrow Films was the disc to beat. I've upgraded from good picture to very good, no booklet to excellent weighty booklet, one meaty doc to three meaty docs and bog-standard box to lovely digipac.

Minus a commentary, that sounds like a comparable upgrade to the Seven Samurai one.

And Schreck, I haven't seen the Image disc. Would you consider the subs enough of an improvement over the CC to warrant getting hold of a copy on the cheap?