Barry Lyndon 4K UHD (1975) (UK)

[dallywhitty]

Originally Posted by philthehip

The disc was corrected at the time. no?

Not in the UK, Warners kinda brushed it under the rug and wouldn't do a replacement program, but later editions had the fixed disc.

[gap]

Originally Posted by dallywhitty

Not in the UK, Warners kinda brushed it under the rug and wouldn't do a replacement program, but later editions had the fixed disc.

I have the French disc from the Kubrick set. Anything major if the disc is affected (haven't watched it yet(?

[philthehip]

Originally Posted by dallywhitty

Not in the UK, Warners kinda brushed it under the rug and wouldn't do a replacement program, but later editions had the fixed disc.

Ahhh, I had completely forgotten. Thank you. I was being thick!

[dallywhitty]

Originally Posted by gap

I have the French disc from the Kubrick set. Anything major if the disc is affected (haven't watched it yet(?

There's a hard cut where there should be a fade to black.

[JackyJacquard]

Originally Posted by gap

I have the French disc from the Kubrick set. Anything major if the disc is affected (haven't watched it yet(?

33:45ish should be a fade to black before cut to the pod heading towards the moon. In the incorrect version the scene continues un-faded then you get the cut to the Moon-bound pod

[MifuneFan]

Not sure if it's a sign of anything, but pre-orders have been pulled from the Warner UK Shop. Same for One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest. Other places like Amazon, and HMV do still have them up though

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by MifuneFan

Not sure if it's a sign of anything, but pre-orders have been pulled from the Warner UK Shop. Same for One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest. Other places like Amazon, and HMV do still have them up though

Odd that both of those had that same boilerplate placeholder art of the title on a black background too, like they never even got close to finalising the art or the package they wanted to offer. Hmmm. I'll buy the Criterion if I have to, but I don't want to.

[dallywhitty]

If they've cancelled the UK release right after I sold the Criterion on eBay, I swear to God...

[aladdin123]

Why would they cancel the UK release? Could they just have delayed it?

[Jackie Scanlon]

Originally Posted by aladdin123

Why would they cancel the UK release?

Cos God hates dally.

[PowellPressburger]

Originally Posted by dallywhitty

If they've cancelled the UK release right after I sold the Criterion on eBay, I swear to God...

Wouldn’t it be icing on the cake if Arrow stepped in and somehow said Please let us release them in the UK.

One can dream, only with Eyes Wide Shut.

I’d sh*t

[Fat Phil]

The Barry Lyndon 4K UHD Steelbook listing on amazon UK dropped to £19.99 which is shirely a mistake, so I boshed in a pre-order. Worth a punt, even if it doesn't amount to anything, eh?

LINK

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by Fat Phil

The Barry Lyndon 4K UHD Steelbook listing on amazon UK dropped to £19.99 which is shirely a mistake, so I boshed in a pre-order. Worth a punt, even if it doesn't amount to anything, eh?

LINK

Yep, I wanged in an order as soon as I saw it earlier.

[MarkGubarenko]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

Yep, I wanged in an order as soon as I saw it earlier.

in my order it's now without VAT and priced 16.66 (not 24.99 like one flew)

[nicwood]

"This item cannot be dispatched to your selected delivery location. Please choose a different delivery location."

[The Hornets]

Originally Posted by nicwood

"This item cannot be dispatched to your selected delivery location. Please choose a different delivery location."

You’re in Germany and all Amazons these days are iffy over which countries they’re happy to sell to.

We get same with your Amazon DE store.

[Frank169]

Originally Posted by Jackie Scanlon

So the aspect ratio is still wrong then.

Which is the correct one?

Many years ago I read a reliable article according to which Stanley Kubrick hated black bars of any kind.

With the 4:3 DVD (suitable for 4:3 CRT TVs, then) I made the experiment to have it zoomed in on my 16:9 front projector and the image composition still looked intact to my eyes.

It appears he had multiple formats in mind, provided the film would appear without any bars.

Since 16:9 or 1.78:1 is the leading worldwide viewing format, I'm uncertain whether Kubrick would have preferred that or 1.66:1 (again, thin black bars left and right...).

Wait, found this: https://forum.blu-ray.com/showpost.p...postcount=1145

If 1.66:1 projection wasn't possible and 1.85:1 admissable, then 1.78:1 (after all the widescreen format agreed upon as the compromise between both) should be perfectly okay, IMHO.

[Kyle15]

Originally Posted by Frank169

Which is the correct one?

Many years ago I read a reliable article according to which Stanley Kubrick hated black bars of any kind.

With the 4:3 DVD (suitable for 4:3 CRT TVs, then) I made the experiment to have it zoomed in on my 16:9 front projector and the image composition still looked intact to my eyes.

It appears he had multiple formats in mind, provided the film would appear without any bars.

Since 16:9 or 1.78:1 is the leading worldwide viewing format, I'm uncertain whether Kubrick would have preferred that or 1.66:1 (again, thin black bars left and right...).

Wait, found this: https://forum.blu-ray.com/showpost.p...postcount=1145

If 1.66:1 projection wasn't possible and 1.85:1 admissable, then 1.78:1 (after all the widescreen format agreed upon as the compromise between both) should be perfectly okay, IMHO.

Time to break out the letter again...



He instructed 1.66 except compromise would be permitted to a certain point. That's no longer applicable and there is no constraint in the home. It doesn't have to be anything other than 1.66, there is no reason for it to be anything other than 1.66, and I doubt it's going to be anything other than 1.66 ever again. They've long since corrected it and I don't see why anybody would change that now.

[RossyG]

I was briefly a projectionist in the mid-noughties and I had two choices: flat (1.85:1) and Scope. It meant manually clicking a lens over.

Did 1970s projectionists have more flexibility? Was it common to be able to accommodate 1.66 as well as the then standard 1.75? Could they still show 1.35? On the projectors I used the cropping was done by the lens. If I'd laced up an Academy frame film it would've screened at 1.85 and there was no mechanism to open the aperture.

[sherlockjr]

Originally Posted by RossyG

I was briefly a projectionist in the mid-noughties and I had two choices: flat (1.85:1) and Scope. It meant manually clicking a lens over.

Did 1970s projectionists have more flexibility? Was it common to be able to accommodate 1.66 as well as the then standard 1.75? Could they still show 1.35? On the projectors I used the cropping was done by the lens. If I'd laced up an Academy frame film it would've screened at 1.85 and there was no mechanism to open the aperture.

It would have depended where you worked. I worked as a repertory theater projectionist which meant we had to be able to show films 1.37/Academy and European 1.66 with subtitles (or not) as well as US widescreen 1.85 and 2.35/4 Scope. Mostly double features so you were frequently changing aspect ratios between features, two to four times a day. We never used 1.75, though the aperture plates were available if you wanted to order them.

You simply had four different aperture plates and four different focal length lenses for each aspect ratio for each projector. Change aperture plates and lenses out as appropriate for the next film, change screen masking for the aspect ratio for each film. That would take just a couple of minutes between screenings.

Then, of course, you would make (hopefully minor) adjustments to framing and focus when the new film hit the screen. In theory they should all be matched between lenses, etc. In practice, not so much.

But that was normal anyway--I worked in 2,000 foot changeover houses, so we were checking framing and focus at least every 20 minutes on reel changeovers--different films wouldn't necessarily focus in the same location even between reels of the same feature, let alone different features. Framing could also be off between features and reels due to sloppy lab work. And focus drift, especially on B+W films, would mean adjusting focus during the run of each reel anyway.

All this was common in art/rep theaters in the US and I presume many UK/European theaters in the 50s through the 70s, with different films from different eras and geographies coming in frequently. As older 1.37 films went out of common circulation and flat widescreen settled on 1.85, likely newer booths wouldn't bother stocking the equipment for other ratios.

In more automated locations in the US from the late 70s on and with a single projector per screen running from platters or MUTs they would mostly likely only be setup for 1.85 and Scope, sometimes with automated changing between those two aspect ratios on the fly (for trailers, etc). Pretty much every 35mm projector made was capable of running any standard 35mm 4 perf aspect ratio--not hard to change between ratios--but if you didn't have the correctly cut aperture plates and the right focal length lenses to fill the screen for that ratio, there wouldn't be any reason to make those changes.