criterionforum.org

Pickpocket



This incomparable story of crime and redemption from French master Robert Bresson follows Michel, a young pickpocket who spends his days working the streets, subway cars, and train stations of Paris. As his compulsive pursuit of the thrill of stealing grows, however, so does his fear that his luck is about to run out. A cornerstone in the career of this most economical and profoundly spiritual of filmmakers, Pickpocket is an elegantly crafted, tautly choreographed study of humanity in all its mischief and grace, the work of a director at the height of his powers.


New, 2K digital film restoration, with uncompressed monaural soundtrack on the Blu-ray
Audio commentary by film scholar James Quandt
Introduction by writer-director Paul Schrader
The Models of “Pickpocket,” a 2003 documentary by Babette Mangolte that features actors from the film
Interview from 1960 with director Robert Bresson, from the French television program Cinépanorama
Q&A on Pickpocket from 2000 with actor Marika Green and filmmakers Paul Vecchiali and Jean-Pierre Améris
Footage of the sleight-of-hand artist and Pickpocket consultant Kassagi from a 1962 episode of the French television show La piste aux étoiles
Trailer
PLUS: A booklet featuring an essay by novelist and critic Gary Indiana

Criterionforum.org user rating averages

Feature currently disabled

Spine number 314. November. Specs.

Wow, they dropped the ball on this one.


- New, restored high-definition digital transfer
- Audio commentary by film scholar James Quandt
- New video introduction by writer-director Paul Schrader
- The Models of “Pickpocket,â€

All righty! Everything I wanted! A James Quandt commentary and The Models of Pickpocket. The other extras are nothing to sneeze at either.

What A Disgrace wrote:Wow, they dropped the ball on this one.

How do you figure?

Are those real specs? What's the source?

If they're real - they're absolutely top notch.

peerpee wrote:Are those real specs? What's the source?

If they're real - they're absolutely top notch.

They were on Criterion's site an hour ago. They're not anymore, for some reason.

Retail was $39.95.

This baby is a 2-discer, whereas Au hasard balthazar is 1.

What A Disgrace wrote:

peerpee wrote:Are those real specs? What's the source?

If they're real - they're absolutely top notch.

They were on Criterion's site an hour ago. They're not anymore, for some reason.

Retail was $39.95.

somewhat worryingly, thats all we need, a few minutes!! our team of experts (geeks) is monitoring the criterion website in 24 hr, round-the-clock shifts.

Actually, with the exception of the Quandt commentary and Schrader intro, all of those extras are identical to the MK2/AE version already out.

Not to say that I'm not delighted by Quandt's inclusion.

Doug Cummings wrote:Actually, with the exception of the Quandt commentary and Schrader intro, all of those extras are identical to the MK2/AE version already out.

Not to say that I'm not delighted by Quandt's inclusion.

Two great reasons to take Criterion's release over the MK2...

cinephrenic wrote:This baby is a 2-discer, whereas Au hasard balthazar is 1.

That makes a lot of sense. Balthazar speaks for itself - it's greatness doesn't need to be supported with a lot of extras. Pickpocket, on the other hand, needs some explaining . . .

Ok, this is probably just my somewhat cynical way of saying that I didn't really click with this film on my first pass.

bunuelian wrote:

cinephrenic wrote:This baby is a 2-discer, whereas Au hasard balthazar is 1.

That makes a lot of sense. Balthazar speaks for itself - it's greatness doesn't need to be supported with a lot of extras. Pickpocket, on the other hand, needs some explaining . . .

Ok, this is probably just my somewhat cynical way of saying that I didn't really click with this film on my first pass.

I partly share that opinion of Pickpocket, but it's one which I couldn't get out of my head, and I realised how much I actually really liked it a week or two after the initial viewing.

Looking forward to this one, along with Le Samourai, Ugetsu and Ran. Man, they've sure lifted their game of late imo...

cinephrenic wrote:This baby is a 2-discer, whereas Au hasard balthazar is 1.

A possible sign of my blindness, but I can't find any evidence other than the list price that this is a two disc set. The movie is 75 minutes, so I guess they can cram a lot of extras on one DVD.

Just saw a press screening of this, and the print is incredible - totally, utterly spotless. The press materials include Gary Indiana's essay for the CC DVD, which starts this way:

I have an unusually easy way of remembering when I first become fascinated by Robert Bresson's films. Pickpocket was the first one I saw...it was also the first movie I saw on LSD. (Even on acid, I was never one to enjoy Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs.)

Nice.

Pickpocket - Back cover:

http://www.criteriondvd.com/popup_image ... tem_id=377

A quick comparison between Criterion and MK2 transfers of PICKPOCKET: the MK2 seems a bit softer, but otherwise it's a negligible difference. The MK2 extras also show up on the Criterion release, but the deal-breakers are the 15-minute interview with Paul Schrader and the excellent James Quandt commentary (far better than Kent Jones's on the L'ARGENT disc, for my money). Needless to say, it's another essential Criterion disc.

Criterion - Region 1 - NTSC "Pickpocket" vs. MK2 (3 Films de Robert Bresson) - Region 2 - PAL vs. Artificial Eye - Region 2 - PAL

MK2 / Artificial Eye




Criterion




http://www.dvdbeaver.com/

Best,

The Criterion image looks excellent, but what is with the cropping? From those screen-shots, they seem to have taken quite a lot off the top.

It seems that many companies crop even more of the image (from another side) to bring it back to the 'correct aspect ratio'. I would rather they leave it a bit out without destroying more of the composition.

At least it doesn't look as bad as 'In the mood for love'...

It looks like the Artificial Eye version cropped off some of the image on the bottom.

jcelwin wrote:It seems that many companies crop even more of the image (from another side) to bring it back to the 'correct aspect ratio'. I would rather they leave it a bit out without destroying more of the composition.

I haven't seen the Criterion disc yet, so I can't judge whether there's significant information missing or compositions compromised, but most films contain information in the film frame that was not intended to be part of the projected image. Hence, if you see a boom appear at the top of the shot it's more likely to be the fault of the projectionist than of the camera operator. Just because a particular transfer contains more visual information doesn't necessarily mean that it's closer to the director's vision. It's generally a fair assumption, however, that filmmakers do not intentionally cut off the tops of people's heads!

I've been watching Pickpocket for years on VHS with such hazy image quality that I sort of became accustom to it. Now the sharpness of Criterion image is startling.

zedz wrote: It's generally a fair assumption, however, that filmmakers do not intentionally cut off the tops of people's heads!

Generally, but certainly not always. I remember hearing that rule-of-thumb a while ago, and began to specifically look for this characteristic in framing whenever I watched a film in a theatre. There are a number of films that take the very top off of the actor's head... and when I say "number" I mean more do than don't. I'm not talking about someone mis-framing the image either - as in when the actor's entire head is missing or a boom-microphone shows up.

Andre Jurieu wrote:

zedz wrote: It's generally a fair assumption, however, that filmmakers do not intentionally cut off the tops of people's heads!

Generally, but certainly not always. I remember hearing that rule-of-thumb a while ago, and began to specifically look for this characteristic in framing whenever I watched a film in a theatre. There are a number of films that take the very top off of the actor's head... and when I say "number" I mean more do than don't. I'm not talking about someone mis-framing the image either - as in when the actor's entire head is missing or a boom-microphone shows up.

And let's not forget that cutting off actors' heads in order to focus attention elsewhere (like the belly of a corulent industrialist or army officer) was part of the stylistic identity of Pudovkin, the great Soviet director. (Probably quite a few others, too, but Pudovkin really sticks out in my mind because it was so disconcerting when I first viewed Storm Over Asia.)

Peter Watkins (Culloden; The War Game; Punishment Park) used the technique of cropping above the eyebrows in order to heighten the tension in a shot of an authoritation/repressive characters. Many Academy ratio films have shots like this.

The Criterion transfer looks stunning. What an amazing set this is; I can't wait to delve into it.

The James Quandt is probably the best Criterion Collection commentary I've heard since Alexander Sesonske's Rules of the Game essay.

Andre wrote:The James Quandt is probably the best Criterion Collection commentary I've heard since Alexander Sesonske's Rules of the Game essay.

Can you explain why? Did he open your eyes to ideas and techniques you had missed before?

I have a Bresson fever, and the only cure may be ... more commentary?