criterionforum.org

DVD Times has cover art for this upcoming release. It will be available on March 6, 2007 and include Billy Budd, Captain Horatio Hornblower, Madame Bovary (1949), The Prisoner of Zenda (1937 & 1952 Double Feature), and The Three Musketeers (1948). Each will also be available separately.

Excellent post! I've been waiting for Prisoner of Zenda for years! Don't think I'll be picking up the others however.

souvenir wrote:The Prisoner of Zenda (1937 & 1952 Double Feature)

I remember that, during the last HTF-Warners chat, they were talking about including the silent 1922 version as well (for a triple feature). Looks like Warners is issuing yet another slap in the face to fans of their silents library. Wonder if they'll actually ever release any of that stuff....

I guess specs aren't up yet, so I might end up being pleasantly surprised. But I really wish more consumers would call Warners on this instead of fawning over them year after year. (Sorry to sound so bitter, but this strikes me as a wonderful opportunity that they've just pissed away.)

I have to agree with tryavna, and I have to admit that every time I see the number of posts in this board change, I rush here in excitement, thinking that there will be announcements regarding silent Lubitsch, more Lon Chaney, a King Vidor Signature Collection, or a Lilian Gish collection...at long last! Tonight, we discover that Rex Ingram's film isn't a priority amongst the Prisoner of Zendas.

Or maybe they're planning a Terry/Ingram set.

Actually I never watched any of these movies.But I'm curious,looking forward to it.(at least a rent) Raoul Walsh,Vincent Minnelli....I kinda like these people.Though I know Minnelli was capable,at times,to produce some of the most boring things ever.

To me, this is one of the news of the year. I've been waiting for Bovary and Three Musketeers since the DVD format came out. The breaking of the windows scene in Bovary, Milady de Winter' s demise in Musketeers... I am walking on air.

well i'm hoping too that the '22 version of Zenda is on the DVD. i'll wail till we get the full specs.

shearerchic wrote:well i'm hoping too that the '22 version of Zenda is on the DVD. i'll wail till we get the full specs.

3 feature films (at approx. 320 minutes altogether) will be too much to squeeze onto one disc, but I'll maintain hope as well.

I was kind of hoping for "Swashbucklers" set that would include the three Zendas and a double dose of Scaramouche. And The Scarlet Pimpernel.

Matt wrote:3 feature films (at approx. 320 minutes altogether) will be too much to squeeze onto one disc, but I'll maintain hope as well.

I was kind of hoping for "Swashbucklers" set that would include the three Zendas and a double dose of Scaramouche. And The Scarlet Pimpernel.

Even so if it was a double sided disc??

Wow, great line-up! And Billy Budd from Warner? You beauty! My expectations for a DVD were slim, so this is great news for Melvillians.

shearerchic wrote:Even so if it was a double sided disc??

But Warners rarely (if ever) do double-sided discs anymore.

Full specs are now up. Shorts, commentaries and trailers will be provided on all discs and apart from The Three Musketeers (which comes with Portuguese too), only English subs for the feature will be made available.

Maybe they know I'm a Gene Kelly fan. Jokes apart, you can't help admit that it's kind of odd that Warner ditched Spanish and French subs altogether on their upcoming DVD editions. I wonder what made them do that.

I've noticed that Warners will cut corners on some releases they think might not be big sellers. Note, for example, how the discs in the Berkeley collection have only a black title on the disc instead of the usual 4-color, full-label silkscreen. Or the reversible cover art in the new Maltese Falcon set (which, though it's a big title, is still a double-dip). Reducing the number of subtitle translations available is probably another way of doing that, even though I think it's a bad thing not to put at least Spanish subtitles on every DVD released in the US.

Commentary by Terence Stamp and filmmaker Steven Soderbergh on Billy Budd? Wow! The cinematographer on the film was the great Robert Krasker (Brief Encounter, Odd Man Out, The Third Man,The Criminal) and this, in fact, was his last black and white feature film and the film itself is one of the last great examples of classical monochrome cinematography, yet it wasn't even nominated and in 1963, you still had the seperate catergory for bw cinematography, for which Birdman of Alcatraz (Burnett Guffey), To Kill a Mockingbird (Russell Harlan), Two for the Seesaw (Ted McCord), What Ever Happened to Baby Jane? (Ernest Haller) were nominated and The Longest Day (Jean Bourgoin and Walter Wottitz) won. Mind you, Ossie Morris wasn't nominated for Lolita, nor was Sam Leavitt for Cape Fear, Edmond Richard for The Trial or Walter Lassally for The Loneliness of the Long Distance Runner. Great year for cinematography - both color and bw!

Anyway, it will be great to hear what Stamp and Soderbergh have to say about this masterful film, long overdue on home video in its OAR.

Out here in France, most of movie and DVD lovers are really upset that Warner decided to drop French subtitles on their future releases. It looks like most of French cinephiles were buying too many of their DVDs online and R1...

Seems like a lot to fit on one dual layer disc for "Prisoner of Zenda"

Tom Peeping wrote:Out here in France, most of movie and DVD lovers are really upset that Warner decided to drop French subtitles on their future releases. It looks like most of French cinephiles were buying too many of their DVDs online and R1...

Eh? That's crazy. What about their French-Canadian customers?

The Prisoner of Zenda disc might be a DVD-10 or DVD-14 (101 mins and 96 mins) like the Jekyll & Hide disc.

Grapevine Video released the 1922 version of Zenda on DVD: Click here to order. I have no idea of the quality.

DVDBeaver reviews Billy Budd and Captain Horatio Hornblower.

Billy Budd was a revelation in its original CinemaScope framing. Robert Ryan is astounding - I can't believe he wasn't nominated for an Oscar. Immensely powerful film, excellent in every department and as I said, it was a joy to finally gain an appreciation of Robert Krasker's exemplary black and white CinemaScope cinematography. As for Ustinov, one wishes that he had directed more straight dramas and less comedies. I have only listened to about ten minutes of the commentary, but sounds as good as the Soderbergh-Mike Nichols tracks.

Gordon wrote:I can't believe he wasn't nominated for an Oscar

Nick Adams and Bobby Darin were Oscar nominees that year, if you can believe that. At least BAFTA had the intelligence to nominate him for Best Foreign Actor, although he lost to Burt Lancaster.

Matt wrote:I think it's a bad thing not to put at least Spanish subtitles on every DVD released in the US.

I can attest that this is indeed a bad idea, my dad speaks English and can understand it well, but since his (and mine) first language is Spanish he prefers to understand the film completely rather than miss the meaning of slang or sayings that are much more prevalent in films than native English speakers notice.

So if a DVD doesn't have Spanish subtitles he thinks twice before buying them. And he only does if it's one of his favorites.

My mom loves seeing movies with me but is annoyed that Criterion DVD's only have English subtitles, since she understands very few words of English. She only sees Italian films with me since it is close enough to Spanish that she understands the basics of the movie and only asks me about what a character said if she gets lost.

And many of my parent's friends hate not having films subtitled and refuse too buy them, the Latino market is growing and it seems idiotic not to include at least Spanish and French Subtitles on all DVD's.

Maybe another thread on this subject should be made to discuss this further.

kinjitsu wrote:

Gordon wrote:I can't believe he wasn't nominated for an Oscar

Nick Adams and Bobby Darin were Oscar nominees that year, if you can believe that. At least BAFTA had the intelligence to nominate him for Best Foreign Actor, although he lost to Burt Lancaster.

No - the noms for the 1963 Oscars were:

Best Actor in a Leading Role

Birdman of Alcatraz (1962) - Burt Lancaster
Days of Wine and Roses (1962) - Jack Lemmon
Divorzio all'italiana (1961) - Marcello Mastroianni
Lawrence of Arabia (1962) - Peter O'Toole

Winner: To Kill a Mockingbird (1962) - Gregory Peck

Best Actor in a Supporting Role

Billy Budd (1962) - Terence Stamp
Birdman of Alcatraz (1962) - Telly Savalas
Lawrence of Arabia (1962) - Omar Sharif
What Ever Happened to Baby Jane? (1962) - Victor Buono

Winner: Sweet Bird of Youth (1962) - Ed Begley

But, I agree that the 1964 awards were also screwy - even though I am fan of Bobby Darin - as Dirk Bogarde should have been nominated for The Servant. And how could Hud not have been nominated for Best Picture? It was for Best Director, Best Actor in a Leading Role (Paul Newman), Best Actor in a Supporting Role (Melvyn Douglas, who won), Best Actress in a Leading Role (Patricia Neal, who won) and Best Black and White Cinematography (James Wong Howe, who won). Tom Jones is a terrible film, in my humble opinion.

Anyway. Robert Ryan was one of those actors who had had to make magic and menace out of many dull roles, but in John Claggart, he really got the chance to rise to his zenith as a dramatic actor. The scene with him and Stamp under the stars where Billy tries to reach him is one of Cinema's most extraordinary scenes. Awesome actor. One of the greatest British films of the 60s, no question.

Gordon wrote:But, I agree that the 1964 awards were also screwy

You mean 1963, not 1964.

The film was released in 1962, hence my feeble-minded confusion. Am I getting old, or what?

Gordon wrote:Anyway. Robert Ryan was one of those actors who had had to make magic and menace out of many dull roles, but in John Claggart, he really got the chance to rise to his zenith as a dramatic actor. The scene with him and Stamp under the stars where Billy tries to reach him is one of Cinema's most extraordinary scenes. Awesome actor. One of the greatest British films of the 60s, no question.

It's my considered opinion that Ryan is one of those few actors who never gave a bad performance, though he certainly appeared in a few bad movies. I remember reading somewhere -- can't remember where now -- that Ryan probably worked with more auteurs than any other American actor: Anthony Mann, Nick Ray, Jean Renoir, Joseph Losey, Fritz Lang, Sam Peckinpah, Sam Fuller, Robert Aldrich, Jacques Tourneur, etc. Plus, the man was a "two-fisted liberal" that McCarthy didn't dare touch because of his war record. Ryan is one of the few actors I would have actually liked to meet and buy a beer for.

kinjitsu wrote:

Gordon wrote:But, I agree that the 1964 awards were also screwy

You mean 1963, not 1964.

The film was released in 1962, hence my feeble-minded confusion. Am I getting old, or what?

No - I mean that the 1964 Oscars were also screwy! In fact, every AA ceremony has been screwy! At least Jimmy Wong Howe won for Hud - another example of a masterfully photographed BW-scope film.

Anyway, years are not important, only events.