The Criterion Collection

[Namuhana]

Originally Posted by iScottie

Having just finished Valerie and Her Week of Wonders, I am rather speechless as to not only its appeal, but what people find redeeming in it.

From all of the positive reviews, I was expecting something fun and surreal, but all I got was something incredibly ridiculous.

I have the same sentiment. I was hoping that it would be an awesome Alice in Wonderland-esque adventure, and it turned out to be be pretty unappealing. It was disjointed to me, and as a coming-of-age story I'm not sure if Valerie really does come-of-age (except for the fact that she gets her period).

I've realized that of the four Czech films I've seen (Marketa Lazarová, Loves of a Blonde, Valerie and Her Week of Wonders, and Daisies), I've only liked Marketa. Maybe the Czech New Wave just isn't for me.

[ShellOilJunior]

Check out The Innocents thread for a bunch of comments where people said the Criterion disc couldn't possibly improve upon the BFI release.

[bwdowiak]

Originally Posted by baheidstu

What are you talking about? If you don't speak a word of French and are watching a film made in French and having to rely on subtitles to understand what is being said, it's a compromise. You may still be getting the gist of the film, or even a pretty good understanding but you're still relying on a third party's interpretation of what is being said to understand the dialogue. Are subtitles preferable to dubbing in most cases to many people? Sure. Some people like hearing the actor's voices even if they don't understand what is being said, but it's still a compromise.

Google's definition of compromise is "an agreement or a settlement of a dispute that is reached by each side making concessions." I understand what you're saying perfectly clear, but what concession am I making when I don't speak French, for example, to begin with? Tell me what it is I'm giving up.

If I can walk but need a crutch, am I not still walking?

To the other poster, I'll say what I said earlier: watch the film again then.

[jlk5844]

Something's not right, the cover for Sullivan's Travels says 1942, but the review and specs on the page say 1941.

[Scottie]

Originally Posted by Namuhana

I have the same sentiment. I was hoping that it would be an awesome Alice in Wonderland-esque adventure, and it turned out to be be pretty unappealing. It was disjointed to me, and as a coming-of-age story I'm not sure if Valerie really does come-of-age (except for the fact that she gets her period).

I've realized that of the four Czech films I've seen (Marketa Lazarová, Loves of a Blonde, Valerie and Her Week of Wonders, and Daisies), I've only liked Marketa. Maybe the Czech New Wave just isn't for me.

I've only seen Marketa Lazarová, which I loved, and Valerie and Her Week of Wonders, which I did not care for at all.

Earlier this week I posted that I probably would not keep Marketa, but after thinking about it for the past two days and reading about it, I realized that keeping it is the best option.

[bwdowiak]

Originally Posted by iScottie

Having just finished Valerie and Her Week of Wonders, I am rather speechless as to not only its appeal, but what people find redeeming in it.

From all of the positive reviews, I was expecting something fun and surreal, but all I got was something incredibly ridiculous.

I had never heard of this film and was surprised that so many people were not only aware of it, but that it really seems to be quite a favorite.

It doesn't sound like something I'd enjoy but good on'ya Scottie for sharing an honest opinion. On that note, The Innocents put me to sleep... twice.

[joie]

re: sub/dub gate --

I can understand how emotional content of an actor's voice can be lost in a dub, but I'm talking about a Criterion produced dub. Surely those wouldn't have any deficiencies.

As to lip sync, I never noticed the problems with Harrison Ford's dialog being out-of-sync on the Blade Runner workprint until I was told about it.

For a long time even Italian was dubbed on Italian films, because the studios were very noisy and they couldn't get good on-set audio recordings. By the way, the English dub of one of the early Fellini's (La Strada or Nights of Cabiria) is awful.

But the best argument for a dub may be that viewers would have a choice. English or original audio, with optional English sub's. It might boost interest in foreign language films, too. There are people who believe with all their hearts and with all their minds that films are made to be seen, not read. And the French, who loved American films, usually heard a dub (on 400 blows, there is a doc. in which either Truffaut or the kid he used to skip school with says that they usually watched American films dubbed into French).

[Edward J Grug III]

Originally Posted by pro-bassoonist

Sullivan’s Travels Blu-ray REVIEW



The film looks fine, but I wanted it to look as good as Sturges' The Palm Beach Story and Frank Capra's It Happened One Night. There are traces of some built-in sharpening that occasionally pop up here and there.

My actual score is 3.75/5, as it appears that some additional cleanup work has been done. The extras are very nice.

Anyway, this truly is an essential American film to see and own, so consider getting yourself a copy

Pro-B

A shame that it isn't as well restored as The Palm Beach Story and It Happened One Night! It is also my favourite of Sturges' films (and I love his films so much!)

So, is there a clear winner between the two releases, or are they more or less the same?

[CHEЯNOБLY!]

Originally Posted by ShellOilJunior

Check out The Innocents thread for a bunch of comments where people said the Criterion disc couldn't possibly improve upon the BFI release.

BFI's The Innocents had a much lower feature size and bitrate than CC, so I am not surprised the CC was better. However, this BFI War Trilogy is maxed out on the discs. Very different situation...it will depend on the size of the supplements CC adds with the feature films.

I am sure the CC will be very good when they final release it, but BFI might turn out to have slightly better PQ since that stats are so maxed out...just saying for those interested.

[jayembee]

Originally Posted by joie

re: sub/dub gate --

I can understand how emotional content of an actor's voice can be lost in a dub, but I'm talking about a Criterion produced dub. Surely those wouldn't have any deficiencies.

As to lip sync, I never noticed the problems with Harrison Ford's dialog being out-of-sync on the Blade Runner workprint until I was told about it.

That's a different kettle of fish. It's virtually impossible to dub a foreign-language film into English and make it look in synch, because most foreign languages have different sentence structures. On top of the words being different. Look in a mirror and see how different your mouth moves if you say "hat" or "sombrero" or "bōshi" or "kapélo".

[pro-bassoonist]

Originally Posted by CHEЯNOБLY!

BFI's The Innocents had a much lower feature size and bitrate than CC, so I am not surprised the CC was better. However, this BFI War Trilogy is maxed out on the discs. Very different situation...it will depend on the size of the supplements CC adds with the feature films.

It is a different situation, but bitrates and file sizes have absolutely nothing to do with the fact that the Criterion release looks vastly superior. The Criterion release uses as a foundation a recent 4K restoration of the film, while the BFI release is sourced from a dated master.

People really need to stop listening to all these random speculations suggesting that higher bitrates and bigger files magically produce vastly superior results.

If and when Criterion announce the Trilogy for Blu-ray, I am absolutely certain that they will access the new 4K restorations and that their box set will look magnificent.

Originally Posted by Edward J Grug III

A shame that it isn't as well restored as The Palm Beach Story and It Happened One Night! It is also my favourite of Sturges' films (and I love his films so much!)

So, is there a clear winner between the two releases, or are they more or less the same?

Ed, take a look at our reviews. I personally prefer the cleaner look of the Criterion release, but in terms of detail and image depth there are no sizable discrepancies. The new piece with director Bill Forsyth is also very nice.

Pro-B

[pedromvu]

Originally Posted by joie

re: sub/dub gate --

I can understand how emotional content of an actor's voice can be lost in a dub, but I'm talking about a Criterion produced dub. Surely those wouldn't have any deficiencies.

It simply isn't viable, Criterion can't even afford to add other language's subtitle options (probably cost more to license?), which even if their films are region locked would probably increase their foreign sales (since their website allows them).

Getting actors to produce a full dub would be prohibitive because of the cost, time and their small staff, and based on the answers from here it will probably wouldn't give their releases any significant boost in sales.

[Edward J Grug III]

Originally Posted by pedromvu

... which even if their films are region locked would probably increase their foreign sales (since their website allows them).

??? I thought Criterion would sell outside of the US?

[pedromvu]

Originally Posted by Edward J Grug III

??? I thought Criterion would sell outside of the US?

That is what i meant sorry, probably wasn't clear enough

I wanted to say that if they had more subtitle options they would probably be purchased by more people outside US, since their site allows purchases from other countries.

Edit: forget it, not sure why i thought they did sell to other countries, it seems they just ship to US and Canada :S

[CHEЯNOБLY!]

Originally Posted by pro-bassoonist

It is a different situation, but bitrates and file sizes have absolutely nothing to do with the fact that the Criterion release looks vastly superior. The Criterion release uses as a foundation a recent 4K restoration of the film, while the BFI release is sourced from a dated master.

People really need to stop listening to all these random speculations suggesting that higher bitrates and bigger files magically produce vastly superior results.

I did not know it was a different source...that would be a major reason for the different results as well.

I wasn't suggesting "vastly superior results", or that bitrates and feature sizes are the only thing that matters. How it is encoded matters significantly, but of course bitrates and the amount bytes devoted to the feature matters as well.

[Edward J Grug III]

Originally Posted by pedromvu

That is what i meant sorry, probably wasn't clear enough

I wanted to say that if they had more subtitle options they would probably be purchased by more people outside US, since their site allows purchases from other countries.

Edit: forget it, not sure why i thought they did sell to other countries, it seems they just ship to US and Canada :S

Haha, I confusingly made a typo in my message, which was meant to say:

'??? I thought Criterion wouldn't sell outside of the US?'

But you edited to agree! ;D

[joie]

Originally Posted by jayembee

That's a different kettle of fish. It's virtually impossible to dub a foreign-language film into English and make it look in synch, because most foreign languages have different sentence structures. On top of the words being different. Look in a mirror and see how different your mouth moves if you say "hat" or "sombrero" or "bōshi" or "kapélo".

It doesn't bother me if the lips aren't synced to the spoken word.

[Edward J Grug III]

Originally Posted by joie

It doesn't bother me if the lips aren't synced to the spoken word.

But in the end, you understand that the cost involved to produce a really high quality dub, the likes of which would be acceptable by Criterion and Criterion fans, is prohibitive?

[Edward J Grug III]

Originally Posted by pro-bassoonist

Ed, take a look at our reviews. I personally prefer the cleaner look of the Criterion release, but in terms of detail and image depth there are no sizable discrepancies. The new piece with director Bill Forsyth is also very nice.

I read both reviews and it didn't seem obvious one way or the other which was 'better.' (Extras are great and all, but all I really care about is the 'best' presentation of the film - I would prefer no extras and an amazing transfer over a packed disc and a just okay transfer).

So if both are more or less equal, I could go either way in terms of which to pick up.

[pedromvu]

Originally Posted by Edward J Grug III

I read both reviews and it didn't seem obvious one way or the other which was 'better.' (Extras are great and all, but all I really care about is the 'best' presentation of the film - I would prefer no extras and an amazing transfer over a packed disc and a just okay transfer).

So if both are more or less equal, I could go either way in terms of which to pick up.

From the Criterion review:

Some minor dirt specks remain, but it appears that additional cleanup work has been performed and the film looks cleaner than it does on the Arrow Video release.

Looks like the winner based only on PQ.