The Criterion Collection

[jscoggins]

Originally Posted by DanFan

Hmmm, framing issues on Criterion Blu-rays. interesting.

Originally Posted by Edward J Grug III

Like trash? Well, that's not the general consensus.

But would you believe someone who insists they remember the exact placement of a logo on a black screen from their viewing of the film in the cinema 20 years earlier?

Especially if that person most likely watch the zoomed in DVD multiple times, probably changing their memory, in the years between seeing the movie in the cinema and viewing the blu ray?

These issues -- and more! (Blanc is also affected) -- are documented extensively in the Three Colors thread and across the Internet.

Some of you need to get your heads out of this thread and live a little. Criterion fanboying is just as bad of an echo chamber as anything else.

[jayembee]

Originally Posted by jscoggins

Yes.

Originally Posted by Edward J Grug III

http://www.theatlantic.com/health/ar...e-fake/281558/

When the "To Be Continued" card was removed from the end of Back to the Future for its DVD release, there were big arguments across the interwebs.
There were people who absolutely insisted that they saw the card in the film during its original theatrical release, despite the fact that Zemeckis and Gale (the director and writer) said that it wasn't there. It was added to the film's VHS release.

[jscoggins]

Originally Posted by jayembee

When the "To Be Continued" card was removed from the end of Back to the Future for its DVD release, there were big arguments across the interwebs.
There were people who absolutely insisted that they saw the card in the film during its original theatrical release, despite the fact that Zemeckis and Gale (the director and writer) said that it wasn't there. It was added to the film's VHS release.

See my post right before yours.

[Snicket]

Originally Posted by jhiggy23

Incorrect. The DVD version, per Mulvaney, was zoomed in on that scene to hide the boom at the top. Criterion opted not to do so because it altered the composition of the scene, and others, too dramatically; detail was lost on the side and top of the screen. The supposed framing issues were deliberate, in an attempt to recreate the film as close to how it appeared in theaters.

The DVD version has significantly less detail and cinematic feel, and represents the tinkering of those that did the transfer, altering the original and purposeful look of the film. Inferior? Certainly not.

Interesting. I had never heard Criterions reasoning. This makes me feel better about it.

[jayembee]

Originally Posted by jscoggins

Some of you need to get your heads out of this thread and live a little. Criterion fanboying is just as bad of an echo chamber as anything else.

Why is it "Criterion fanboying" to opine that the superior image quality of the HD Blu-ray over the SD DVD is more important to some people than instances of misframing?

[DanFan]

Originally Posted by jscoggins

These issues -- and more! (Blanc is also affected) -- are documented extensively in the Three Colors thread and across the Internet.

Some of you need to get your heads out of this thread and live a little. Criterion fanboying is just as bad of an echo chamber as anything else.

I'm agreeing with you. My comment is based on the same reception I received when I posted about framing issues with Criterion's The Fisher King.

[jayembee]

Originally Posted by jscoggins

See my post right before yours.

There's nothing in your post right above mine that's relevant to the issue of memories of theatrical showings from 20 years in the past.

[monorail91]

Originally Posted by jmclick

That is so funny. I have just such a spreadsheet myself, fully color-coded and annotated. I should have known I wouldn't be the only one! Call us "well-organized".

My spreadsheet lists them out, and is color-coded Green for what I've seen and Yellow for what I haven't seen but is readily available (as Hulu or Netflix streaming). I also have a tally formula at the top calculating how many spines I've seen, plus their share of the total # spines.

I don't have the Eclipse or additional titles from Hulu listed anywhere...but first things first, gotta tackle the spines.

Also, I'm iffy on my local Barnes & Noble - lots of the Blu-rays don't have the blue CC sticker, and a ton of the cases are cracked / otherwise damaged. How far does a fella have to travel to get a copy of Carlos that hasn't been beaten to a pulp! Of my wish list of 10ish Criterions, they were either not acceptable for purchase or were simply not at my B&N at all. Total first world problem but still.

[jscoggins]

Originally Posted by Snicket

Interesting. I had never heard Criterions reasoning. This makes me feel better about it.

Mulvaney was blowing smoke.

He accuses Miramax of zooming in on the image.

What happened to Binoche's hand in the Criterion transfer?

Originally Posted by DanFan

I'm agreeing with you. My comment is based on the same reception I received when I posted about framing issues with Criterion's The Fisher King.

Thank you. Criterion is not infallible. Indeed, with their small staff, they're much more likely to make mistakes than other outfits.

[Edward J Grug III]

Originally Posted by jscoggins

These issues -- and more! (Blanc is also affected) -- are documented extensively in the Three Colors thread and across the Internet.

Some of you need to get your heads out of this thread and live a little. Criterion fanboying is just as bad of an echo chamber as anything else.

I actually already read that thread. There are a few people of the thousands that own the blu ray. So, not a consensus.

[jscoggins]

Originally Posted by Edward J Grug III

I actually already read that thread. There are a few people of the thousands that own the blu ray. So, not a consensus.

Yes, b/c you drank the Drano.

The Criterions are inferior in other ways as well anyway.

- No audio commentaries by Annette Insdorf, who speaks Polish and personally knew Kieslowski.

- A horrible version of the short film "The Tram".

[Edward J Grug III]

Originally Posted by jscoggins

Yes, b/c you drank the Drano.

... I read the thread that you asked me to read (before you asked me to). I said it has just a handful of the percentage of the owners of the blu ray complaining, and that the blu rays have been actually very well recieved.

How does your reply make any sense at all?

[DanFan]

Originally Posted by jscoggins

Mulvaney was blowing smoke.

He accuses Miramax of zooming in on the image.

What happened to Binoche's hand in the Criterion transfer?





Thank you. Criterion is not infallible. Indeed, with their small staff, they're much more likely to make mistakes than other outfits.

What aspect ratio is the DVD? 1.85?

Did Criterion open theirs to 1.78?

Edit: It appears that it is 1:85.

[Edward J Grug III]

Oh goodie, arguing with someone who goes back and edits their posts after they've posted. Please think your posts out before hitting submit reply.

Originally Posted by jscoggins

The Criterions are inferior in other ways as well anyway.

- No audio commentaries by Annette Insdorf, who speaks Polish and personally knew Kieslowski.

- A horrible version of the short film "The Tram".

We are discussing your memory of where a logo sits and the fact that the blu ray doesn't look like trash. If you bought the blu ray looking for those things, I guess you might have been disappointed, but it doesn't factor into the discussion.

[DanFan]

[QUOTE=jscoggins;11105863]Mulvaney was blowing smoke.

He accuses Miramax of zooming in on the image.

What happened to Binoche's hand in the Criterion transfer?



Of course the image was zoomed. Why would anyone want the boom mic to be visible.

The shot is only slightly tighter and the composition is not compromised.

Any information lost is not important. So it eats into her head a little. The only option to hide the boom.

The zoomed version is most likely how it was shown in theaters.

[jscoggins]

Originally Posted by DanFan

Of course Miramax zoomed the image. Why would they want the boom mic to be visible.

The shot is only slightly tighter and the composition is not compromised.

Any information lost is not important. So it eats into her head a little. The only option to hide the boom.

The zoomed version is most likely how it was shown in theaters.

Mulvaney was just trying to save face. Even if Criterion didn't want to zoom, look at how much information was discarded at the bottom. Hilariously, if the same bottom area were shown, the boom wouldn't actually be there -- zoom or no zoom!

[Edward J Grug III]

Originally Posted by jscoggins

Mulvaney was just trying to save face. Even if Criterion didn't want to zoom, look at how much information was discarded at the bottom. Hilariously, if the same bottom area were shown, the boom wouldn't actually be there -- zoom or no zoom!

Do you remember her knuckles from your first viewing of the film?

[DanFan]

I emailed Jon Mulvaney over a week ago about Fisher King and have yet to hear a response.

[jscoggins]

Originally Posted by Edward J Grug III

Do you remember her knuckles from your first viewing of the film?

.

Originally Posted by jscoggins

Even if Criterion didn't want to zoom, look at how much information was discarded at the bottom. Hilariously, if the same bottom area were shown, the boom wouldn't actually be there -- zoom or no zoom!

[DanFan]

Originally Posted by Edward J Grug III

Do you remember her knuckles from your first viewing of the film?

Do you remember the boom mic from your first viewing of the film?