TIDELAND - Terry Gilliam's latest on DVD 2/27 (1 Viewer)

[PaulP]

I hope ThinkFilm's statement means they're aware of the problem and will offer replacements.

 

[Mikael Soderholm]

Andrew, yes, that's the one I have, the Panorama one. I bought mine from www.cd-wow.com (or actually www.cd-wow.fm, but it's the same company).
Actually, having now read the info linked to here re the correct ratio, the R3 might actually be 2,25:1, I didn't actually measure it, but it sure looked like any scope film on my screen, not like, say 2001 (at 2,20:1), which looks much taller (like most folks, I use a constant width screen).

 

[Sean Richardson]

Just so you know, Thinkfilm has now come out and said that this is untrue, the Canadian version is identical to the American.

EDIT: People who have bought the Canadian DVD are now denying this, which is to say, it might be 2.25 : 1. I'd trust random anonymous Canadians on the Internet over Thinkfilm, at this point, but I'm still waiting until that's more confirmed before I buy anything.

Mikael - how does the picture look on the R3? That's NTSC, right? the reason I ask is that Thinkfilm is denying that there is an NTSC HD 2.25 transfer of 'Tideland', that the one they received was PAL and was not HD. This smells like bullshit to me, since (a) that would seem to be a blatant contradiction of the distribution contract, the part about delivering usable elements in a timely fashion (they claim to have only found out about it a few weeks before delivery date, even though they previously claimed that they had been begging for a proper transfer ever since receiving the 2.25 one shortly after the process started) so that DVDs can be produced, (b) why would there be an HD NTSC transfer at 1.77 (and of all the extras) but only an SD PAL transfer at 2.25?, and (c) various contradictions between Thinkfilm's statements make me generally wary of anything they say. Given that, I'd love to have proof to point to that this statement is false:
"What you are not aware of is that this was a PAL version that was going to be a simple standard convert and not from the HD so the quality to a fan like you would have been utterly disgusting and you would have been able to slam Think worse than you are right now for not using it."

[Yes, that run-on sentence was written by a VP at Thinkfilm; you should see the spelling errors and cursing in the same E-mail, posted at the forum on Gilliam's Dreams website.]

It looks like they're starting to crack a little, though.

 

[Chad E]

Do any Canadians here have the Maple release? As Sean mentioned, some Canadians have said that their copies are indeed 2.25:1, but it seems all the Canadians who posted comments to the story on film ick say it's either 1.78:1 or 1.85:1.

Is it possible there was more than one release in Canada (beyond the retail/rental split that Sean already mentioned)?

If any Canadians own this, can you post the approximate AR of your copy, as well as what is marked on the packaging? If there are multiple releases, maybe they are marked differently.

 

[Sean Richardson]

There is a later story that says that there's definitely a retail version at 2.25 ... this link will automatically be updated anytime film ick posts news on Tideland:

http://www.filmick.co.uk/search/label/tideland

 

[Mikael Soderholm]

Sean, my R3 is NTSC, that's correct (and it is not a PAL conversion, AFAIK). PQ looked OK, perhaps not a reference disc, but it looked fine, like new films do. It doesn't say anything about mastered in HD or sourced from a HD master or anything on the cover though...
It is a single disc, with the Getting Gilliam 45 minute doc as supplement.

 

[Nathan V]

This whole affair is kind of incredible. I can't believe this type of stuff actually happens in the real world. In terms of DVD production, releasing a film in the wrong aspect ratio has got to be one of the biggest and most inane blunders conceivable. You would really think people would check on these types of things. I'm only marginally interested in the film itself, but I emphatically feel that Gilliam deserves much, much better.

Regards,
Nathan

 

[Mark Hawley]

Can someone confirm about the Canadian release?

I was in Future Shop the other day and they had a copy of it with the Cronenberg quote on the front and the Harry Knowles quote on the back, and while being specified as widescreen, it didn't state the ratio.

So could it be possible that the one release with the Cronenberg quote on the front be correct one while the one with the Knowles quote on front isn't?

 

[Paul_D]

I love the irony that I discover this thread, THE VERY DAY MY REGION 1 COPY ARRIVES!!!

With the weakness of the dollar at the moment its still much cheaper to buy R1 for $14.99 + shipping rather than £12.99 + free shipping over here. That and R1 are generally better discs than R2 (or the same). Almost never inferior!!!

So does anyone know if ThinkFilm will be offering replacements?

 

[Anthony Thorne]

The UK Terry Gilliam fan site DREAMS will shortly feature a comparative screenshot analysis of all the various DVD releases, with a new, up-to-date statement from Gilliam on where things stand. There some interesting discussion there already but site editor Phil Stubbs has apparently shown the various discs to Gilliam (US, UK and Canadian) and Gilliam's full response will be posted over this weekend. I'm linking the site as it seems to be the key place where Gilliam is offering his responses to all this.

Does the R3 edition feature the Gilliam commentary? It'd be nice to have an edition from somewhere with all the extras, the correct ratio and no PAL speed-up, but I'm not sure if it exists anywhere.

http://www.smart.co.uk/dreams/

 

[Sean Richardson]

For those who didn't check in on 'Dreams', it seems that:
- Thinkfilm is lying about a lot of stuff (from TG: "Don't believe their version of events, it's simply not true.")
- The American and Canadian versions are both misframed at 16:9, with cropping on both vertical edges, and a slightly opened up top and bottom
- The UK version is misframed at 2.05:1, with cropping on both vertical edges, but apparently the original top and bottom framing*
- Nothing is said regarding the region 3 version.


* = note that this is weird, as Gilliam specifically said he opened up the top and bottom slightly for the 2.25:1 transfer he approved. This is a tough call, because the screenshot they use for the 2.35 image isn't as sharp as the other screenshots. It appears, based on the tree, that the top and bottoms are the same, but it's tough to say; people who have the British disc seem to agree that it is not opened up at all.

Full link: http://www.smart.co.uk/dreams/tidecrop.htm

Question for Mikael: People at the Dreams forum (and other places) are wondering what sort of extras, if any, the R3 disc includes. Especially, does it have the commentary track?

 

[PaulP]

The best part is when Terry Gilliam writes:


Makes it sound like there will be a repressing, am I right?

 

[Bryan Tuck]

I can just hear all those discs now: "Help, help; I'm being repressed!"

Seriously, I really hope this is sorted out and that ThinkFilm offers a replacement program.

 

[Mikael Soderholm]

Sorry for the late reply, my R3 has the 45 minute 'Getting Gilliam' doc but no commentary track. There might be a trailer or so as well (I don't have the disc with me right now).

 

[Bryan Tuck]

Did anything ever come of this? A repressing? At least an acknowledgement of the goof?

 

[Sean Richardson]

It has been acknowledged in some way by the company (who, at different times, assigned the blame to everybody they could think of except themselves). It wasn't exactly public, but it was made public pretty quickly by various people.

Gilliam has said they're working on fixing it, but nothing further has been said. I have a feeling it's going to be one of those things which doesn't get fixed until 'Tideland' is released in HD.

 

[Bryan Tuck]

Old thread, I know, but the imminent release of The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus reminded me of this. Was anything ever done about the incorrect aspect ratio on this DVD? I kept hearing about "plans" for a corrected release, but nothing ever seemed to come of it.