Arrow Video - The Bird with the Crystal Plumage

[Der Spieler]

THE BIRD WITH THE CRYSTAL PLUMAGE



A stunning portrait in psycho-terror!

Dario Argento nails the Giallo blueprint in The Bird with the Crystal Plumage, a brutal thriller that packs a gory brace of terrifying murders alongside it’s genre defining mix of red herrings, leather gloved slashers and stylish decor.

When Sam, an American writer in Rome, witnesses an attempted slaying in an art gallery, he unwittingly sets the killers sights on himself and his beautiful model girlfriend. But soon, things start to unravel as it becomes clear that the identity of the unknown slayer is very much open to question. Somebody’s killing everyone, who is the evil fiend? Could it be Sam himself?

Argento’s groundbreaking shocker combines eye-popping visuals with a seamy vein of sadomasochism and a lust for violence to create a genre defining movie classic.

SPECIAL FEATURES:

- Brand new High Definition restoration of the film from the original negative presented in Director of Photography, Vittorio Storaro’s original 2:1 Univisium aspect ratio
- 4 Sleeve art options with original and newly commissioned artwork
- Two-sided fold-out poster
- Exclusive collector’s booklet featuring brand new writing on the film by Alan Jones, author of ‘Profondo Argento’
- Brand new HD restoration of the film presented in 1080p
- A Crystal Classic: Luigi Cozzi Remembers Dario’s Bloody Bird (1080p)
- Sergio Martino: The Genesis of the Giallo (1080p)
- The Italian Hitchcock: Dario Argento Remembers The Bird With the Crystal Plumage (1080p)

Blu-ray only
Optional Original English and Italian LPCM mono audio
Running time 96 mins
Region ABC

Original art by Rick Melton

Release Date 2nd May 2011

"Brand new High Definition restoration of the film from the original negative presented in Director of Photography, Vittorio Storaro’s original 2:1 Univisium aspect ratio"

Glad I picked up the BU release...

[Le Grande Blu]

That's a pretty awful cover image, even by Arrow's Standards.

[charnier]

Originally Posted by Der Spieler

"Brand new High Definition restoration of the film from the original negative presented in Director of Photography, Vittorio Storaro’s original 2:1 Univisium aspect ratio"

Glad I picked up the BU release...

So am I - it is a very good release. But according to the Cult Labs boards, Arrow did not have access to the BU master and had to make do.

Here's what I don't understand - Storaro seems to have a reputation for meddling (Apocalypse Now), but it says that it was in the original 2:1 Univisium ratio. Was the film supposed to have always been presented in that ratio or is it that we generally prefer 2:35 as an aspect ratio and so expect it to be used all the time?

[charnier]

Originally Posted by MichaelB

It's a non-standard ratio, so if Storaro intended it to have been presented in 2:1 back in 1969, hardly any cinemas would have been able to oblige him.

Of course, it's not unknown for a film to have been screened in the wrong aspect ratio for years or even decades - Disney's Sleeping Beauty was conceived for 2.55:1, but by the time it was finished it was only able to be screened in 2.35:1, and I think the Blu-ray is the first time it's been presented as originally intended.

But in that case there's no doubt at all what the correct aspect ratio should be, whereas in this case we have to take Storaro's word for it. Granted, it's a word that comes with considerable authority behind it, and given that this was Argento's debut it's likely that he'd have had a pretty huge input into issues like framing and composition - but it would be useful to hear Argento's own opinion on this.

Thanks, Michael - that's exactly why I asked; you raised a similar point in the Criterion forum over Larks on a String. There's how it was originally meant to be and then how it was actually represented over the years, with people preferring the representation and treating it as definitive.

This may be one of those cases where being authentic does not necessarily pay - but I agree; Argento needs to chip in and settle this.

[the blob]

Storaro's 'vision' is designed as a medium point between theatrical and home video so I doubt it was a concern in 1969. He didn't even devise Univisium/Univision until 1998.

[Der Spieler]

I'm pretty sure if BU released this in 2:35 there was a reason for it. 2:1 is not only unusual but ugly. And it is my understanding that Arrow once again works with a possibly inferior master. We'll wait and see. I always give the runner a chance, but it's a 100% non-buy for me as I've already ordered the BU.

[Liquid_Swords]

Originally Posted by Le Grande Blu

That's a pretty awful cover image, even by Arrow's Standards.

Well...Agree to disagree. Plus there is 4 cover art options.

[LordCrumb]

Originally Posted by Der Spieler

I'm pretty sure if BU released this in 2:35 there was a reason for it. 2:1 is not only unusual but ugly. And it is my understanding that Arrow once again works with a possibly inferior master. We'll wait and see. I always give the runner a chance, but it's a 100% non-buy for me as I've already ordered the BU.

Dude seriously, give it a rest. Don't make a completely new Arrow thread if you have no intention of purchasing it, and just to complain and complain again.

[Der Spieler]

I don't see why mods here always have to protect Arrow. It's not like I'm exaggerating anything. Not my fault if they're releasing this in a cropped ratio. Even the people at Cult Labs are complaining and saying they won't buy.

I'm judging products objectively. I have nothing against the Arrow brand per se, but it just happens they're releasing movies I'm interested in, so I give special attention to their offerings... which I often find "meh".

Just tell me straight off the bat if we're not allowed to criticize an Arrow blu here.

[J-Syxx]

Arrow sucks. Some people at this company should be fired. Leave it to them to choose the wishes of a senile DP over Dario Argento himself. There's no way in hell Dario Argento approves of this. No way.

[Leterface]

Originally Posted by Der Spieler

It's not like I'm exaggerating anything. Not my fault if they're releasing this in a cropped ratio.

Originally Posted by Der Spieler

I'm pretty sure if BU released this in 2:35 there was a reason for it. 2:1 is not only unusual but ugly.

It can't be cropped if it is the Vittorio Storaro’s original 2:1 Univisium aspect ratio now can it?

Why would 2:1 be uglier than any other aspect ratio, sorry, this just doesn't make any sense or you are just exaggerating things?

For me the correct aspect ratio is a must, so if I didn't miss anything about the "if BU released this in 2:35 there was a reason for it" this Arrow release seems promising in atleast the OAR aspect.

[pro-bassoonist]

Originally Posted by Der Spieler

I don't see why mods here always have to protect Arrow. It's not like I'm exaggerating anything. Not my fault if they're releasing this in a cropped ratio. Even the people at Cult Labs are complaining and saying they won't buy.

I'm judging products objectively. I have nothing against the Arrow brand per se, but it just happens they're releasing movies I'm interested in, so I give special attention to their offerings... which I often find "meh".

Just tell me straight off the bat if we're not allowed to criticize an Arrow blu here.

There is no need to throw sarcastic remarks at KaiGusto and the mod team.

Yes, you have been exaggerating a lot. In The Beyond thread I specifically asked you not to pass your speculations as facts, as very obviously you were misinformed.

Furthermore, you are not judging Arrow's products objectively. The Bird with the Crystal Plumage streets on May 2, and you most definitely do not own a copy of it yet. When the disc arrives and you have at least read some detailed reviews, come back and claim that you are judging Arrow's release objectively.

No one here censors opinions, so don't point a finger at the mods.

And one final suggestion, at this point it is perfectly clear that you dislike Arrow and their products. That is fine. Don't support them. But just like you are entitled to have an opinion, our members are also entitled to have one and disagree with you. So, stop trying to force everyone to agree with you.

I hope that this time you would consider very seriously my request.

Thanks.

Pro-B

[J-Syxx]

Originally Posted by pro-bassoonist

There is no need to throw sarcastic remarks at KaiGusto and the mod team.

Yes, you have been exaggerating a lot. In The Beyond thread I specifically asked you not to pass your speculations as facts, as very obviously you were misinformed.

Furthermore, you are not judging Arrow's products objectively. The Bird with the Crystal Plumage streets on May 2, and you most definitely do not own a copy of it. When the disc arrives and you have at least read some detailed reviews, come back and claim that you are judging Arrow's release objectively.

No one here censors opinions, so don't point a finger at the mods.

And one final suggestion, at this point it is perfectly clear that you dislike Arrow and their products. That is fine. Don't support them. But just like you are entitled to have an opinion, our members are also entitled to have one and disagree with you. So, stop trying to force everyone to agree with you.

I hope that this time you would consider very seriously my request.

Thanks.

Pro-B

So if the upcoming release of Taxi Driver was said to be in in black and white a few months before release date because that is what the director of photography wants now, we're not allowed to complain about it untill we actually buy the disc and watch it? That seems to be pretty much what you are implying here, which is a standard that is ridiculous beyond belief.

[demiscy]

I almost thought-about-cancelling my pre-order from this negativity going on but then I remembered who the OP was..

He was also mocking people in The Beyond thread. "Laughing" at all who pre-ordered and expecting a corrected disc.

[pro-bassoonist]

Originally Posted by J-Syxx

So if the upcoming release of Taxi Driver was said to be in in black and white a few months before release date because that is what the director of photography wants now, we're not allowed to complain about it untill we actually buy the disc and watch it. That seems to be pretty much what you are implying here, which is a standard that is ridiculous beyond belief.

I've made myself perfectly clear.

At this point you either seriously consider my request and move or you don't. Either way, the current bashing will stop. This is my final request.

Pro-B

[J-Syxx]

Originally Posted by pro-bassoonist

I've made myself perfectly clear.

At this point you either seriously consider my request and move or you don't. Either way, the current bashing will stop.

Pro-B

I've only seen people commenting on factual information about the releases, and I don't see how telling them to stop is anything less than censorship. Maybe you need to clarify yourself a bit, becuase it does seem you are coming in on the side of Arrow Films for whatever reason. I mean seriously, do you take your reviews that seriously that we have to only respond to what you say in them? There's plenty of information in that press release presented as fact that can be criticized. Unless this isn't a forum after all. I suggest then turning it into a blog or something.

[schluppeaux]

So, if this 2:1 transfer is supposed to be in the OAR, is it the case that previous versions with 2.35:1 were cropped around 7% at both the top and the bottom respectively, so that this new transfer is actually opened up in comparison to previous transfers?

2.35:1 for 1080p means ~1920x818 whereas 2:1 for 1080p translates to 1920x960.

The usual thing to expect would thus be, that the horizontal scope is identical for both transfers while the vertical scope is a bit larger for the 2:1 transfer, right?

[dwk]

2:1 is not the OAR of The Bird With the Crystal Plumage (look at the fourth screencap in DVDBeaver's review). This is another case of Storaro cropping his past work to fit into his stupid Univision aspect ratio. Arrow's copy, using the word "original" in describing the aspect ratio is deceptive.

[the blob]

Originally Posted by Leterface

It can't be cropped if it is the Vittorio Storaro’s original 2:1 Univisium aspect ratio now can it?

Why would 2:1 be uglier than any other aspect ratio, sorry, this just doesn't make any sense or you are just exaggerating things?

For me the correct aspect ratio is a must, so if I didn't miss anything about the "if BU released this in 2:35 there was a reason for it" this Arrow release seems promising in atleast the OAR aspect.

Okay, I'm a member at Cult Labs, have many an Arrow disc and am supportive of what they're trying do so I'll immediately use that as a disclaimer for any anti-Arrow bias.

Now, as I stated earlier, Univisium was only devised by Storaro in 1998. Bird was shot in 1969. It's the only master Arrow could use unfortunately, which they may not have known when they licensed it but it's obvious there's a mistake in just using the term 'Vittorio Storaro’s original 2:1 Univisium aspect ratio'. It's his idealistic (or egotistic!) universal ratio for theatre and home video that noone else on the planet seems to agree with. Right now, people at CL are running off to snap up copies of the BU disc before they disappear. It's something that isn't going down well anywhere.

[schluppeaux]

Originally Posted by schluppeaux

... so that this new transfer is actually opened up in comparison to previous transfers?

Seems as if I was mistaken. Vittorio Storaro’s format is described here: Univision 2:1
This paper seems to indicate that the Arrow transfer will indeed be cropped on the sides.

I'm not trying to bash Arrow, but personally, I'd rather have no release at all than a release where part of the film is cut off. Changing the aspect ratio and removing parts of the picture which have been intact in the theatrical (and previous home video) releases seems like a very bad idea to me.

Also, the Blue Underground Blu-ray release has recently gone out of print, AFAIK.

So let's hope, that the Arrow release will not be cropped but opened up (even though it seems to be unlikely now).