The Criterion Collection

[whbinder]

Originally Posted by lDlisturb3d

Thanks, i was just curious thats all.

I think you got your answer, but it's really just a matter of

a) There are hundreds of DVDs, so they can't all come out at once, it takes time
b) Many titles are no longer available to Criterion

[keldons]

Originally Posted by ccfixx

Trailer for Malick's upcoming "Tree of Life."

NOTE: This is a hand held phone recording in the theater.

CC

As much as I love Malick, this looks to have more or less the exact same feel as his other stuff. But of course I'll reserve actual judgement for when I see the film.

[Arkadin]

[QUOTE]

Originally Posted by 42041

Someone posted shots from the new Leopard restoration, and I'm inclined to agree.
http://blubrew.com/

well imo there really doesn't look to be much difference except for obvious different color timing.
the overall detail looks almost identical so I'm not sure Criterion wasn't more correct that some people are saying.
I certainly don't think the "richer" colors should cause people to immediately assume the "new" version is that much better.
I mean where are some people seeing a vast difference?
all these screenshots look very strong to me.

[pro-bassoonist]

Couple of things:

1. I don't have the French release to compare yet, but because of the better scan, the grain structure should be resolved better. This said, the advantage(s) should be noticeable primarily for people with very large screens and top-end projectors.

2. There is some premature euphoria here giving the French release an edge. As far as I know, the Criterion release (and the 'copycat' BFI) is the only one using a transfer supervised by Director of photography Giuseppe Rotunno. And I see serious discrepancies in the color-schemes between the two.

3. Nothing that has been said about the Criterion release is in any way compromised by the arrival of the French release - it is stunningly beautiful, it is one of the very best in Criterion's catalog, and certainly the best English-friendly release.



Pro-B

[Beta Man]

Originally Posted by kdssrugby

A member over at AVSfourms has obtained a copy of the Pathe version of The Leopard and has offered up some comparisons. I can't answer as to the accuracy of the contrast or the aspect ration on the new disc, but the resolution is far and away superior to the Criterion. Thoughts?

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1295472

Sorry, thought I'd quote this.... It didn't get approved (since there was a link by a new member) and I didn't want anyone to think we were censoring "negativity" I reserve that distinction for CG

[SpiderBaby]

Originally Posted by keldons

As much as I love Malick, this looks to have more or less the exact same feel as his other stuff. But of course I'll reserve actual judgement for when I see the film.

What, you mean the same cinematography relied on film with a poetry-like narrative over top of the slow moving "powerful" images that suppose to speak to me on an artistic level, but doesn't, because films that pushes "art" only "touch" people who is forcing themselves to be snobby? Yeah, me too.


Sean Penn should do another stoner movie. I like him. Enough with these "Oscar bait" roles. Do something more with your career Sean. Don't let these people hate you. Early Sean Penn > Later Sean Penn. And I am saying that in a pretentious way, knowing myself that his early roles were far better than his "Let's make this to get an Oscar" roles.

Fast Times at Ridgemont High
Bad Boys
Crackers
The Falcon and the Snowman
At Close Range
Colors
Casualties of War
Carlito's Way

[Trekkie313]

Originally Posted by Beta Man

Sorry, thought I'd quote this.... It didn't get approved (since there was a link by a new member) and I didn't want anyone to think we were censoring "negativity" I reserve that distinction for CG
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1295472

Man, Criterion didn't give a very good response about why their transfer looks like someone dug it out of a dumpster. No disrespect to the people who worked on it, but it looks like a DVD.
One thing we can say is that our QC staff thinks the Leopard may be the most beautiful Blu-ray we've ever made!

Oh, come on! Even though Criterion is practically unmatched when it comes to restoring important films, they should know better than to play "kiss-ass".

[keldons]

Originally Posted by CassavetesGodard

What, you mean the same cinematography relied on film with a poetry-like narrative over top of the slow moving "powerful" images that suppose to speak to me on an artistic level, but doesn't, because films that pushes "art" only "touch" people who is forcing themselves to be snobby? Yeah, me too.

Nope. The value of Malick, eloquently summed up by a user on Mubi:

Something I've always loved about Malick's body of work (and The Thin Red Line in particular) is that it proposes questions rather than arrogantly answering them. He is a true philosopher by nature, unlike other highly regarded filmmakers who are forcing it (*cough noise* Godard!)

Thats more or less what I enjoy in his work, with a comment about Godard I can't help but appreciate.

[Volume11]

Originally Posted by Trekkie313

Man, Criterion didn't give a very good response about why their transfer looks like someone dug it out of a dumpster. No disrespect to the people who worked on it, but it looks like a DVD.
One thing we can say is that our QC staff thinks the Leopard may be the most beautiful Blu-ray we've ever made!

Oh, come on! Even though Criterion is practically unmatched when it comes to restoring important films, they should know better than to play "kiss-ass".

You guys sound like the spoiled little girls on my super sweet 16 that have parents who spend 20k on an event hall, 30k for Usher to sing 1 personalized song, another 20k on high end catering, and ONLY 40k on a modest new Acura when you wanted a M series BMW...

Wahhhhhhh, wahhhhhhh....

[Beta Man]

Originally Posted by Trekkie313

Even though Criterion is practically unmatched when it comes to restoring important films,.

Many would disagree with that..... I'm not one of them..... but many would.

EDIT:

Their 'consistency' is fantastic in my opinion.

[Trekkie313]

Originally Posted by Volume11

You guys sound like the spoiled little girls on my super sweet 16 that have parents who spend 20k on an event hall, 30k for Usher to sing 1 personalized song, another 20k on high end catering, and ONLY 40k on a modest new Acura when you wanted a M series BMW...

Wahhhhhhh, wahhhhhhh....

I don't watch the show and your comment eludes me, what does it add to the discussion?

[42041]

Originally Posted by Arkadin

the overall detail looks almost identical so I'm not sure Criterion wasn't more correct that some people are saying.
I certainly don't think the "richer" colors should cause people to immediately assume the "new" version is that much better.
I mean where are some people seeing a vast difference?

Man, I completely disagree The new restoration has an incredible degree of natural, film-like detail that's as good as anything I've seen on the format (better than most other large-format films, even). The old one is harsher and edgy-looking, with clumpier grain, it's not even close IMO.

I have no idea which color timing is "right", but after 45 years' worth of color fading, I doubt either could represent how the movie looked in 1963; to my eyes the new version looks superior in every regard. I really hope Criterion considers updating their release.

[Volume11]

Originally Posted by keldons

Nope. The value of Malick, eloquently summed up by a user on Mubi:

Thats more or less what I enjoy in his work, with a comment about Godard I can't help but appreciate.

I don't disagree about Godard, as I value his work less and less as I get older, but ANYONE can do what Malick has done since TTRL...taking slow and pretty shots of nature interposed with a hackneyed narrative isn't anything but weak story telling at it's best. Its a lot easier to take the psuedo-intellectual hands off approach he often employs with his films than it is to take pretty RELEVANT pictures to a story that actually has something to say outside refusing to say anything...

I don't like being force fed black and white logic screenplays but true masters can tell a story with a point without hitting you over the head with it and leaving certain aspects open while having great cinematography to boot...Malick only has one of those aspects down...

[Strevlac]

[QUOTE=Arkadin;4098765]

well imo there really doesn't look to be much difference except for obvious different color timing.
the overall detail looks almost identical so I'm not sure Criterion wasn't more correct that some people are saying.
I certainly don't think the "richer" colors should cause people to immediately assume the "new" version is that much better.
I mean where are some people seeing a vast difference?
all these screenshots look very strong to me.

Are you for real? What, are you looking at the pics on a Iphone or something? With that one post you have completely eradicated any credibility you might have once had. Get your eyes checked.

Sheesh.

[Volume11]

Originally Posted by Trekkie313

I don't watch the show and your comment eludes me, what does it add to the discussion?

Calling out Criterion for QC on a solid (though not spectacular) edition of the Leopard reeks of annoying internet guy who lives and dies by the still capture and forgets that

1. Criterion aren't WB or Disney...they don't have the resources to commission 8k scans for every film they release...

2. Criterion release more small/cult/historical films on blu than any other company does, in good to great packages that NO ONE else would touch or put even the minimal amount of care into if they did, like Fox Lorber/Kino, for example...

3. Criterion's edition is an APPROVED title...

4. Its about the movie itself sometimes...if this title were an atrocity (see remastered Predator and Patton for examples) then you would have a point...but even with a better edition available than doesn't negate the fact that Criterion's version is well above average...

[Trekkie313]

Originally Posted by Volume11

Calling out Criterion for QC on a solid (though not spectacular) edition of the Leopard reeks of annoying internet guy who lives and dies by the still capture and forgets that

1. Criterion aren't WB or Disney...they don't have the resources to commission 8k scans for every film they release...

3. Criterion's edition is an APPROVED title...

So your calling me out over this? Geez. Its pretty much well known Criterion isn't that large of a company. But after seeing their other Blu-Ray releases compared to "mainstream editions" its obvious that it could have been better in terms of PQ.

I don't live and die by screenshots, but they are a good idea how the "film" looks. I own several movies in different editions/formats and I can tell you they certainly look different whether paused or playing.

For example, the Ghostbusters LaserDisc had way better audio than the DVD and VHS versions IMO. A Criterion "Approved" title is not the be-all/end-all of movies.

[Volume11]

Originally Posted by Trekkie313

So your calling me out over this? Geez. Its pretty much well known Criterion isn't that large of a company. But after seeing their other Blu-Ray releases compared to "mainstream editions" its obvious that it could have been better in terms of PQ.

I don't live and die by screenshots, but they are a good idea how the "film" looks. I own several movies on different formats and I can tell you they certainly look different whether paused or playing.

And daddy COULD HAVE gotten me an M series but he cheaped out and got me an Acura...

..and we come full circle...

[Trekkie313]

Originally Posted by Volume11

And daddy COULD HAVE gotten me an M series but he cheaped out and got me an Acura...

..and we come full circle...

That comment just fails, hard. You're quoting a bad reality series on a thread about the Criterion Collection...

[Volume11]

Originally Posted by Trekkie313

That comment just fails, hard. You're quoting a bad reality series on a thread about the Criterion Collection...

...to point out how whiny and spoiled most of you sound. Beta, clean this thread up...it used to be good before the screengrab "if its not perfect I'm calling you out despite 99 out of 100 of your titles kicking ass!" mafia entered the fray.

[Trekkie313]

Originally Posted by Volume11

...to point out how whiny and spoiled most of you sound. Beta, clean this thread up...it used to be good before the screengrab "if its not perfect I'm calling you out despite 99 out of 100 of your titles kicking ass!" mafia entered the fray.

You're whining to the mods because I made a comment about the transfer quality of one movie...really?