New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

William Friedkin's Sorcerer?

post #1 of 25
1/18/07 at 8:28pm
Thread Starter 
This year marks the 30th anniversary of William Friedkin's Sorcerer, and I was wondering if anyone knew of any plans to give this film a better release. I firmly believe this to be Friedkin's best film, and it deserves better than the DVD that's out there now (well, OOP now, I believe). It's Universal, so I definitely won't get my hopes up, but with the anniversary and Friedkin's new film on the horizon, I'd figure now would be the time to do a DVD right.

I wish Criterion could get there hands on this thing. It'd go nicely alongside The Wages of Fear.
Reply
post #2 of 25
1/18/07 at 9:05pm

Re: William Friedkin's Sorcerer?

Agreed. Over the years I almost kept caving in to buy the horrid dvd just so I can see the damn film again, but held out on hopes of a special edition of any sort.

Does anyone know the correct OAR that Sorcerer should be presented in? Is it 1.66 or 1.85?
Reply
post #3 of 25
1/18/07 at 9:16pm

Re: William Friedkin's Sorcerer?

Many webpages say that the current DVD is pan and scan is it in fact full frame (open matte)?

The reason I ask is because Friedkin apparently hated letterboxing during the VHS, and even LaserDisc era. I would hope that his opinion has changed given the increased resolution of DVD, and the availability of widescreen TVs.
Reply
post #4 of 25
1/19/07 at 6:19pm

Re: William Friedkin's Sorcerer?

I agree. We need a remaster of this fun film!
Reply
post #5 of 25
1/19/07 at 8:31pm

Re: William Friedkin's Sorcerer?

He didnt seem to mind THE EXORCIST being widescreen;
I seem to recall him claiming he was 'coerced' into going FS (by marketing types who didnt think WS would sell-which influenced some of his earlier decisions).
I beleive he's of a different opinion now.
and yes, a cleaned up, enhanced SORCERER would be great.
Reply
post #6 of 25
1/19/07 at 10:45pm

Re: William Friedkin's Sorcerer?

I have heard of it, but I have never seen it. I would like to see it, since I would like to see how it compares to "Wages of Fear". So....yes....I'd like to see a good release of this film on DVD, HD DVD, or preferably both.
Reply
post #7 of 25
1/20/07 at 10:26am

Re: William Friedkin's Sorcerer?

Regardless of how Sorcerer was shot (1.66:1), it was presented to theater audiences at 1.85:1.

As I also believe that this is one of Friedkin's best films, it would be GREAT to see this remastered and framed properly, as both my laserdisc and dvd look P&S.

Dugger
Reply
post #8 of 25
1/20/07 at 5:23pm

Re: William Friedkin's Sorcerer?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark_TS
He didnt seem to mind THE EXORCIST being widescreen;
I seem to recall him claiming he was 'coerced' into going FS (by marketing types who didnt think WS would sell-which influenced some of his earlier decisions).
I beleive he's of a different opinion now.
and yes, a cleaned up, enhanced SORCERER would be great.

When Jade came out on DVD it was pan-and-scan only as per his request... not that Jade is any great shakes (or any shakes at all), but I can't believe someone at Paramount was coercing him then...
Reply
post #9 of 25
1/20/07 at 6:10pm

Re: William Friedkin's Sorcerer?

If I recall correctly he subtly implied Universal, but I could be wrong-I read
this interview a long while ago, where he was asked why he wasnt catching up to the 20th century having his films widescreen on DVD.
.
At any rate, he implied he was steered in the PS direction by some lackey, and not having any other particular factors to go by, went for it, unless someone insisted otherwise, like say, WB for the EXORCIST
Reply
post #10 of 25
6/7/09 at 11:42am

Re: William Friedkin's Sorcerer?

Has anyone heard anything recently regarding the SE of Sorcerer?
Reply
post #11 of 25
6/8/09 at 2:38pm

Re: William Friedkin's Sorcerer?

SORCERER seems like a great Blu ray choice. I'd buy it.
Reply
post #12 of 25
6/9/09 at 2:11am

Re: William Friedkin's Sorcerer?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Dugger
As I also believe that this is one of Friedkin's best films, it would be GREAT to see this remastered and framed properly

Yes, but please, let's keep Friedkin himself away from it!

We don't want another FRENCH CONNECTION fiasco, do we?

Reply
post #13 of 25
6/9/09 at 8:20am

Re: William Friedkin's Sorcerer?

I've tired of waiting for something better and just ordered a copy of the non-anamorphic DVD for $7.50. Hopefully it will at least look a little smoother than the LaserDisc, which I plopped on earlier this morning after stumbling on this thread.

SORCERER by Friedkin is a favorite of mine, from the first time I saw it back on cable TV decades ago. In fact, that cable showing that I videotaped to VHS differs a tiny bit from the LaserDisc version. The old cable-TV version has no on-screen captions for the early location switches. Those captions however do indeed appear on the LaserDisc ("Jerusalem", "Paris", "Elizabeth, New Jersey", etc.)

So, question: which way did the film appear in theaters (with or without the location captions), and which way does it appear on the existing DVD?

Harry
Reply
post #14 of 25
6/10/09 at 5:33pm

Re: William Friedkin's Sorcerer?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Harry-N
I've tired of waiting for something better and just ordered a copy of the non-anamorphic DVD for $7.50. Hopefully it will at least look a little smoother than the LaserDisc, which I plopped on earlier this morning after stumbling on this thread.

SORCERER by Friedkin is a favorite of mine, from the first time I saw it back on cable TV decades ago. In fact, that cable showing that I videotaped to VHS differs a tiny bit from the LaserDisc version. The old cable-TV version has no on-screen captions for the early location switches. Those captions however do indeed appear on the LaserDisc ("Jerusalem", "Paris", "Elizabeth, New Jersey", etc.)

So, question: which way did the film appear in theaters (with or without the location captions), and which way does it appear on the existing DVD?

Harry

If I remember correctly, and it was a very long time ago, there were location captions in the the theatrical version.
Reply
post #15 of 25
6/11/09 at 8:42am

Re: William Friedkin's Sorcerer?

Just rented the Sorcerer from Netflix, not the best transfer for sure but the movie kept me interested.
Reply
post #16 of 25
6/11/09 at 9:53am

Re: William Friedkin's Sorcerer?

Quote:
Originally Posted by AL KUENSTER
Just rented the Sorcerer from Netflix, not the best transfer for sure but the movie kept me interested.

Nice..why was the transfer 'not the best'?
Reply
post #17 of 25
6/11/09 at 3:14pm

Re: William Friedkin's Sorcerer?

Well it could be anamorphic, that might help. A remaster is in order IMHO.
Reply
post #18 of 25
6/11/09 at 8:57pm

Re: William Friedkin's Sorcerer?

Quote:
Originally Posted by AL KUENSTER
Well it could be anamorphic, that might help. A remaster is in order IMHO.

Isn't it not even OAR? I thought the only Sorcerer DVD was pan and scan...
Reply
post #19 of 25
6/12/09 at 6:29am

Re: William Friedkin's Sorcerer?

Quote:
Isn't it not even OAR? I thought the only Sorcerer DVD was pan and scan...

Not sure, but to me it looks like it's been cropped from 1.66:1. I seem to remember hearing somewhere that the film was shot hard-matted. There's no actual panning-and-scanning.
Reply
post #20 of 25
6/21/09 at 6:41am

Re: William Friedkin's Sorcerer?

As I mentioned above, I thought I'd try to locate a cheap copy of the SORCERER DVD just to have it in the DVD format, even though I suspected that it wouldn't be any better than the LaserDisc.

Now that I have the disc, I can see a very small improvement in the picture quality between the DVD and the LaserDisc. The DVD's sharper focus allows one to see just how grainy the transfer is!

It's not much of an improvement, but it looks like there's a little more detail in the picture, and that the black level is just a little better. I'm still hoping someday for a better, anamorphic transfer of this fine and nearly forgotten film.

As for the aspect ratio, the LaserDisc has a little box proclaiming:

Quote:
The film on this laserdisc was transferred from the 1.66:1 original camera negative. Director William Friedkin supervised all aspects of the audio and video element transfers.

The framing on the DVD is identical to the framing on the LaserDisc, looking like a straight port over from the Laserdisc master when they made the DVD.

Harry
Reply
post #21 of 25
4/13/12 at 8:07am
A bit of interesting news today regarding this title:

http://www.deadline.com/2012/04/william-friedkin-takes-paramount-universal-to-court-over-%E2%80%98sorcerer%E2%80%99/
Quote:
Who owns the rights to Sorcerer and how much money has the 1977 thriller made? That’s what William Friedkin has asked the court to find out for him...The Oscar-winner claims that Paramount and Universal are not allowing him domestic rights to Sorcerer nor a full accounting of how much the movie has really made. Friedkin directed and produced Sorcerer and contends he has profit participation in the movie. The suit...says both studios have “recently disclaimed rights to exploit the Picture in the United States, and admitted ignorance as to who, if anyone, currently has such rights.” The suit goes on to add, “Bafflingly, however, defendants persist in denying that Friedkin has any rights to exploit the Picture.”

It was not a big draw in theaters, grossing just over half its $22 million budget...Friedkin believes he has the rights to the movie and to show the print he has, and is asking the court for a three-day hearing on the money matters and to “issue a declaration as to who has the right to exploit Sorcerer in the United States and abroad”.
Reply
post #22 of 25
4/13/12 at 8:31am

Incredible.  Just...incredible.

Reply
post #23 of 25
4/13/12 at 1:26pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chas in CT View Post

Incredible.  Just...incredible.



You said it! I cannot believe and do not understand this most cavalier attitude that these studios have about their own possession.

 

Reply
post #24 of 25
4/13/12 at 2:07pm
Strange indeed. Looks like any future home video release of this is on hold until this is all sorted out. A shame since the DVD was hardly satisfactory.
Reply
post #25 of 25
4/13/12 at 11:01pm
Might have better luck from an overseas edition, it seems. Unless these two companies own it (or don't own it...) worldwide?
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: DVD