Jump to content



Sign up for a free account!

Signing up for an account is fast and free. As a member you can join in the conversation, enter contests to win things like this Logitech Harmony Ultimate Remote and you won't get the popup ads that guests get. Click here to create your free account.

Photo

New Kubrick SE's


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
396 replies to this topic

#1 of 397 Neil_Duffy

Neil_Duffy

    Second Unit

  • 320 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 25 2001

Posted February 27 2006 - 08:25 PM

I have oftne read around the net that there are going to be releases of some Kubrick titles as SE 2 disc sets. I know that 2001 is a cert, but does anyone have any idea what other Kubrick titles are on the way... and when they are due?

#2 of 397 Robert Crawford

Robert Crawford

    Studio Mogul

  • 24,153 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 09 1998
  • Real Name:Robert
  • LocationMichigan

Posted February 27 2006 - 10:01 PM

The other three films are The Shining, A Clockwork Orange and Eyes Wide Shut. They're being released on September 5th.





Crawdaddy

Crawdaddy

 

Blu-ray Preorder Schedule

 


#3 of 397 Neil_Duffy

Neil_Duffy

    Second Unit

  • 320 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 25 2001

Posted February 27 2006 - 10:13 PM

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

I wonder what ever happened to Jan Harlans book on Kubricks aborted Napoleon project?

http://kubrickfilms.....ssrelease.html

#4 of 397 seanOhara

seanOhara

    Supporting Actor

  • 820 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 09 2005

Posted February 28 2006 - 05:54 AM

Quote:
Interesting... no new Barry Lyndon?

Not this year, but they definitely have plans for the rest of the Kubricks in their library.
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"

#5 of 397 Richard Kim

Richard Kim

    Producer

  • 4,389 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 29 2001

Posted February 28 2006 - 08:00 AM

So will A Clockwork Orange finally be anamorphic 1.66:1?

#6 of 397 Vincent-P

Vincent-P

    Second Unit

  • 333 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 19 2004

Posted February 28 2006 - 08:03 AM

Yes. I asked about that at the Warner chat.

#7 of 397 Robert Crawford

Robert Crawford

    Studio Mogul

  • 24,153 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 09 1998
  • Real Name:Robert
  • LocationMichigan

Posted February 28 2006 - 09:21 AM

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

Crawdaddy

 

Blu-ray Preorder Schedule

 


#8 of 397 Andrew Radke

Andrew Radke

    Screenwriter

  • 1,250 posts
  • Join Date: May 07 2003
  • Real Name:Andrew Radke
  • LocationGuelph, Ontario - Canada

Posted February 28 2006 - 09:39 AM

I'm excited about "Eyes Wide Shut". I love that movie, but held off on buying the DVD due to the aspect ratio, even though it WAS Kubrick's preference. I opted for the theatrical version, and I'm ecstatic that we'll finally be getting it. I can't wait.
My DVD / Blu-ray collection:
 

 


#9 of 397 Patrick McCart

Patrick McCart

    Lead Actor

  • 7,456 posts
  • Join Date: May 16 2001
  • Real Name:Patrick McCart
  • LocationBlairsville, GA, USA

Posted February 28 2006 - 10:06 AM

Kubrick didn't approve anything on Eyes Wide Shut's video transfer(s) since he was unavailable to do so. So, even if he approved unmatted for The Shining and Full Metal Jacket in 1991, he didn't have the opportunity for EWS due to his death.

#10 of 397 Bruce Hedtke

Bruce Hedtke

    Screenwriter

  • 2,249 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 11 1999

Posted February 28 2006 - 12:21 PM

So, Full Metal Jacket will also get a re-issue, just not this year?

Bruce
The Mads are calling

#11 of 397 David Olstein

David Olstein

    Agent

  • 32 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 10 2001

Posted February 28 2006 - 01:06 PM

The one thing I definitely want to see included on the Shining SE is the epilogue that was deleted after the film had already been released.

Of course, I doubt we'll see it. I recall Jan Harlan saying something along the lines of "Stanley didn't want any of that footage seen" in response to questions about the pie fight sequence in Doctor Strangelove.

Frankly, I really don't buy this whole argument about honoring the wishes of someone who's dead. After all, Franz Kafka wanted to have all his unpublished manuscripts destroyed after his death. All I can say is THANK GOD his wishes weren't respected. Sadly, the wishes of Eugene O'Neill were respected, and all but one of his unfinished plays were destroyed, and Western culture is all the poorer as a result.

#12 of 397 Andrew Radke

Andrew Radke

    Screenwriter

  • 1,250 posts
  • Join Date: May 07 2003
  • Real Name:Andrew Radke
  • LocationGuelph, Ontario - Canada

Posted March 01 2006 - 01:25 AM

Quote:
Kubrick didn't approve anything on Eyes Wide Shut's video transfer(s) since he was unavailable to do so. So, even if he approved unmatted for The Shining and Full Metal Jacket in 1991, he didn't have the opportunity for EWS due to his death.


My mistake. I just remembered reading somewhere that Kubrick preferred the 'height' of this particular film as opposed to the 'width', thus explaining why the theatrical ratio wasn't used in the initial DVD release. I guess I just came to my own assumption.
My DVD / Blu-ray collection:
 

 


#13 of 397 Patrick McCart

Patrick McCart

    Lead Actor

  • 7,456 posts
  • Join Date: May 16 2001
  • Real Name:Patrick McCart
  • LocationBlairsville, GA, USA

Posted March 01 2006 - 04:03 AM

You know, I do have to agree that deleted scenes can harm the mystique of a film. When I saw the outtakes from The Gold Rush in Unknown Chaplin, I really thought Chaplin could have made a better film if he didn't scrap so much (like the location footage).

Then, with Star Wars, I realized how close the film came to being mediocre. Saved by editing, literally. I have a better appreciation for the film by seeing how it was saved.


On the other hand, as a film student, I'm facinated by the evolution from raw footage to the final film.

#14 of 397 Bryan Tuck

Bryan Tuck

    Screenwriter

  • 1,459 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 16 2002

Posted March 01 2006 - 05:21 AM

Quote:
Kubrick didn't approve anything on Eyes Wide Shut's video transfer(s) since he was unavailable to do so. So, even if he approved unmatted for The Shining and Full Metal Jacket in 1991, he didn't have the opportunity for EWS due to his death.

Sorry to start up this whole debate again, but it's very possible that Kubrick approved a 4:3 ratio for EWS before he died. Even in 1998-99, decisions regarding video (although not necessarily DVD) releases were often at least discussed long before the film came out.

That said, I'm happy this release will be in widescreen.
"Flying a plane is no different from riding a bicycle; it's just a lot harder to put baseball cards in the spokes."

#15 of 397 Jeff Adkins

Jeff Adkins

    Screenwriter

  • 1,762 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 18 1998
  • Real Name:Jeff Adkins

Posted March 01 2006 - 08:50 AM

Quote:
My mistake. I just remembered reading somewhere that Kubrick preferred the 'height' of this particular film as opposed to the 'width', thus explaining why the theatrical ratio wasn't used in the initial DVD release. I guess I just came to my own assumption.
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.

#16 of 397 Felix Martinez

Felix Martinez

    Screenwriter

  • 1,441 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 27 2001
  • LocationSouth Florida

Posted March 01 2006 - 08:57 AM

Quote:
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?

Absolutely, and Vincent-P's question was taken right offa my keyboard Posted Image

re Jan Harlan's comments about SK's wishes...I remember him making a lengthy, convoluted explanation about why they decided to keep 1.66:1 letterboxed on the last go-around (as well as the decisions to go 4:3 AR on some titles - hello, now The Shining is 1.78:1!?), so I think there's some flexibility and room for surprise as to what might turn up on these releases...

#17 of 397 Jack Theakston

Jack Theakston

    Supporting Actor

  • 848 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 03 2003

Posted March 01 2006 - 09:06 AM

Yes, wait until the DVDs come out and THEN start bitching. But until then, please refrain.
-J. Theakston

#18 of 397 Patrick McCart

Patrick McCart

    Lead Actor

  • 7,456 posts
  • Join Date: May 16 2001
  • Real Name:Patrick McCart
  • LocationBlairsville, GA, USA

Posted March 01 2006 - 02:19 PM

He at least tolerated 1.66:1/1.85:1 since he used flat AR's on all of his films after Killer's Kiss (except for 2.20:1 on his two large format films).

#19 of 397 Christopher Lee

Christopher Lee

    Agent

  • 40 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 18 2006

Posted March 02 2006 - 02:17 AM

September 5th! That's the first time I've heard of the actual release date for these discs; can't wait. As a huge Kubrick follower / fan, any new presentations of his work are always greatly appreciated.

In regards to the way in which he shot and presented his work, I always feel that it's best to consider the perspective of the artist. That is to say that those decisions were made to satisfy his particular artistic vision at the time, and we see that it obviously differs dramatically from film to film. It is generally true that he preferred a presentation that allowed for height as opposed to great width. Basically, if he could have his own way with his later three films, which were theatrically presented as 1.85:1, he would have shown them without the mattes. However, the realist in him knew that he had to deal with 1.85:1, and that was that. When it came around to presenting the films on television / home video, he had the opportunity to remove the mattes and present the work in a manner that he enjoyed more personally. Aside from a few shots, such as the opening shot in The Shining that shows the shadow of the helicopter, he always kept the full frame in line with the eventual 1.85:1 compositions, meaning that things like boom mikes and such would not be revealed when he dropped the mattes. It may seem odd to us, as it changes our viewing experience relative to the original theatrical presentations, but that is simply the way he liked to see it himself; once he had the opportunity, he made it happen.

Clockwork is a bit different, in that it was shot and theatrically shown in 1.66:1. Again, that was simply his artistic decision, and he did not have a problem getting it shown theatrically in 1.66:1 at the time. Logic would lead me to believe that if he had filmed Clockwork in the 80's or later, he would have shot it full frame for a theatrical 1.85:1 presentation, just like his last three films.

In any case, it's great that we will now have the opportunity to see the films both as he would have liked to show them with the current discs and as they were originally shown theatrically (at least it will be pretty close ;-) ) with the SE discs on the way. Personally, I enjoy comparing the two differing versions just to see the subtle differences in composition; what is added, what is taken away, and so on. Anything that sparks further analysis of the work is a good thing in my opinion. I think that fundamentally, Kubrick considered the films as different animals in different mediums: a film shown on a conventional TV set is one experience, and a film shown on a full size theater screen is another experience, and he chose to present the work in a way that best satisfied him within the constraints of those mediums.

CLD

#20 of 397 Jack Briggs

Jack Briggs

    Executive Producer

  • 16,725 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 03 1999

Posted March 02 2006 - 04:15 AM

The post above explains Mr. Kubrick's approach accurately. As stated about Mr. Kubrick, he used the "shoot-to-protect" method in making his films (as a result of being badly put off by the 1977 NBC-TV airing of his masterpiece). However, these new DVD editions will give devotees of the man's work a chance to see the (later) films presented as they were in commercial theaters.

Like many of Mr. Kubrick's fans, I am elated by the news.

But I do hope we get an edition of Eyes Wide Shut without the digital "censorship" of activities in the mansion.


Back to DVD



Forum Nav Content I Follow