The Criterion Collection

[tallrichard]

Originally Posted by shadedpain4

Are we 100% sure those angels aren't eating beans?

Uhhh beans with bones?

[Scottie]

It's more than likely Only Angels Have Wings because TCM's release is out of print, but maybe it's a release of Heaven Can Wait?

[Bates_Motel]

Originally Posted by shadedpain4

Are we 100% sure those angels aren't eating beans?

Only Angels Have Beans?

[jayembee]

Originally Posted by Bates_Motel

Which is odd since the TCM blu-ray was fantastic, aside from not having the English subs. Maybe it went out of print like their Lady From Shanghai disc? Either way, I don't see the PQ getting any better.

The DVD is still in print. The Blu-ray is listed with "Limited Quantity". Incidentally, they still have the BD/DVD Combo of The Lady from Shanghai listed, with no qualified availability.

[hoytereden]

Originally Posted by Ray Jackson

I would like to see The Texas Chain Saw Massacre on Criterion.

I know there's no logical reason for it to happen, as the 40th anniversary edition provides a fantastic transfer and great special features. But it's such an important film imo...the seminal independent horror film of the 70s.

I would just like to see it.

...I would just like to see it.

Originally Posted by Roninblues

HGL's Blood Feast.

I'd like to see the original Night of the Living Dead get the CC treatment but since it was a public domain title I don't know how practical that idea is.

[Knaldskalle]

Originally Posted by BobbyMcGee

Any chance Criterion could release Ken Russel's The Devils?

Watched it last week for the first time and thought it was a fantastic film and certainly deserving of a Criterion edition.

Maybe they could release it with a copy the book it is based on, Aldous Huxley's The Devils of Loudun.

The BFI release is cut (2 scenes missing) and word has it that Warner refuses to release it uncut to anyone. Supposedly the Warner CEO is a devout Christian and the scenes in question are sacrilegious/offensive.

[mrjohnnyb]

Originally Posted by iScottie

...or could it possibly be Majid Majidi's 1997 film Children of Heaven?

[BobbyMcGee]

Originally Posted by Knaldskalle

The BFI release is cut (2 scenes missing) and word has it that Warner refuses to release it uncut to anyone. Supposedly the Warner CEO is a devout Christian and the scenes in question are sacrilegious/offensive.

Oh well, there goes that idea. Guess I will have to stick with the 111 minute Eruo-Cult DVD. At least it has some nice special features.

[MifuneFan]

Originally Posted by shadedpain4

Are we 100% sure those angels aren't eating beans?

Yeah those are totally beans, and those aren't clouds behind them either

[mrjohnnyb]

Originally Posted by MifuneFan

Yeah those are totally beans, and those aren't clouds behind them either

I think that they look more like fortune cookies.

[buffetfroid]

I don't see how that is anything other than Only Angels Have Wings

[filmmusic]

Originally Posted by buffetfroid

I don't see how that is anything other than Only Angels Have Wings

Could they release it again in the USA?
I hope so because I need the English subtitles, that's why I didn't get the TCM release!

But that eating thing is a bit confusing.
Could this point out to another title?

edit: Oh, i get it! Those are chicken wings!

[Namuhana]

I'd be happy with a movie with Cary Grant. He's one of my favorite actors.

[filmmusic]

Originally Posted by Namuhana

I'd be happy with a movie with Cary Grant. He's one of my favorite actors.

I'd be happy with a Cary Grant box-set!

[pedromvu]

Originally Posted by buffetfroid

I don't see how that is anything other than Only Angels Have Wings

Well if those are chicken wings, that invalidates the phrase: Only Angels Have Wings

[popcorntreect]

Originally Posted by buffetfroid

I don't see how that is anything other than Only Angels Have Wings

That's a bingo! First time in a long while I got the clue without the internet.

[pro-bassoonist]

Originally Posted by Vidya

Maybe so, however, I'm referring to compression issues. I would never criticize problems inherent to the source material.

Originally Posted by Vidya

Of course, but blowing up screenshots is an effective way to examine the quality of an encode.

Regards

1. An older transfer done on a Spirit will show noise, which isn't inherent to the source material. The noise would interfere with the grain. It is one of many reasons why modern scans done on ARRIs or Oxberrys would look so superior -- they eliminate it from the get-go.

On the other hand, compression artifacts and age-related anomalies are both distractions. They were not there when the film was shot. So, when you restore a film, or remaster it, your job should be to eliminate both (and all other). The only distinction that needs to be made is how they were introduced. Problems and source limitations are two very different things.

2. It is a subjective way to examine quality. The only way one can begin to argue that it is an objective way to produce some sort of an opinion is if every single frame was extracted and analyzed. Five or eight random screencaptures will not reveal whether there might be a random encoding glitch.

And I still won't go for such an option because films were not meant to be viewed/experienced as series of random screencaptures.

Pro-B

[oildude]

Originally Posted by bwdowiak

I have no idea how it is that I have never heard of this film before. Cary Grant, Howard Hawks... and it seems to be well-reviewed. I'm intrigued.

Also Rita Hayworth in her first major role.

[oildude]

Originally Posted by iScottie

Since...you know...nobody actually bothered to post the clue...

I had three thoughts on this one.

The Exterminating Angels

Only Angels Have Wings

An Angel at my Table

Only Angels Have Wings fits the best, but I hope it is all three, especially since I already own the TCM release and consider it quite good.

[MifuneFan]

Originally Posted by pedromvu

Well if those are chicken wings, that invalidates the phrase: Only Angels Have Wings