Home Theater Forum  ›  Forums  ›  Entertainment and Media  ›  SD DVD - Film and Documentary  ›  New Kubrick SE's
Forum Nav More Forums | All New Posts | New Thread

New Kubrick SE's

#31
Rating: 0
8/15/06 at 12:14pm
  • Joined: February 2001
  • Location: Livonia, MI USA
  • Post Count: 5,476

Re: New Kubrick SE's

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeff Adkins
I'm not sure if I have the exact quote, but I believe it was:

"Stanley hated 1.85. He liked height."

It was a general comment but not related directly to EWS.
I don't think he ever said "Stanley hated 1.85." I am positive he did say he "liked height".

BTW, I just saw "The Shining" on HD Net Movies last Saturday, and it looked great via my 720p projector. Future Kubrick HD airings are:

2001:ASO

11:30 AM ET - Wed, Aug 16th
8:00 PM ET - Mon, Aug 21st
12:30 AM ET - Tue, Aug 22nd
9:45 AM ET - Tue, Aug 22nd
8:15 AM ET - Sat, Aug 26th
5:30 PM ET - Thu, Aug 31st

Barry Lyndon

7:20 AM ET - Thu, Sep 14th

A Clockwork Orange

4:05 AM ET - Sat, Aug 19th
10:00 PM ET - Thu, Aug 24th
2:20 AM ET - Fri, Aug 25th
4:00 AM ET - Mon, Sep 4th

Regards,

Ken McAlinden
Livonia, MI USA

Export to Wiki
#32
Rating: 0
8/15/06 at 12:18pm
  • Joined: February 2006
  • Post Count: 211

Re: New Kubrick SE's

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rich Malloy
If anyone can tell me what to listen for, I'd be glad to check it out to confirm this rumor or put it to rest.

IMDB says this:

The Region 3 release (Hong Kong) is uncut, but does NOT contains the passages from the Bhagavad Gita recited during the orgy scene. The verses, "paritranaya sadhunam, vinasaya ca duskritam, dharma-samstapanarthaya, sambhavami yuge yuge", are heard on the soundtrack (track 9), but not any DVD or video releases.

I guess that tells you what to listen for, if you want to confirm for yourself.

My DVD Collection:
http://adam-santangelo.dvdaf.com/

Export to Wiki
#33
Rating: 0
8/15/06 at 1:41pm
  • Joined: April 2000
  • Post Count: 3,999

Re: New Kubrick SE's

Thanks, Adam!

I can probably pick out those words (Hindi has those nice, big round vowels), but I wonder if anyone can help out on the music? Has the Bhagavad Ghita here been set to Western music, either a 12-tone scale or the (5?) tone scale typically used for Gregorian chant music (sorta like the chant parts in the soundtrack that appeared on the theatrical release)? Or does it sound more like micro-tonal Indian music?

\"Only one is a wanderer;
Two together are always going somewhere.\"
Export to Wiki
#34
Rating: 0
8/15/06 at 2:22pm
  • Joined: May 2001
  • Location: Georgia, USA
  • Post Count: 7,216

Re: New Kubrick SE's

DavisDVD announced that Spartacus is coming to HD-DVD in October, but it seems to be trailer-only.

Tell The Weinstein Company to release Richard Williams' animated masterpiece The Thief and the Cobbler on DVD in Panavision widescreen and uncut! See and hear what you're missing from their Bitsy Award winner of Worst Standard Edition DVD of 2006 on YouTube!
Export to Wiki
#35
Rating: 0
8/15/06 at 7:58pm
  • Joined: June 2006
  • Location: Houston, TX USA
  • Post Count: 594

Re: New Kubrick SE's

Quote:
Interesting... no new Barry Lyndon? ;( Oh well...

Too bad. That's really all I was excited about....

Onkyo TX-SR606
Toshiba HD-A2. HD-A3
Panasonic DMP-BD60
Mitsubishi WD-62725 62" DLP

Export to Wiki
#36
Rating: 0
8/16/06 at 2:33am
  • Joined: July 2000
  • Post Count: 995

Re: New Kubrick SE's

Quote:
I don't think he ever said "Stanley hated 1.85." I am positive he did say he "liked height".

Did Kubrick want to shoot 2001 with 1.85:1 in mind?

Is there going to be a new boxset? Surely there must have plans for one?
Export to Wiki
#37
Rating: 0
8/16/06 at 5:28am
  • Joined: February 2001
  • Location: Livonia, MI USA
  • Post Count: 5,476

Re: New Kubrick SE's

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dharmesh C
Did Kubrick want to shoot 2001 with 1.85:1 in mind?
No. He would not have used 65mm film if he did.

Regards,

Ken McAlinden
Livonia, MI USA

Export to Wiki
#38
Rating: 0
8/16/06 at 5:54am
  • Joined: December 1998
  • Post Count: 7,277

Re: New Kubrick SE's

I didnt even know there was a WB chat. Is there a transcript available,I didnt see anything.
Export to Wiki
#39
Rating: 0
8/16/06 at 6:28am
  • Joined: January 2003
  • Post Count: 4,493

Re: New Kubrick SE's

From IMDB:

Originally, Stanley Kubrick had planned to shoot 2001 in the aspect ratio of 1.85:1. After consultant 'Robert Gaffney' convinced the director that Super Panavision (aspect ratio 2.2:1) was a more visceral experience, Kubrick agreed and got MGM to pay for the photographic process. Since shooting a 70mm space film with monaural sound was frowned upon, Kubrick decided to mix the soundtrack in stereo sound.

FWIW


STOP HIM! He's supposed to die!
Export to Wiki
#40
Rating: 0
8/16/06 at 2:57pm
  • Joined: October 2005
  • Post Count: 291

Re: New Kubrick SE's

MGM were looking for another project for release in Cinerama after the sucess of How the west was won, so there is no way they would have backed 2001 in 35mm mono at an aspect ratio of 1.85 :1.
When they originally annouced Napoleon it was also to be shot in 70mm.Later when Kubrick was trying to salvage that project in the 1970's, he wanted to film it in "full frame"35mm so it would blow up better to 70mm .
Export to Wiki
#41
Rating: 0
8/16/06 at 4:29pm
  • Joined: June 2005
  • Post Count: 425

Re: New Kubrick SE's

Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert Crawford
So will A Clockwork Orange finally be anamorphic 1.66:1?

I'm not trying to be a smartass, but based on several questions I have seen posted a week since the chat, do people actually read the chat transcript? Anyhow, Warner stated that their company policy has changed and they will not release anymore non-anamorphic 1.66:1 ratio dvds.





Crawdaddy

Robert, can you or someone esle link me to that chatlog? I've looked around the site and haven't found it. Thanks.
Export to Wiki
#42
Rating: 0
8/16/06 at 10:23pm
  • Joined: June 2005
  • Post Count: 820

Re: New Kubrick SE's

Quote:
MGM were looking for another project for release in Cinerama after the sucess of How the west was won, so there is no way they would have backed 2001 in 35mm mono at an aspect ratio of 1.85 :1.

And probably not coincidentally, one of the working titles for the film was How the Solar System was Won.
My Blog
Les Miserables Volume 1 with my reading of "Four and Four"
Librivox Short Story Collection 34 with my reading of Jack London's "War"
Export to Wiki
#43
Rating: 0
8/17/06 at 1:11am
  • Joined: February 2001
  • Post Count: 3,219

Re: New Kubrick SE's

Quote:
Originally Posted by Adam Santangelo
If I'm not mistaken, there was also a reflection of a cameraperson in a bathroom mirror that was removed for home video. I guess a lot of people want (or should want) to see that reinstated.

EDIT: Sorry, just glanced at IMDB. According to them, it was a boom operator reflected in a shower stall post that was removed.

Restore it. Kubrick intended it as a Brechtian Alienation Effect.
Export to Wiki
#44
Rating: 0
8/17/06 at 1:48am
  • Joined: May 2001
  • Post Count: 1,568

Re: New Kubrick SE's

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken_McAlinden
No. He would not have used 65mm film if he did [intend 1.85:1].
Jacques Tati did with Playtime though, but admittedly that's the only instance I can think of.
Export to Wiki
#45
Rating: 0
8/17/06 at 5:37am
  • Joined: February 2001
  • Location: Livonia, MI USA
  • Post Count: 5,476

Re: New Kubrick SE's

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jon Robertson
Jacques Tati did with Playtime though, but admittedly that's the only instance I can think of.
I suppose if you wanted a multi-channel stereo soundtrack, it would give you much better results than a 35mm blow-up. The negative area of a 65mm frame cropped on the sides for a 1.85:1 aspect ratio is almost identical to the negative area of a VistaVision frame cropped at the top and bottom to 1.85:1.

Regards,

Ken McAlinden
Livonia, MI USA

Export to Wiki
#46
Rating: 0
8/18/06 at 5:06pm
  • Joined: September 2003
  • Location: Monmouth County, NJ
  • Post Count: 1,006

Re: New Kubrick SE's

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken_McAlinden
I suppose if you wanted a multi-channel stereo soundtrack, it would give you much better results than a 35mm blow-up. The negative area of a 65mm frame cropped on the sides for a 1.85:1 aspect ratio is almost identical to the negative area of a VistaVision frame cropped at the top and bottom to 1.85:1.

Regards,

I guess the difference is you wouldn't neccessarily need to do an optical conversion if you simply added a hard-matte to the sides of the 65mm frame during shooting in order to achieve a 1.85:1 aspect ratio, and thus would have a better-quality print. If you shoot in ViataVision, you have to optically convert it- either reduction print to 35mm, or blow-up to 70mm release print.

Vincent
Export to Wiki
#47
Rating: 0
8/23/06 at 8:44pm
  • Joined: December 2001
  • Post Count: 755

Re: New Kubrick SE's

So I'm guessing these have been delayed given that the original rumored release date of 9/5 is in less than 2 weeks and we haven't even seen an official press release on these SEs yet. Is there any new rumors about when we'll get these? I was really looking forward to them in September. Hope its not pushed back to sometime in 2007.
Export to Wiki
#48
Rating: 0
8/23/06 at 11:53pm
  • Joined: September 2002
  • Post Count: 3,743

Re: New Kubrick SE's

I'm not at all surprised considering the literally dozens of classic film releases by Warner this Fall. They've barely begun announcing December releases, so you never know....
My DVD/BD Collection
Criterion DVD/BDs Owned: 55, Total DVDs Owned: 525, Blu-ray Discs Owned: 227
Export to Wiki
#49
Rating: 0
8/24/06 at 2:53pm
  • Joined: September 1998
  • Post Count: 1,590

Re: New Kubrick SE's

Quote:
I don't think he ever said "Stanley hated 1.85." I am positive he did say he "liked height".

Sorry, but he did say that. It took some digging, but here is the exact quote from Leon Vitali:

"That is because at the time (of The Shining) 1.85:1 was becoming an industry norm in the United States, so what he did was, he shot his original negative, then he made the interpositive, then for theatrical release he would mask the interpositive, which meant he still had the original negative in full frame. This was also very important to Stanley. He was very conscious of the fact that you lose I think 27% of your picture when it is matted to 1.85:1. He hated it, he didn't find it satisfactory. He liked height. (laughs)"


and from another interview, some other interesting quotes.

"Leon Vitali: The important thing to know about Stanley, is that he wanted all of his films shown on video - anything that wasn't a theatrical presentation - in the original camera ratio that he shot it in. He wanted you to see the films exactly as he saw them when he looked through the camera lens and composed them on set. He was no fan of 1.85, because he felt that you were losing part of the image he composed. Now he knew that, with a film like The Shining or Full Metal Jacket, that they would have to be shown in theaters in 1.85 format. But for video, he could present the full frame as he composed it - that's what he wanted.

Bill Hunt: Was there ever talk about doing alternate anamorphic widescreen versions of the later films - the ones that were shown theatrically at 1.85? So you could have both versions on DVD?

Leon Vitali: Yes, it was discussed. But Stanley just wasn't interested."
Export to Wiki
#50
Rating: 0
8/24/06 at 3:59pm
  • Joined: January 2001
  • Post Count: 4,389

Re: New Kubrick SE's

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeff Adkins
Bill Hunt: Was there ever talk about doing alternate anamorphic widescreen versions of the later films - the ones that were shown theatrically at 1.85? So you could have both versions on DVD?

Leon Vitali: Yes, it was discussed. But Stanley just wasn't interested."

And yet anamorphic DVDs of Kubrick's flat AR films have already been released and will be released in the near future.
Export to Wiki
#51
Rating: 0
8/24/06 at 11:45pm
  • Joined: January 2002
  • Post Count: 4,609

Re: New Kubrick SE's

Wasn't there pretty much no home video market back in 1980? (The Shining era)
Who was gonna watch them "on video"...? 100 people?
We were one of the first people we knew to get a $1000 betamax around 1981. It seems odd that a famous and revered film director would care more about how a very small audience back then would watch his film most likely on a 25" or smaller TV set rather than in a proper cinema.
http://www.myspace.com/franbro
Export to Wiki
#52
Rating: 0
8/25/06 at 1:29am
  • Joined: October 2001
  • Location: Regensburg, Germany
  • Post Count: 1,246

Re: New Kubrick SE's

Guess it is time once again to post the following. From the "Kubrick Archives" book, this is a storyboard from "The Shining". See the text in the upper right:

Export to Wiki
#53
Rating: 0
8/25/06 at 6:06am
  • Joined: February 2001
  • Location: Livonia, MI USA
  • Post Count: 5,476

Re: New Kubrick SE's

Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Kim
And yet anamorphic DVDs of Kubrick's flat AR films have already been released and will be released in the near future.
...and Stanley is even less interested.

The theatrical ratios are legitimate since that is how they were originally presented and like it or not, that was the ratio for which SK and his DPs had to compose. I have no problem resolving this in my mind with believing his preference for home and special presentations was the unmatted full exposed frame. Both formats have legitimacy, and, finally, both are going to be available in quality presentations. Everybody wins.

Regards,

Ken McAlinden
Livonia, MI USA

Export to Wiki
#54
Rating: 0
8/25/06 at 9:53am
  • Joined: January 2002
  • Post Count: 4,609

Re: New Kubrick SE's

Very well said, Ken.



How come I can never be all rational like that?
http://www.myspace.com/franbro
Export to Wiki
#55
Rating: 0
8/25/06 at 10:11am
  • Joined: April 2000
  • Post Count: 3,999

Re: New Kubrick SE's

Ken (or anyone), do we know with any degree of certainty that there will be two transfers for the films in question, one in Academy ratio and the other in 1.78:1/1:85:1?

Having seen EWS, FMJ, and The Shining in both presentations, I find that I prefer EWS and FMJ in Academy ratio and The Shining in widescreen... I'd love to be able to view each in my preferred format!

\"Only one is a wanderer;
Two together are always going somewhere.\"
Export to Wiki
#56
Rating: 0
8/25/06 at 11:04am
  • Joined: February 2001
  • Location: Livonia, MI USA
  • Post Count: 5,476

Re: New Kubrick SE's

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rich Malloy
Ken (or anyone), do we know with any degree of certainty that there will be two transfers for the films in question, one in Academy ratio and the other in 1.78:1/1:85:1?

Having seen EWS, FMJ, and The Shining in both presentations, I find that I prefer EWS and FMJ in Academy ratio and The Shining in widescreen... I'd love to be able to view each in my preferred format!
The FMJ HD-DVD is widescreen only. I presume the upcoming HD-DVDs will be the same. I doubt the SE DVDs will have 4:3 transfers either since it would likely involve having an additional disc for just the movie. If you want the 4:3 version, you'll have to hold on to your previous DVDs (and grin and bear your censored Eyes Wide Shut).

Regards,

Ken McAlinden
Livonia, MI USA

Export to Wiki
#57
Rating: 0
8/25/06 at 11:32am
  • Joined: January 2002
  • Post Count: 4,609

Re: New Kubrick SE's

I have the Japanese R2 uncensored Eyes wide shut in NTSC. region free is the only way to go...
http://www.myspace.com/franbro
Export to Wiki
#58
Rating: 0
8/25/06 at 11:48am
  • Joined: December 2000
  • Location: London, UK
  • Post Count: 1,076

Re: New Kubrick SE's

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave Mack
Wasn't there pretty much no home video market back in 1980? (The Shining era)
Who was gonna watch them "on video"...? 100 people?

Rather more than that surely. VHS came out in 1976.
Export to Wiki
#59
Rating: 0
8/25/06 at 11:51am
  • Joined: June 2002
  • Post Count: 1,619

Re: New Kubrick SE's

The correct aspect ratio of Kubrick's films doesn't have anything to do with projected movies vs. vhs home theater versions.

It has to do with art. There should be one composition ratio that works best for each of these movies. And if anybody would know which one that was, it would be Kubrick.
Export to Wiki
#60
Rating: 0
8/25/06 at 12:42pm
  • Joined: February 2001
  • Location: Livonia, MI USA
  • Post Count: 5,476

Re: New Kubrick SE's

Quote:
Originally Posted by DeeF
The correct aspect ratio of Kubrick's films doesn't have anything to do with projected movies vs. vhs home theater versions.

It has to do with art. There should be one composition ratio that works best for each of these movies. And if anybody would know which one that was, it would be Kubrick.
This is nice and all, but I still think both ratios are legit. He composed for 1.85:1 in production and approved their wide release in that format. Even if he subsequently preferred them unmatted, he authorized their initial theatrical release that way, and we will now have DVDs that represent the result of that. Again, other than the EWS censorship issue, everybody wins.

Regards,

Ken McAlinden
Livonia, MI USA

Export to Wiki
Forum Nav More Forums | All New Posts | New Thread