Posted: Fri Jul 27, 2007 2:54 pm
Movies Unlimited has this up for pre-order, with a street date of October 23rd. Two disc set; no specs yet.
-BJ
-BJ
I thought it would be vanilla. Perhaps this will contain Mike Kaplan's new documentary on Anderson which played at Cannes?patrick wrote:Wow, two discs is a bit unexpected, I was assuming they would just rush out a single disc with nothing but commentary to appease Malcolm McDowell.
Exactly. OLM is getting the kind of treatment I was expecting they'd give to Performance, which I'm still not forgiving them for going all out on the extras. Not even a commentary.patrick wrote:Wow, two discs is a bit unexpected, I was assuming they would just rush out a single disc with nothing but commentary to appease Malcolm McDowell.
IMDb lists the running time as 183 mintes - that's the original "X-rated" UK cut. The Cannes Premier ran 192 minutes. The 1995 Warner USA, NTSC VHS ran 173 minutes. The 1995 NTSC Laserdisc ran 178 minutes; the extra 5 minutes are of the "My Home Town" sequence. I don't know what the 183-minute version adds - or what was cut from the 192-minute Cannes cut. Malcolm will know.Video: Widescreen 1.78:1 Color (Anamorphic)
Audio: ENGLISH: Dolby Digital Mono [CC]
Subtitles: English, French
Studio: Warner Bros.
Production Year: 1973
Release Date: 10/23/2007
Length: 178 mins
Rating: NR
Number of Discs: 2
Item Code: 120031
UPC Code: 085391200314
PRINCE OF THE CITY's nearly three hour runtime was split across two discs, but the set contained no extras besides the trailer and a half-hour featurette. Given O LUCKY MAN!'s similarly epic length, there's no reason to assume that two discs means WHV has rolled out the red carpet.Lino wrote:Exactly. OLM is getting the kind of treatment I was expecting they'd give to Performance, which I'm still not forgiving them for going all out on the extras. Not even a commentary.patrick wrote:Wow, two discs is a bit unexpected, I was assuming they would just rush out a single disc with nothing but commentary to appease Malcolm McDowell.


I'm sure it was a contractual thing to get the rights to the documentary, but how bizarre is it that Katia de Vidas, who apparently hasn't done much of anything but shoot and edit this doc gets credit on the features block? I'm sure people will say, "Oooh, edited by Katia de Vidas! That must be good."* Commentary by Malcolm McDowell, Alan Price, and screenwriter David Sharwin
* New Feature-Length Career Profile, O Lucky Malcolm!, Produced/Directed by Jan Harlan, Edited by Katia de Vidas
* Vintage Featurette: O Lucky Man! Innovations in Entertainment
* Theatrical Trailer
Perhaps she's a Harlan "protege."Jeff wrote:I'm sure it was a contractual thing to get the rights to the documentary, but how bizarre is it that Katia de Vidas, who apparently hasn't done much of anything but shoot and edit this doc gets credit on the features block? I'm sure people will say, "Oooh, edited by Katia de Vidas! That must be good."* New Feature-Length Career Profile, O Lucky Malcolm!, Produced/Directed by Jan Harlan, Edited by Katia de Vidas
Why horrible? It's based on the original poster. What's there to dislike about McDowell's grin?Glass wrote:What a horrible, horrible cover
I'm a big fan of O Lucky Man! too, and it's probably my favourite Anderson, but don't write off British filmmaking of the time. The Bill Douglas Trilogy is one of the great achievements in British film of any era, and this is also the period when Terence Davies and Alan Clarke arrived and Greenaway did his best work. It's just that the best and most innovative filmmaking was on the independent margins (Douglas, Davies, Greenaway, Overlord) or on television (Clarke, Leigh, Loach, Blue Remembered Hills).Gropius wrote:As for the film, I think O Lucky Man! is probably the best (certainly most innovative) British film of the 70s (not that there's a great deal of competition)
Yes, that is based on the original one-sheet. I certainly don't think it's horrible, and even kind of like the charming goofiness, but I would have preferred the 70s vibe of this alternate art.Gropius wrote:Why horrible? It's based on the original poster. What's there to dislike about McDowell's grin?Glass wrote:What a horrible, horrible cover
All good points, but I was thinking in terms of feature films. I recently saw the Douglas trilogy actually, and agree that considered as a trilogy, it is possibly a greater stylistic achievement than even O Lucky Man!, but none of its individual parts, apart from the last, are really feature length. Ditto Greenaway's medium-length shorts (which are still too long to be eligible for your List Project, by the way); Davies's 'arrival' consists of one short, which in my opinion seems amateurish next to the first part of Douglas's trilogy.zedz wrote:I'm a big fan of O Lucky Man! too, and it's probably my favourite Anderson, but don't write off British filmmaking of the time. The Bill Douglas Trilogy is one of the great achievements in British film of any era, and this is also the period when Terence Davies and Alan Clarke arrived and Greenaway did his best work. It's just that the best and most innovative filmmaking was on the independent margins (Douglas, Davies, Greenaway, Overlord) or on television (Clarke, Leigh, Loach, Blue Remembered Hills).
I don't think I'd classify the Alan Price songs as "light rock". They are a good, not great, set of songs.Gropius wrote:although I'm not particularly enthusiastic about the musical interludes. I know they're supposed to be Brechtian, but that 'light rock' style has dated less well than the rest of it.
Yes. It is featured as a supplement on both films.manicsounds wrote:O LUCKY MALCOLM! is also on the Clockwork Orange SE, isn't it?