DVD/BluRay News

@mastersofcinema wrote:

Turns out the TOUCH OF EVIL 'grabs' were not actual BD grabs, they were screengrabs from MPEGStreamClip. Expect even better than that soon!

What a bunch of teases.

Makeshift Python wrote:

Was gonna buy the 50th Anniversary DVD soon. Well, glad I didn't.

It's good buy.

So what's the story on this 1.37 TOUCH OF EVIL? Was it intended to be 1.37? I know it was shot that way, but didn't Welles compose it for 1.85?

The White Tuxedo wrote:

Makeshift Python wrote:

Was gonna buy the 50th Anniversary DVD soon. Well, glad I didn't.

It's good buy.

So what's the story on this 1.37 TOUCH OF EVIL? Was it intended to be 1.37? I know it was shot that way, but didn't Welles compose it for 1.85?

Debate rages on. No definitive word on the matter, really.

Damn. Now I wanna see it 1.37. I actually prefer my noir to be 1.37.

Makeshift Python wrote:

Was gonna buy the 50th Anniversary DVD soon. Well, glad I didn't.

Aren't the Masters of Cinema films Region 2, though?

Mr. Brown wrote:

Makeshift Python wrote:

Was gonna buy the 50th Anniversary DVD soon. Well, glad I didn't.

Aren't the Masters of Cinema films Region 2, though?

Yeah, they are.

The White Tuxedo wrote:

So what's the story on this 1.37 TOUCH OF EVIL? Was it intended to be 1.37? I know it was shot that way, but didn't Welles compose it for 1.85?

Universal liked to matte films down to widescreen in the 1950s, and directors and cinematographers were instructed to protect the 1.37 image for widescreen presentation in 2.00 or 1.85. Thus, to some extent, the films (such as Touch of Evil) are composed for 1.85 or whatever. However, lots of people assert that Welles and Metty (and Sirk, who also has films with similar debate surrounding them) much preferred 1.37, and thus an unmatted presentation is closer to their vision of the film. Luckily MoC are providing both ratios so people can decide for themselves - on a lot of shots I expect to see excessive headroom in 1.37, but the shots MoC tweeted yesterday demonstrate the virtue of showing the entire frame.

The absurdly long threads over at criterionforum about the aspect ratio of Magnificent Obsession and Touch of Evil are pretty fun reads, just to see how passionate people can get over missing table legs and cropped headroom.

Harmsway wrote:

Mr. Brown wrote:

Makeshift Python wrote:

Was gonna buy the 50th Anniversary DVD soon. Well, glad I didn't.

Aren't the Masters of Cinema films Region 2, though?

Yeah, they are.

Some are, but they like to be region free where possible. Touch of Evil will be B-locked, but that probably means Universal are gonna be giving it a Region A release at some point in the future (I'd assume using the same transfer, just a less robust package). Some of their best Blus are region-free, including Sunrise, City Girl, and Une femme mariée.

But generally they detest region coding, as this message from one of their locked discs shows:



Ballsy.

THE LADY VANISHES is coming to Criterion Blu-Ray.

http://www.amazon.com/Dressed-Kill-Blu-ray-Michael-Caine/dp/B0058O1FES/ref=sr_1_1?s=movies-tv&ie=UTF8&qid=1315369771&sr=1-1

If there are any Hammer Fans out there like me, one of its very best - 'Quatermass and the Pit' hits Blu ray in the UK next week (Region B locked apparently).

They'll also be releasing Ro.Go.Pa.G with, as the name suggests, segments by Pasolini, Godard, Rossellini, and Gregoretti too, but no artwork for that yet.

http://www.amazon.com/dp/B004TNGLW0/ref=pe_54440_21421420_pe_vfe_dt1

De Palma's making good money off of the thugs/fanboys.

Honestly, I don't get the snobbery over SCARFACE '83.

IMO, It's one of the finest modern takes on Shakespeare's Richard III.

Up there w/ Dreyfuss' interp in GOODBYE GIRL?

Yep.

Sharky wrote:

Honestly, I don't get the snobbery over SCARFACE '83.

IMO, It's one of the finest modern takes on Shakespeare's Richard III.

From CARRIE, to OBSESSION, to BLOW OUT, to SCARFACE. To me, it just doesn't fit with De Palma's work. Plus, I hate most of the performances in the film, especially Pacino's. The incestuous relationship between Tony and his sister is about as De Palma-esque as this gets. The rest is people getting shot, shit blowing up, and Pacino sticking his head into a mound of coke. Oh, and that take on Shakespeare, apparently. Most of the film's target audience would never pick that up.

That "snobbery" may only exist around here, though. Lots of people love this film--just ask anyone walking down Myrtle Avenue in Brooklyn.


Regardless, if this were a special edition set for any of my favorite De Palma films, I still wouldn't pay $700 for it.

I'd pay $500 for a few hours with Pfeiffer, though.

Well, maybe $300.

De Palma's work can be split into two, his personal interests and his 'gun for hire' crap.

Mr. Brown wrote:

I'd pay $500 for a few hours with Pfeiffer, though.

Well, maybe $300.

Looks like you'll have to get the iPhone 4$ 16GB after all.

Mr. Brown wrote:

From CARRIE, to OBSESSION, to BLOW OUT, to SCARFACE. To me, it just doesn't fit with De Palma's work.

You're leaving out less succesfull fare like THE FURY and SISTERS. I think SCARFACE can easily hold its own with those two.

Mr. Brown wrote:

Plus, I hate most of the performances in the film, especially Pacino's.

I think Mary Elizabeth Mastrantonio is excellent as Gina, as is Míriam Colón as Tony's mother. Robert Loggia, Michelle Pfiefer, are fairly good too.

I like Pacino's performance for it's sheer theatricality. You only find that kind of performance in a De Palma film.

Mr. Brown wrote:

That "snobbery" may only exist around here, though. Lots of people love this film--just ask anyone walking down Myrtle Avenue in Brooklyn.

Nah, it's pretty damn commonplace in "cinephile" circles across the InterWeb. A lot of it's a resentment of the film's canonisation in Hip-Hop culture.

If you're a "serious" film lover, you can dig BLOW OUT, DRESSED TO KILL, or hell even HI MOM! - but FFS, don't ever show support for SCARFACE. That's for the stupid, uncultured, plebs.

Mr. Brown wrote:

Regardless, if this were a special edition set for any of my favorite De Palma films, I still wouldn't pay $700 for it.

Yeah, it's a cray rip-off.

Sharky wrote:

I like Pacino's performance for it's sheer theatricality. You only find that kind of performance in a De Palma film.

Some truth in that. Fiona Shaw in The Black Dahlia. :)

Amazon has 60% off on for one day only - today - on a 9 movie Kubrick set. Cheap. Only $56.00 for the blu-ray pack. Less than $40.00 for the dvd set. Cheap cheap cheap.

Search your regional Amazon quick, if you want to grab this bargain. They aren't kidding around either. I grabbed my complete Uncle TV set via this promotion. Good thing I moved quick as the price doubled back to its usual price, the next day. They also have an 11 pak of Oscar-winning best-pictures, slashed way down for one day only.

http://www.criterion.com/library/expanded_view?f=1&s=release_date

Coming in January:

Belle de Jour (1967)
The Moment of Truth (1964)
Godzilla (1954)

Put me down for BELLE DE JOUR. Was thinking of getting the available DVD, but I'll wait. Been years since I've seen it.

It's one big wank fantasy.

So apparently the MoC Touch of Evil has several versions of the film, and you can watch either open or matted. That's... very thorough of them. And thank God for them, since I can't watch Criterion BDs in this part of the world.