The Criterion Collection

[Scottie]

I rewatched Still Walking tonight.

Not comparing this film to Ozu's work like I did on my initial viewing was probably the best thing I could have ever done.

This film is about as close to perfection as any film thus far this century.

[jw007]

Originally Posted by StarDestroyer52

Get Being There, it's a masterpiece and also an appropriate film for this age.

I ended up blind-buying Being There! (Because I like Hal Ashby)

I plan to blind-buy Lost in America! (Because I like Albert Brooks)

Let's see...so far, my B&N count for this current sale stands around 5 titles.

They are:

Being There
Ghost World
Rumble Fish
The Squid and the Whale
Stalker

Which brings my tally up to 261 total Criterions! (See below)

[Count Orlok]

I don't have very many Criterion titles, but I did hit the 28 mark yesterday. Friday is payday, so I plan to hit up B&N again before the sale is over.

[oildude]

Originally Posted by Count Orlok

I don't have very many Criterion titles, but I did hit the 28 mark yesterday. Friday is payday, so I plan to hit up B&N again before the sale is over.

Nice! It Happened One Night should be at the top of the list for anyone that doesn't own it.

[mande2013]

So does the new 4K restoration of Belle de Jour render the Criterion version obsolete? Argh...this is what I hate about the blu-ray era. On that note, why doesn't Criterion rerelease their films when new 4K transfers become available? Is it just not worth it if films are only being presented in 1080p?

[javy]

Originally Posted by mande2013

So does the new 4K restoration of Belle de Jour render the Criterion version obsolete? Argh...this is what I hate about the blu-ray era. On that note, why doesn't Criterion rerelease their films when new 4K transfers become available? Is it just not worth it if films are only being presented in 1080p?

I just purchased the current Belle de Jour and it's stunning. For myself, when companies start restoring films that have already been restored it usually comes down to miniscule things that I can't tell the difference. I'm not saying the new Belle de Jour is not gonna be an improvement, but I am saying it's ok to just be happy with what ya got. Like I said, the current Belle de Jour is beautiful. I'm happy with what I got.

[mande2013]

Originally Posted by javy

I just purchased the current Belle de Jour and it's stunning. For myself, when companies start restoring films that have already been restored it usually comes down to miniscule things that I can't tell the difference. I'm not saying the new Belle de Jour is not gonna be an improvement, but I am saying it's ok to just be happy with what ya got. Like I said, the current Belle de Jour is beautiful. I'm happy with what I got.

Maybe I'm showing my technical ignorance here, but what's the purpose of these constant restorations aside from maintaining the condition of the celluloid itself? 35 mm is 35 mm, so why would a restoration done today look better than one done in 2005 resolution wise. That's my question. What's the benefit of a 4K restoration over a 2K one if again, 35 mm is 35 mm? Film restoration is a noble endeavour, but is it necessary twice for the same film within the span of ten years?

[Knaldskalle]

Originally Posted by mande2013

Maybe I'm showing my technical ignorance here, but what's the purpose of these constant restorations aside from maintaining the condition of the celluloid itself? 35 mm is 35 mm, so why would a restoration done today look better than one done in 2005 resolution wise. That's my question. What's the benefit of a 4K restoration over a 2K one if again, 35 mm is 35 mm? Film restoration is a noble endeavour, but is it necessary twice for the same film within the span of ten years?

These are usually not photochemical restorations (i.e. not restoration of 35mm film), but "digital restorations" where the restoration work takes place entirely in the digital realm after a scan of (ideally) the original negative or some intermediate thereof. There are exceptions to this, but photochemical restorations are very expensive and slow (see Apu Trilogy for an example) so digital restorations are pretty much the norm these days.

The reason why a digital restoration done today may look better than a digital restoration done in 2005 is twofold. First, equipment and technology improves all the time, so the tools to perform digital restorations presumably improve as well. Secondly, experience. Whenever a new format (DVD, BD, UHD BD) comes out, it takes a while for the people who do these restorations a while to learn how to use the new tools and new formats optimally.

Which brings me to 2K vs. 4K when it's all 35 mm film. The resolution of film depends on the size of the film and the "granularity" of the emulsion layer on it. 35 mm film has higher resolution than 16 mm film, but less than 70 mm (65mm) film. That's simply a function of the area used to store the image.

Typically, it's said that 35 mm film has the equivalent resolution of 4K, which means that scanning at a higher resolution than that should be a waste of resources. HOWEVER, there is the little factor of "granularity" that I mentioned earlier. On digital cameras the "resolution" is evenly spread out across the image (X pixels by Y pixels), but on film the location of the "grain" varies from frame to frame since it's all little photosensitive particles in an emulsion layer that's been smeared onto the film. Scanning at a higher resolution allows you to capture more of this variability of the image, which again translates into capturing more detail of the image.

During the digital processing of the scan (digital intermediates), working in high resolutions helps preserve these little details until the last step where it gets down-sampled to 1920 by 1080 pixels for a blu-ray. And that's why a new 4K scan of a 35 mm film can look better than a 2K scan of the same film, even though they're ultimately both presented in the same format, 1920 by 1080p.

[SammyJankis]

Watched Ministry of Fear this morning. A great deal of fun, to be sure, and was surprised to see Duryea emerge yet again in a slight role. I guess Lang couldn't resist his slimy scowl.

[Ray Jackson]

Well I'll be watching Being There for the first time tonight.

Not terribly pleased about the spine--kind of a limp design/color scheme if you axe me...which you didn't.

...but I suppose I can live with it if the movie's great.

[HuggyBear73]

If I order a blu-ray direct from Criterion, is there STANDARD shipping USPS?

[mande2013]

Originally Posted by Knaldskalle

During the digital processing of the scan (digital intermediates), working in high resolutions helps preserve these little details until the last step where it gets down-sampled to 1920 by 1080 pixels for a blu-ray. And that's why a new 4K scan of a 35 mm film can look better than a 2K scan of the same film, even though they're ultimately both presented in the same format, 1920 by 1080p.

I wouldn't doubt that a 1080p transfer taken from a 4K source would be an improvement over one taken from a 2K source. I think it's merely an issue of diminishing returns, which perhaps also explains why some people doubt UHD BD's ability to catch on to the extent conventional blu-ray did. There's a reason Criterion most likely doesn't rerelease films on blu-ray to upgrade the source from 2K/conventional HD to 4K: cost-benefit analysis.

[Scottie]

REVIEW



PACKAGING PHOTOS

[Talal86]

I wish Criterion would release Hard Boiled and The Killer on blu ray

[20th Century Boy]

Originally Posted by Talal86

I wish Criterion would release Hard Boiled and The Killer on blu ray

Agreed. I wish labels paid as much attention to Chinese/Asian titles as they did in the late 90s. Terribly neglected in the HD era.

[ShellOilJunior]

Jean Pierre Melville's centennial is 10/20/17.

[Brad1963]

I received an e-mail this morning. It appears B&N has extended the sale one more week. Now I can pu The Breaking Point.

[Knaldskalle]

Originally Posted by mande2013

I wouldn't doubt that a 1080p transfer taken from a 4K source would be an improvement over one taken from a 2K source. I think it's merely an issue of diminishing returns, which perhaps also explains why some people doubt UHD BD's ability to catch on to the extent conventional blu-ray did. There's a reason Criterion most likely doesn't rerelease films on blu-ray to upgrade the source from 2K/conventional HD to 4K: cost-benefit analysis.

Oh, absolutely, as this figure shows (someone else originally used it to make the same point on this very forum, apologies for having forgotten who it was):



As you can see, there comes a point where the image is "good enough" and it doesn't get much better despite a tenfold increase in "resolution." However, blow this up on a large screen and then start looking at the details and you will be able to tell the difference.

My guess is that for most people the DVD hit the point where it became "good enough", for others it's BD and for others still it'll be UHD BD and then there are those for whom it'll never be "good enough".

I think Criterion is hesitant to release new versions of their old releases for several reasons. Once they start doing it they'll almost have to do it for any release that gets an overhaul and I think that's a can of worms they'd rather leave unopened. Secondly, I think it'll create a kind of backlash with people questioning the validity of the old releases and it's pretty obvious that Criterion cares a lot about how they're perceived as a premium brand (see B&N's new coupon policy re CC releases for an example, or how their UK releases are locked to region B).

Unfortunately, this means that Criterion risks diluting their own brand in the longer term, when people start catching on to the fact that other places get releases that look better than the Criterion versions. The longer this goes on, the more the "balance" shifts in the favor of the newer (non-CC) releases and at some point they'll almost be forced into releasing new versions. The question is when this'll happen and whether it'll happen before or after the death of physical media, or before or after Criterion adopts UHD BD's as a format. My money would be on Criterion taking the opportunity to release new DVD/BD versions when they add UHD BD to their available formats, but that's obviously just a guess and I have no idea when (or even if) that'll happen.

[Darth Marcus]

Originally Posted by ShellOilJunior

Jean Pierre Melville's centennial is 10/20/17.

Speaking of, I've been tempted to sell my Criterion copies of Army of Shadows and Le Cercle Rouge while I can get a pretty penny for them. I would imagine Rialto Pictures will license them out for a re-release to someone down the line.

[ShellOilJunior]

Originally Posted by Darth Marcus

Speaking of, I've been tempted to sell my Criterion copies of Army of Shadows and Le Cercle Rouge while I can get a pretty penny for them. I would imagine Rialto Pictures will license them out for a re-release to someone down the line.

Rialto had licensed the film for the blu-ray but apparently Studio Canal controls the rights to the OOP Melvilles. We know what Canal does with films...

I've got them all and I'm hanging on to them.