A Few Words About A few words about...™ 1900 -- in Blu-ray (1 Viewer)

[Brandon Conway]

Originally Posted by Peter Neski /t/320782/a-few-words-about-1900-in-blu-ray#post_3926461
Maybe I am thinking of all the Japanese films they did already,and I am sure money has something to do with everything,
They only have two Bertollucci film and one on BR they clearly can't get everything they want to get

It's strongly rumored that Criterion licensed The Conformist from Paramount (in the same deal that got them Harold & Maude and Rosemary's Baby), but there's nothing officially out there to confirm it.

 

[Ethan Riley]

Well, it's a depressing film no matter how you look at it, and some of the graphic sex stuff is borderline x-rated and disturbing. I think that's what's kept people away from this film for the most part--although you have to admit there's some pretty good acting all across the board with Sutherland, DeNiro and Depardeau.
I'm sorry the blu looks so lousy. I thought the dvd looked just okay; now I'm afraid to upgrade because I simply don't want to magnify the transfer's flaws. I doubt they'll ever do a restoration any time soon because nobody likes to restore five hour long depressing films. Honestly, half the people I've talked to only watched it because they wanted to see Robert DeNiro's junk!

 

[NY2LA]

I don't recall the sex being disturbing. I recall only the one scene, which was cut even when it debuted in NYC. Once the um, "manual labor" began and the camera moved upward, just before it cleared the footboard, you could practically hear the splice go through the projector. But in the uncut version, the camera certainly didn't go any closer, so you couldn't see a lot of detail... The violence on the other hand, IIRC wasn't it Lancaster swinging a kid around by his feet until...?
Anyway it seems HTF has uploaded the wrong cover image for this thread, as Amazon is showing the Blu Ray with the original poster.

 

[Ed Lachmann]

The Italian BD (DaliAngelo's 35th Aniversario NOVECENTO) I bought from Amazon Italy about a year ago was a disappointment in a different way. The film was stripped of all grain in the same way as the horrible Universal BD release of SPARTACUS and the sharpness was noticeably compromised. The one thing I liked about the captures on DVD Beaver was the relatively intact grain structure I noticed, as if the DNR lunatics were kept at bay. I do like the film quite a bit and did not hesitate to order the Olive version. I suppose that the grain in, say, Criterion's THE LEOPARD similarly often has a life on its own in several sequences, as is the case also with Carlotta's LUCKY STAR. But, truthfully, I SO much prefer it to the more annoying DNR. I just dream that SPARTACUS will be loaned out to, say, Criterion someday and I finally get a sharp and watchable BD, heavy grain and all.

 

[Stephen_J_H]

The 317 minute cut was rated NC-17 when submitted to the MPAA, so your instincts regarding X-rated elements are spot on. While I am not much of a Bertolucci fan, it's a shame that Paamount couldn't @ least spring for a new transfer, as the film appears to have more than a few fans.

 

[Robert Harris]

Originally Posted by Ethan Riley /t/320782/a-few-words-about-1900-in-blu-ray#post_3926503
Well, it's a depressing film no matter how you look at it, and some of the graphic sex stuff is borderline x-rated and disturbing. I think that's what's kept people away from this film for the most part--although you have to admit there's some pretty good acting all across the board with Sutherland, DeNiro and Depardeau.
I'm sorry the blu looks so lousy. I thought the dvd looked just okay; now I'm afraid to upgrade because I simply don't want to magnify the transfer's flaws. I doubt they'll ever do a restoration any time soon because nobody likes to restore five hour long depressing films. Honestly, half the people I've talked to only watched it because they wanted to see Robert DeNiro's junk!

Let us not presume that any restorative functions are needed.

I would surmise, that all the film needs is a decent image harvest, which does not come without cost.

RAH

 

[Peter Neski]

A lot of these Blue Rays just use old Hd transfers which never were restored in the first place

 

[Robert Harris]

Originally Posted by Peter Neski /t/320782/a-few-words-about-1900-in-blu-ray#post_3926581
A lot of these Blue Rays just use old Hd transfers which never were restored in the first place

HD transfers generally did not need restoration. Again, just a transfer.

RAH

 

[Peter Neski]

well near all are 2K not 4k, was that Chinatown Blue Ray done from 4K ,I don't think so
also I don't think 1900 is 1:66 if that's what the titles are they are wrong

 

[haineshisway]

The Italian BD (DaliAngelo's 35th Aniversario NOVECENTO) I bought from Amazon Italy about a year ago was a disappointment in a different way. The film was stripped of all grain in the same way as the horrible Universal BD release of SPARTACUS and the sharpness was noticeably compromised. The one thing I liked about the captures on DVD Beaver was the relatively intact grain structure I noticed, as if the DNR lunatics were kept at bay. I do like the film quite a bit and did not hesitate to order the Olive version. I suppose that the grain in, say, Criterion's THE LEOPARD similarly often has a life on its own in several sequences, as is the case also with Carlotta's LUCKY STAR. But, truthfully, I SO much prefer it to the more annoying DNR. I just dream that SPARTACUS will be loaned out to, say, Criterion someday and I finally get a sharp and watchable BD, heavy grain and all.

Spartacus and heavy grain is on oxymoron. There should be almost no grain visible in Spartacus - it's a large format film and, as has been stated over and over again, that was the point in large format films - very little visible grain. What Universal did to Spartacus was something wholly other.

 

[owen35]

While I must admit, I haven't had a chance to watch all of the Blu-Ray--my immediate were impressions based on spot checking some of my favorite scenes--I did watch about 40 minutes last night until I couldn't take it anymore. Just watching the early Champagne scene between Lancaster and Hayden was torture. The footage would constantly do a quick move-in/move-out or there would be constant hiccups as the camera dollied right. And there was no sense of contrast; Lancaster's shirt was completely blown out!!
So, I pulled out my previous DVD that was released in 2006 and checked the same scene. There it was. All the annoying wiggles, movements, and blown-out whites on full view. This is not a new HD transfer, rather the same transfer used for the DVD release. Now, due to the higher quality blu-ray, these problems are only magnified and make for a very unpleasant viewing experience.
That's a shame. A film with so many talented artists deserves better.

 

[Peter Neski]

after watching 13min of This Blue Ray ,all I can is this Blue Ray is Very Nice,and I don't see what RH saw ,and he sees all Mistakes of the transfer which I don't
What makes Storaro the master of Color is clearly shown in this Transfer
This isn't perfect and Not sure how this transfer would look on a big screen,I have a 34 inch Tube which it looked very nice on,
In days of Laser Disc ,all we had was poor cropped shorter version,Then bravo showed a letterboxed version of the long version,and soon after
other TV channels showed this version,
This film with its X rating type of Nudity wasn't anything Paramount was interested in re releasing of Home Video,So it took forever for it to come
out on DVD!!! So the DVD was a godsend for fans of the film,
So being a fan of the Film,I am glad to have even a fair version,and I think its better than that,
Before Home Video and the Internet I always used the word Grain ,as a Bad thing!! Seeing 1900 in the Theater,I saw seamless Photography
beautiful Light of Bertolucci 's incredible Images with a Knowledge of Color unseen in most films ,The Lab and Prints were fantastic ,Sharp
with little or no grain ,and no faded scenes(at Least when they came out)
I think it must be Taste,Because while I liked Girl with a dragon Tattoo(Fincher Ver) I clearly wasn't as crazy about the look of the film
as Mr Harris was,I feel its only better than whats out today,and while I understand that its a total different type of film(or Video that Is)
the transfer ,and Photography never made my eyes pop like 1900,with its Beauty

 

[Robert Harris]

Originally Posted by Peter Neski /t/320782/a-few-words-about-1900-in-blu-ray/30#post_3927048
after watching 13min of This Blue Ray ,all I can is this Blue Ray is Very Nice,and I don't see what RH saw ,and he sees all Mistakes of the transfer which I don't
What makes Storaro the master of Color is clearly shown in this Transfer
This isn't perfect and Not sure how this transfer would look on a big screen,I have a 34 inch Tube which it looked very nice on,
In days of Laser Disc ,all we had was poor cropped shorter version,Then bravo showed a letterboxed version of the long version,and soon after
other TV channels showed this version,
This film with its X rating type of Nudity wasn't anything Paramount was interested in re releasing of Home Video,So it took forever for it to come
out on DVD!!! So the DVD was a godsend for fans of the film,
So being a fan of the Film,I am glad to have even a fair version,and I think its better than that,
Before Home Video and the Internet I always used the word Grain ,as a Bad thing!! Seeing 1900 in the Theater,I saw seamless Photography
beautiful Light of Bertolucci 's incredible Images with a Knowledge of Color unseen in most films ,The Lab and Prints were fantastic ,Sharp
with little or no grain ,and no faded scenes(at Least when they came out)
I think it must be Taste,Because while I liked Girl with a dragon Tattoo(Fincher Ver) I clearly wasn't as crazy about the look of the film
as Mr Harris was,I feel its only better than whats out today,and while I understand that its a total different type of film(or Video that Is)
the transfer ,and Photography never made my eyes pop like 1900,with its Beauty

It is understandable why you're not seeing what I (and others) may be seeing.

You cannot see it on a 34" tube. Very nice sets in their day, but beyond everything else, viewing in what I presume to be 1080i will not be helpful. My initial viewing of Patton on Blu was on my office 30" Sony, which while it yielded a superb image, covered virtually all flaws.

RAH

 

[Peter Neski]

while I sure understand this,There is no way I can afford a Projector,and I see plasmas and LCDs all the time
and have never really happy with the color of those sets ,while the sharpness is better the contrast and Color aren't as good
as my set,from what I saw ,Maybe when we finally get a OLED set I will give up my Tube

 

[Aaron Silverman]

Clearly it's a matter of screen size, not personal taste.
I saw this movie on the big screen back in the early '90s when they re-released the full-length cut. I only remember a few parts of it, but I'm pretty sure I enjoyed it (I'm a sucker for melancholy, overlong epics). I seem to recall a fairly grainy image.
Maybe the phrase "Hole-in-Pocket Socialist" will enter the vernacular now.

 

[Peter Neski]

Of course the short but nice extras from the dvd aren't on this ,so you have to hold on to another dvd, I don't get it,they filmed a documentary years
ago about the making of the Film and they can't get(afford) that?
The Bertollucci RAI stuff was interesting,and is not a replacement for a good Doc,or that making of

 

[Peter Neski]

Watched more of this,and like the dvd ,there are a few spots were the film is faded,and not the way it was in the Theater ,so even if they did a new remaster they would still
be faded ,unless they could find other sources,But the New" Days Of Heaven" has some faded shots too ,but you wouldn't notice color missing in scenes unless you
saw it in the theater
I really don't understand why films that were sharp clear with fantastic color even blown up to a large theater screen ,can't transfer to video without problems and way to
much grain(or too little)
why in the Theater (only a couple years ago) "Once Upon a Time In America " was perfect on a large screen ,and the BR was so so
even 60inch plasmas are smaller than the theater screens where these films look perfect
1900 looks so fantastic,wonder what it could look like if they spent the money to restore and transfer it to 4k,but that's a dream,so I think your review is too hard
this might the best we get for another 20 years

 

[Robert Harris]

Originally Posted by Peter Neski /t/320782/a-few-words-about-1900-in-blu-ray/30#post_3927866
Watched more of this,and like the dvd ,there are a few spots were the film is faded,and not the way it was in the Theater ,so even if they did a new remaster they would still
be faded ,unless they could find other sources,But the New" Days Of Heaven" has some faded shots too ,but you wouldn't notice color missing in scenes unless you
saw it in the theater
I really don't understand why films that were sharp clear with fantastic color even blown up to a large theater screen ,can't transfer to video without problems and way to
much grain(or too little)
why in the Theater (only a couple years ago) "Once Upon a Time In America " was perfect on a large screen ,and the BR was so so
even 60inch plasmas are smaller than the theater screens where these films look perfect
1900 looks so fantastic,wonder what it could look like if they spent the money to restore and transfer it to 4k,but that's a dream,so I think your review is too hard
this might the best we get for another 20 years

Once again, it is doubtful that restoration is necessary.

RAH

 

[Peter Neski]

"restoration is necessary."
What can they do if color is missing ??

 

[Felix Martinez]

Wow...I thought I was going to disagree with Mr. Harris on this one - I just saw the first half last night on a 92 in FP setup.

There is some crazy amount of noise in the blacks, along with other strange anomalies, for much of the film up to and including (to a lesser extent) the "grown-up" period when De Niro and Depardieu show up (over an hour into the film). The wild color shifts I accepted as creative choices of Mr. Storaro - the blown-out electronic-looking highlights not so much.

This is a fascinating, awkward, brutal, distasteful, passionate, and even humorous failure of a film. Camera moves and staging are ambitious and sometimes awkward - but it's just so fascinating to me, that the film lingered long after I saw it in its (5-hour?) form on the DVD that was released about 5-6 years ago. So I pulled the trigger on this release. Just had to have it as a film fan.

Do I regret it? Not one bit. It took me pretty much about 20 years to finally see the film after I first heard about it and was intrigued. The fact that we have a Blu-ray of the longest version, quality as it is, is kind of a mini-miracle. Unless Criterion picks it up and does a totally new image harvest - assuming the element(s) are better than what they appear on the Blu-ray - I just don't see this film seeing the light of day on home video in such a high-quality format for the foreseeable future.

Audio was as expected. I knew the dubbing would be what it is. The DTS-HD "stereo" track steered to the center speaker as mono when decoded.

I would probably be a bit more generous and rate the video 2.5 or possibly 2.75 as there are some sequences that look fine to me. But this is not a disagreement with RAH, just a recalibration to take into account slightly lower standards on my part.