The Leopard (1963) (Criterion) (Blu-ray) Available for Preorder (1 Viewer)

[OliverK]

A bit of a mess for this magnificent film.

That about sums it up. When the Pathé first came out I pointed out the discrepancies on another forum regarding the framing and the colors (which were quite hotly debated) but from what I know there was never any clarification from an official source with regard to this.Here is a screencap by the way that I prepared which shows the different framing choices for the Criterion Blu-ray (blue) and DVD (red) compared to the Pathé release.

 

[JoshZ]

This is one of those interesting and rare cases in which for one thing Storaro's revisionism about his now preferred ratio has to be put aside and as someone else here said, Luchino is no longer around to tell us what he thinks.

What does Vittorio Storaro have to do with The Leopard? The cinematographer on that film was Giuseppe Rotunno.

 

[john a hunter]

What does Vittorio Storaro have to do with The Leopard? The cinematographer on that film was Giuseppe Rotunno.

Indeed Josh, he was.
The comment refers to Storaro's idea that 2.0:1 is the ratio that, eg Apocalypse Now( which he photographed in 2.35) and others should be transferred to video at 2.0.
This silly notion could have infected others.

 

[david hare]

What does Vittorio Storaro have to do with The Leopard? The cinematographer on that film was Giuseppe Rotunno.

My bad, old age. They are both revisionists however.

 

[JoshZ]

Indeed Josh, he was.
The comment refers to Storaro's idea that 2.0:1 is the ratio that, eg Apocalypse Now( which he photographed in 2.35) and others should be transferred to video at 2.0.
This silly notion could have infected others.

As far as I'm aware, the only person who buys into Vittorio Storaro's kooky "Univisium" theory is Vittorio Storaro.

 

[Vincent_P]

Vilmos Zsigmond briefly flirted with cropping his 'Scope films on home video, too. I believe LIFE AS A HOUSE was cropped as per his request to 2.1:1 for DVD, but I think that's the only one.

Vincent

 

[Dan1664]

I'm coming in a bit late to this discussion, but I thought I'd add a few things that might be of some interest.

I wrote, years ago, the original AVS comment that Dr. Griffin quotes, and John Hunter's explanation is essentially correct. It appears that Criterion extracted a 2.20 crop from the intended 2.35 framing for their DVD and Blu-Ray of THE LEOPARD. They mainly cropped the left side of the 2.35 frame to do this, although occasionally the right side is cropped as well. They also seem to have done a bit of panning-and-scanning, at times, to keep essential visual info within the frame. What I was trying to indicate with my original comment is that the Criterion image doesn't show the full 2.20 frame that you'd see if you were viewing a 70mm print, as Criterion might like us to think. It's a hybrid, of sorts, and why they did this isn't clear. I once contacted Criterion about it, but they wouldn't answer directly, just a "Rotunno's happy with it, so we're happy with it," type of response. It's possible the cropping may have been done to minimize some damage (blurring) at the upper left-hand corner of the frame (it's visible on some of the early European-issued DVDs) or perhaps, as some have said here, to create a Storaro-style revisionist (and TV-friendlier) image.

One correction though: as I understand, in cropping the full Technirama frame to extract a 2.35 Cinemascope-compatible image, it's not the bottom of the frame that was cropped, but the top; at least that's what was done on THE LEOPARD, according to Colin Bell, formerly of Technicolor-London. Bell worked on a 1992 restoration of the film with Giuseppe Rotunno, and he's stated that THE LEOPARD was photographed in full-frame Technirama at 2.25:1. That image would then be cropped to 2.21:1 for 70MM prints, or further cropped at the top to 2.35:1 for 35MM Anamorphic prints. (Flat 35MM prints at 1.85 and anamorphic 16MM prints at 2.66, could also be made.) As far as I know, THE LEOPARD wasn't exhibited in 70MM during its initial release, though reportedly a 70MM print did screen in Mexico in, I think, the 1970s. I see that a poster here said he saw one in Puerto Rico, so apparently some 70MM prints were available in parts of Latin America.

 

[Jim*Tod]

Have we heard anything from Criterion indicating that this is a new transfer or just a reissue of the old one? This is supposed to be released very soon so I would expect we'd be seeing reviews by now.

 

[OliverK]

I'm coming in a bit late to this discussion, but I thought I'd add a few things that might be of some interest.

I wrote, years ago, the original AVS comment that Dr. Griffin quotes, and John Hunter's explanation is essentially correct. It appears that Criterion extracted a 2.20 crop from the intended 2.35 framing for their DVD and Blu-Ray of THE LEOPARD. They mainly cropped the left side of the 2.35 frame to do this, although occasionally the right side is cropped as well. They also seem to have done a bit of panning-and-scanning, at times, to keep essential visual info within the frame. What I was trying to indicate with my original comment is that the Criterion image doesn't show the full 2.20 frame that you'd see if you were viewing a 70mm print, as Criterion might like us to think. It's a hybrid, of sorts, and why they did this isn't clear. I once contacted Criterion about it, but they wouldn't answer directly, just a "Rotunno's happy with it, so we're happy with it," type of response. It's possible the cropping may have been done to minimize some damage (blurring) at the upper left-hand corner of the frame (it's visible on some of the early European-issued DVDs) or perhaps, as some have said here, to create a Storaro-style revisionist (and TV-friendlier) image.

One correction though: as I understand, in cropping the full Technirama frame to extract a 2.35 Cinemascope-compatible image, it's not the bottom of the frame that was cropped, but the top; at least that's what was done on THE LEOPARD, according to Colin Bell, formerly of Technicolor-London. Bell worked on a 1992 restoration of the film with Giuseppe Rotunno, and he's stated that THE LEOPARD was photographed in full-frame Technirama at 2.25:1. That image would then be cropped to 2.21:1 for 70MM prints, or further cropped at the top to 2.35:1 for 35MM Anamorphic prints. (Flat 35MM prints at 1.85 and anamorphic 16MM prints at 2.66, could also be made.) As far as I know, THE LEOPARD wasn't exhibited in 70MM during its initial release, though reportedly a 70MM print did screen in Mexico in, I think, the 1970s. I see that a poster here said he saw one in Puerto Rico, so apparently some 70MM prints were available in parts of Latin America.

Thanks, I wonder what Colin Bell would have to say about the new extrawide releases, as you can see they expand the picture substantially on both sides but they lose a bit of height.
Clearly more height information must be missing if this was photographed in full aperture, but maybe this was a movie that was always matted vertically to some degree?

 

[Dan1664]

Thanks, I wonder what Colin Bell would have to say about the new extrawide releases, as you can see they expand the picture substantially on both sides but they lose a bit of height.
Clearly more height information must be missing if this was photographed in full aperture, but maybe this was a movie that was always matted vertically to some degree?

I suppose he'd at least like it better than Criterion's version, since it doesn't throw off the intended framing as much. It's been a long time since I've seen THE LEOPARD projected in 35MM, so I can't even guess at how much, if any, of Pathe's 'extra image' was meant to be seen in 2.35. Technirama was a "variable-aspect ratio" format, so those parts of the frame may simply be that which was seen in wider 2.66 16MM prints (primarily distributed in Europe). I know that when I'd watch my copy of the Pathe disc on an old CRT television, those areas of the image would be lost to overscan anyway, but they are viewable on an LCD TV or computer.

Back in the early '80s, I did have an opportunity to view some of THE LEOPARD full-frame, and the very top part of the image is basically 'dead air'; it really doesn't need to be seen. Watching the movie full-frame might have given some of it a more 'majestic' feel, but after a while I found it distracting. A properly framed 2.35 image is really the best way to see THE LEOPARD, with a bit more height than the Pathe, and also less width. Oddly enough, Criterion's copy of the Fox U.S. version probably comes closest in replicating the correct widescreen framing. I haven't seen the most recent Medusa disc, but the framing on their first DVD was rather good, as I remember, though the image had other problems, re color, dirt, etc.

 

[Dr Griffin]

You would like to see a responsible reply from Criterion, who claim to present the releases in the highest technical quality, with prices to match.

 

[OliverK]

You would like to see a responsible reply from Criterion, who claim to present the releases in the highest technical quality, with prices to match.

I would find it very unfortunate if they were to re-release the older transfer that looks dated by todays standards. Better to regrade and possibly reframe the new 4k data. That would be a great option to redo their second weaker large format title after Playtime.

 

[david hare]

In the absence of any word from them about sources one has to assume Criterion has not licensed the Pathe 4k.As for relying on them to reframe in the very persuasive format suggested here by Dan Diamond that would be admirable but this just isn't how Criterion works.

having now gone through four (or is it five) versions of this film in DVD and Blu Ray I am frankly likely to hang onto the Pathe now until I am carried out of this joint in a cardboard box, along with my discs.

 

[john a hunter]

You would like to see a responsible reply from Criterion, who claim to present the releases in the highest technical quality, with prices to match.

I sent them an email about this some weeks ago and have no response.According to Technicolor specifications, the same constant height was used when extracting 70mm and 35mm Scope prints.The Scope was fractionally wider.I think it has been established that there were no 70mm prints ever made of this masterpiece.

 

[Dan1664]

According to Technicolor specifications, the same constant height was used when extracting 70mm and 35mm Scope prints.The Scope was fractionally wider.

Curious about those specs as they differ somewhat from ones I have, ie that Technirama 70MM and 35MM scope prints have same height. Specs I have seemed to indicate that 35MM scope had lower top frame line. Do you have a copy of them? I'[SIZE=14.3999996185303px]ll track down and post mine as soon as I find them.[/SIZE]

 

[Ejanss]

And I'll just say it now, and get it over with-- I'm one of those people who can't listen to discussions of Visconti and "Leopard" without hearing:
http://youtu.be/d9aXTtVtaLA?t=2m47s

 

[Dan1664]

And I'll just say it now, and get it over with-- I'm one of those people who can't listen to discussions of Visconti and "Leopard" without hearing:

Thanks much for that.

There was actually a crazy Monty Python-esque sequel of sorts to THE LEOPARD, entitled "I Figli del Leopardo" ("The Sons of the Leopard"), released by Titanus in 1965.

There's a brief clip from it on YouTube, in Italian:

 

[john a hunter]

Curious about those specs as they differ somewhat from ones I have, ie that Technirama 70MM and 35MM scope prints have same height. Specs I have seemed to indicate that 35MM scope had lower top frame line. Do you have a copy of them? I'll track down and post mine as soon as I find them.

I tried before to post them but had difficulty . If you PM me,I'll try to send a copy to you direct.

 

[Robin9]

having now gone through four (or is it five) versions of this film in DVD and Blu Ray I am frankly likely to hang onto the Pathe now until I am carried out of this joint in a cardboard box, along with my discs.

Is the BFI U.K. disc any better? If I recall correctly, the BFI put out a Blu-ray disc which was faulty and then released a second disc.

 

[OliverK]

Is the BFI U.K. disc any better? If I recall correctly, the BFI put out a Blu-ray disc which was faulty and then released a second disc.

There is a UK and a German release that both go back to the same digital source as the Criterion version.