The Criterion Collection

[ChadFL]

Originally Posted by jacobsever

Just import them!
They are only $24.87 shipped ordering from amazon.co.uk.
Most are region A/B.
That's cheaper than the US releases!

Might do that for Elephant Man. But it sounds like the Ran UK copy is inferior to the U.S. version so I'll stick to U.S. for that one.

[rich_adamson]

Originally Posted by ChadFL

Might do that for Elephant Man. But it sounds like the Ran UK copy is inferior to the U.S. version so I'll stick to U.S. for that one.

No, if anything, the US would be inferior as its missing the extra Akira Kurosawa featurette. They are identical in terms of PQ/AQ and all extras except that one which is omitted in the US.

[neo_reloaded]

Originally Posted by rich_adamson

I didn't say it looked as good as it possibly could. I just don't think that it is terrible. It looks better than the dvd upconverted in my opinion, and I like to have the best edition available of a film such as this, which at he moment, (short of owning a 35mm projector and print) is this BD. I guess the only way anyone would be happy with this one is if Criterion had released it and it looked the same/ similar as their version. At this point it just seems to me that people are quick to hate Studio Canal and their releases, but I am just happy that another company is releasing these types of film at all on BD, as Criterion is only doing 3 a month at the moment. The releases are very good in terms of audio/extras too, and it just seems to me that the company is getting quite the bad reputation for this singular release which is a shame. (I will concede their issue with Deer Hunter's 5.1 soundtrack, but apart from that, I'm just getting really tired of the criticism)

I just have a hard time listening to constant *****ing and moaning over even the slightest imperfection on a BD (which this admittedly is not slight), as it seems that people are more interested in showing off their fancy home theaters than actually enjoying the FILM. Blu-Ray is just another vehicle to deliver these great cinematic works to their audiences, and in my eyes, this BD of Ran is the best that I've ever seen it, which is a POSITIVE to me. I am sorry for the length of this rant, but I am growing extremely tired of nitpicking and complaining. How about we all just TRY to enjoy it... it's a great film and its looking better than ever for home viewing.

I'm not one to moan about the slightest problems. StudioCanal's releases of Contempt and Belle de jour were good, and I look forward to the release of Breathless. But their soundtrack problems on Deer Hunter, and the, in my opinion, VERY poor picture quality of Ran don't make it look like they're really taking this seriously. Ran hurts more than it normally would because Criterion clearly had a BD ready to go, and I can't help but feel it would have been much superior, and we never got to see it because of this poor BD StudioCanal put out. I'm all for other studios taking these types of films seriously - I love the Kino and Eureka MoC releases, and wish there was more of this stuff out there. But if SC is going to take their rights away from Criterion and other companies that ALREADY do this stuff well, then they should at least put out a high quality product.

[rich_adamson]

Just got some interesting thoughts from Gary (DVDBeaver) about what could be problems in the original masters of both Ran and the Ladykillers and their Technicolor roots.


For any who might be keen, I have someone, quite famous (but prefers anonymity) who allowed me to publish some text from our emails – added to the reviews:



In The Ladykillers: “What I saw was not chromatic aberrations but fringing caused by the mis-registration of the Technicolor YCMs. LADYKILLERS was shot 3-strip and unless the video master was made by someone or some company that knows how to re-register the separate images, time and chemistry will make them not fit properly. Technicolor prints, before anamorphic release prints, were never that tightly registered. Unless the print was destined for a major first-run house with a large screen (Radio City Music Hall, for example) the fringing was deemed acceptable. Prints for those venues were cherry-picked as they came off of the line. Prints that were somewhat fringy would be sent to lesser theatres and those that were totally f'd up would have the dyes washed off and would be reprinted. Still, I remember some pretty badly misaligned reels in theatres. When 'scope came into being, Technicolor had to resort to Eastman Color print stock until they re-engineered their print line to make registration more accurate.

It is possible that the master used in the BD version was combined a long time ago, perhaps from separations or a release print. The Criterion version of TALES OF HOFFMAN has an entire reel horribly misregistered, the result of a restoration gone bad and the original negatives gone away leaving an awful legacy for that film.”



In RAN : “I have to admire your tenacious comparisons of the endless editions of RAN. The Lionsgate BD looks more nearly what I remember of the film's appearance. But none of them looks quite right. This leads me to believe that the original materials are compromised and the colorists were working from problematic sources.”



Best,

Gary

[rich_adamson]

Originally Posted by neo_reloaded

I'm not one to moan about the slightest problems. StudioCanal's releases of Contempt and Belle de jour were good, and I look forward to the release of Breathless. But their soundtrack problems on Deer Hunter, and the, in my opinion, VERY poor picture quality of Ran don't make it look like they're really taking this seriously. Ran hurts more than it normally would because Criterion clearly had a BD ready to go, and I can't help but feel it would have been much superior, and we never got to see it because of this poor BD StudioCanal put out. I'm all for other studios taking these types of films seriously - I love the Kino and Eureka MoC releases, and wish there was more of this stuff out there. But if SC is going to take their rights away from Criterion and other companies that ALREADY do this stuff well, then they should at least put out a high quality product.

Thats exactly what I'm saying... it feels like these are being maligned because of the possibility that Criterion MIGHT have done better... we will never know, and while these may not be reference quality, they are an improvement. (in the case of Deer Hunter, at least the original 2.0 track is not affected by the problem) It may very well be the case that Ran has compromised source materials and can't really be improved all that much, which would render all this moot.

I look at it this way... by Studio Canal reclaiming all their US rights to films, it just became easier for Criterion to focus on their Janus library and get some of those out that may have taken years if they were constantly trying to get these SC titles out before having to renew their rights. I think that this reversion of rights to SC will greatly reduce the future numbers of OOP's on blu too. (Hopefully)

Back to Ran though... it was shot on an extremely tight budget for a film of its scale, and I have no trouble believing that its source materials would be less than ideal either.

[Xorp]

I like how some people are trying to come up with some technical explanation why Ran looks so bad, when's simply an upconvert. There's poor HD and then there's SD pretending to be HD. Ran is the later.

[rich_adamson]

Originally Posted by Xorp

I like how some people are trying to come up with some technical explanation why Ran looks so bad, when's simply an upconvert. There's poor HD and then there's SD pretending to be HD. Ran is the later.

Where are you getting this... it is just plain untrue! I would like some proof of this if you are so adament about it. What I see is clearly not just a DVD upconvert... The feature size alone is like 35GB, and the colors are so different and improved I find statements like this just plain misleading.

[rich_adamson]

Originally Posted by Xorp

I like how some people are trying to come up with some technical explanation why Ran looks so bad, when's simply an upconvert. There's poor HD and then there's SD pretending to be HD. Ran is the later.

I really hope you aren't just basing this idea off of screencaps.....

[Xorp]

Originally Posted by rich_adamson

Where are you getting this... it is just plain untrue! I would like some proof of this if you are so adament about it. What I see is clearly not just a DVD upconvert... The feature size alone is like 35GB, and the colors are so different and improved I find statements like this just plain misleading.

I have advanced technological knowledge in this field. Just saying the file size is large quickly proves you don't know what you are talking about. You can encode ANY quality source to ANY file size you want. It's completely irreverent and proves nothing.

[jacobsever]

Originally Posted by Xorp

I have advanced technological knowledge in this field. Just saying the file size is large quickly proves you don't know what you are talking about. You can encode ANY quality source to ANY file size you want. It's completely irreverent and proves nothing.

Disproving another's claim makes yours no more valid, thus, proving nothing.

[rich_adamson]

Originally Posted by jacobsever

Disproving another's claim makes yours no more valid, thus, proving nothing.

Thank you. But he didn't even disprove anything... how about the colors? I do know about encoding as well, but I have not seen any 480 transfers ever look like that, or take up 35 GB for that matter. Its just not practical

Advanced technological knowledge does not make you an expert on this film, or its transfer for that matter. I am not claiming to be an expert either, but I do find your tone to be quite childish, and basing your entire impression of my knowledge on one statement about file size seems quite condescending. I am trying to have a realistic discussion about this release, and offer ideas about it, while you are making unwarranted claims and putting me down.

[Xorp]

You do know studios have color controls? It's remarkably easy to increase color saturation and brightness to "spruce up" a poor transfer to impress general consumers.

[jacobsever]

Originally Posted by Xorp

You do know studios have color controls? It's remarkably easy to increase color saturation and brightness to "spruce up" a poor transfer to impress general consumers.

And you still realize you're making vague, general statements that does nothing to back up your claim that this is a simple upconvert.
Make yourself more credible, post some sources, give real facts, instead of dancing around in your "advanced technological knowledge" hat.

[McCrutchy]

Not to detract from the conversation, but there is a Studio Canal thread in the Region A forum right next to this one, and while I appreciate that some of the postings might be relevant (some of those regarding Ran and Contempt), I think most of it would be better served in the SC thread.

If you have something to ask/say that is relevant to the Criterion release vs. the Studio Canal release, or about the loss of rights Criterion had to several SC titles that will occur in March, feel free to post it here.

Otherwise, I would politely request that you discuss Studio Canal US titles in the Studio Canal Collection's official US thread and their European/Australian releases in the official European/Australian thread.

[Blu Titan]

Originally Posted by aggienader08

Well if you still want to hear an opinion: I thoroughly enjoyed the movie. It can be a little slow, but if you stick with it, then it's quite an experience. It's one of Kurosawa's greats, but not quite considered his best. I like it more than Ran, but not near as much as Seven Samurai. If you like Kurosawa, then you should enjoy it, no doubt.

Thank you very much...that's all I wanted to read.

[PowellPressburger]

on the discussion of soon to be OOP Criterion DVD titles Don't hesitate to purchase Le Trou... it is one of the best prison escape films ever made. http://www.criterion.com/films/668?u...tm_term=Letrou

[jmcy2k]

yet on the May releases ... the Criterion collective is slipping.

[reallyagi]

Originally Posted by jmcy2k

yet on the May releases ... the Criterion collective is slipping.

They'll probably release the news this Friday.

[ccfixx]

Originally Posted by jmcy2k

yet on the May releases ... the Criterion collective is slipping.

I'll just wait 'til next week when Criterion will actually make their announcement. No use in my speculation or wishes when Criterion already knows what they're going to release and what they're not going to release.

CC

[McCrutchy]

Originally Posted by jmcy2k

yet on the May releases ... the Criterion collective is slipping.

Really, they didn't predict Stagecoach for May after that hint in the John Ford article on the CC web site?