British Film Institute (BFI) Discussion Thread

[PlexShaw]

My Kitano set is (apparently) arriving tomorrow.

[wabrit]

Originally Posted by PlexShaw

My Kitano set is (apparently) arriving tomorrow.

So was mine, until it wasn't Now apparently due Mon/Tue.

[PlexShaw]

Originally Posted by wabrit

So was mine, until it wasn't Now apparently due Mon/Tue.

Ah, sorry to hear that. Mine did arrive as expected but I probably won't have time to check them out until tomorrow.

[Hintermann]

I want to get a BD of Odds Against Tomorrow but undecided whether to get the BFI or Olive version. Olive's Region A locking is not an issue.

What I want to know is, how the open-matte aspect of the BFI disc looks like on the 'auto' setting of the TV. Does it look like a 1.37:1 with black bars at the sides or 1.85:1? On the Beaver screenshots, the Olive pictures look like they are letterboxed, which is OK with me. The BFI shots look all right but is that an illusion? I hate stretched or distorted images.

I have a few Olive BDs and not greatly impressed with their PQ. But here the Video is rated as 4/5 against only 3/5 for the BFI.

Which should I opt for?

[Dailyan]

Originally Posted by Hintermann

What I want to know is, how the open-matte aspect of the BFI disc looks like on the 'auto' setting of the TV. Does it look like a 1.37:1 with black bars at the sides or 1.85:1? On the Beaver screenshots, the Olive pictures look like they are letterboxed, which is OK with me. The BFI shots look all right but is that an illusion? I hate stretched or distorted images.

I have a few Olive BDs and not greatly impressed with their PQ. But here the Video is rated as 4/5 against only 3/5 for the BFI.

Which should I opt for?

I don't know what you mean by "auto" nor by "illusion". The BFI disc is presented in a 1.37:1 aspect ratio. If you use the "zoom" setting on your TV with the BFI disc you basically get the widescreen presentation of the Olive disc (I'm 99% certain this is what Olive did as the same master aired recently on TCM as the headroom is still inconsistent and the opening credits are cropped off).

[Yami]

I think the review on this site makes it fairly clear: " [...] some of the framing discrepancies are indeed very striking. There are a lot of segments where it is pretty obvious that there is plenty of extra space and in some cases close-ups actually appear completely off. However, as strange as it may sound, there are also a few panoramic shots where the framing here actually appears to capture some movement better. "

[Hintermann]

Originally Posted by Yami

I think the review on this site makes it fairly clear: " [...] some of the framing discrepancies are indeed very striking. There are a lot of segments where it is pretty obvious that there is plenty of extra space and in some cases close-ups actually appear completely off. However, as strange as it may sound, there are also a few panoramic shots where the framing here actually appears to capture some movement better. "

I was a bit confused by the review here and checked on Beaver and that did not help. But comparing the screenshots, I can understand now. I'll get the Olive.

[CouncilSpectre]

As Dailyan says, if you use zoom then you'll be able to achieve the Olive presentation from the BFI disc anyway.

That and the fact that the BFI is stacked with extras, and will undoubtedly be cheaper (it's £7.99 on AMZ)...... it's fairly obvious which version to go with

[Hintermann]

Originally Posted by CouncilSpectre

As Dailyan says, if you use zoom then you'll be able to achieve the Olive presentation from the BFI disc anyway.

That and the fact that the BFI is stacked with extras, and will undoubtedly be cheaper (it's £7.99 on AMZ)...... it's fairly obvious which version to go with

Well, I'll wait for the currently OOP Olive r another release. The problem with zooming an already mediocre rated picture would affect the quality even more.

[CouncilSpectre]

Originally Posted by Hintermann

Well, I'll wait for the currently OOP Olive r another release. The problem with zooming an already mediocre rated picture would affect the quality even more.

The underlying master is exactly the same. Whether you zoom the BFI or watch the Olive you'll be seeing the same thing. The only discrepancy in Svet's rating of the PQ is around the framing.

[LaughingWindows]

Originally Posted by Hintermann

I want to get a BD of Odds Against Tomorrow but undecided whether to get the BFI or Olive version. Olive's Region A locking is not an issue.

What I want to know is, how the open-matte aspect of the BFI disc looks like on the 'auto' setting of the TV. Does it look like a 1.37:1 with black bars at the sides or 1.85:1? On the Beaver screenshots, the Olive pictures look like they are letterboxed, which is OK with me. The BFI shots look all right but is that an illusion? I hate stretched or distorted images.

I have a few Olive BDs and not greatly impressed with their PQ. But here the Video is rated as 4/5 against only 3/5 for the BFI.

Which should I opt for?

Save yourself the trouble. Go with the Academy ratio version.

I did otherwise because I read on this forum an expert with a big argument for the widescreen version (Olive). From the moment the screen credits start popping your eyes do not deceive you: it is awfully cropped (top and bottom). This cropping feeling goes on thru the entire movie. If the original intention was for widescreen, then the cinematographer was terribly incompetent.

I wish I went with the BFI release in the first place

[jayembee]

Originally Posted by Dailyan

I don't know what you mean by "auto" nor by "illusion". The BFI disc is presented in a 1.37:1 aspect ratio. If you use the "zoom" setting on your TV with the BFI disc you basically get the widescreen presentation of the Olive disc (I'm 99% certain this is what Olive did as the same master aired recently on TCM as the headroom is still inconsistent and the opening credits are cropped off).

Thanks for that. Normally, I figure BFI (or Eureka or Indicator) trumps Olive. But I deliberated about getting the Olive instead of the BFI on this because of the ratio issue. I finally chose BFI and it was in my most recent order (which is on its way).

[CelestialAgent]

Don't know why I don't own this release yet, sounds like a great one!

[XGEEKEDGERX]

Originally Posted by Hintermann

I want to get a BD of Odds Against Tomorrow but undecided whether to get the BFI or Olive version. Olive's Region A locking is not an issue.

What I want to know is, how the open-matte aspect of the BFI disc looks like on the 'auto' setting of the TV. Does it look like a 1.37:1 with black bars at the sides or 1.85:1? On the Beaver screenshots, the Olive pictures look like they are letterboxed, which is OK with me. The BFI shots look all right but is that an illusion? I hate stretched or distorted images.

I have a few Olive BDs and not greatly impressed with their PQ. But here the Video is rated as 4/5 against only 3/5 for the BFI.

Which should I opt for?

I own both and believe me the BFI feels more natural to me over the 'obviously cropped' Olive. After viewing both side by side I do find it hard to believe when some reviews state that 1.85:1 was the supposed AR, the credit sequence alone gives away just how cropped it is. Go with the BFI, PQ is really solid and the extras are fantastic and the framing really works. It's also a great film.

[Dailyan]

I think the issue with Olive's widescreen presentation is that they're working with BFI's finished 1.37:1 master instead of going back to the raw scan/files (which can reveal more information) for a more proper framing (leading to a "zoom" setting-like cropping). No major (well, mini major in UA's case) US-produced film in the late 50s was going to be intended to be shown in "Academy ratio" in theaters.

[LaughingWindows]

Originally Posted by XGEEKEDGERX

I own both and believe me the BFI feels more natural to me over the 'obviously cropped' Olive. After viewing both side by side I do find it hard to believe when some reviews state that 1.85:1 was the supposed AR, the credit sequence alone gives away just how cropped it is. Go with the BFI, PQ is really solid and the extras are fantastic and the framing really works. It's also a great film.

Yeah, me too. I guess it is because some people are members of the "Fill The Whole TV screen" brigade.

Never again taking the word of self-appointed AR experts.

[LaughingWindows]

Originally Posted by Dailyan

I think the issue with Olive's widescreen presentation is that they're working with BFI's finished 1.37:1 master instead of going back to the raw scan/files (which can reveal more information) for a more proper framing (leading to a "zoom" setting-like cropping). No major (well, mini major in UA's case) US-produced film in the late 50s was going to be intended to be shown in "Academy ratio" in theaters.

Which makes me wonder if the 1.37:1 presentation (probably intended for TV) we have now is what it is left from a (now lost) original widescreen presentation?

In any case, what Olive did just to satisfy the "widescreen brigade" is atrocious.

[XGEEKEDGERX]

Originally Posted by Dailyan

No major (well, mini major in UA's case) US-produced film in the late 50s was going to be intended to be shown in "Academy ratio" in theaters.

You're right there, that did come to mind when I picked the BFI up originally. Until someone takes a fresh crack at the film and unlikely as the 1.37:1 AR probably is, the BFI definitely wins out over the Olive release due to the zooming issue.

[Aclea]

But 1.66:1 and 1.75:1 were still in play (while most studios had a standardized house ratio by then, United Artists seem to have left it up to the independent producers they backed), either of which would seem less cropped than the Olive.

[Arrowheadrevisited]

Should it be of interest, the Otto Preminger Collection is currently on eBay (Rarewaves-outlet) for £16.78 delivered. 9 left at time of posting.