- View New Content
- Blu-ray, DVD, Streaming Video and Digital Downloads
- Home Theater Hardware
- Theaters, Remotes and Accessories
- Equipment Reviews
- DVD & Blu-ray Reviews
- Other Diversions
- Bargains and Deals
- Feedback and Testing
- Latest Blu-ray Deals
- Blu-ray Pre-Orders
- Shop Amazon & Support HTF
- Theater Photos
DVD & Blu-ray Reviews
- Equipment Reviews
- Shop Amazon
- Support HTF
New Kubrick SE's
396 replies to this topic
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?
Posted February 28 2006 - 08:00 AM
So will A Clockwork Orange finally be anamorphic 1.66:1?
Posted February 28 2006 - 08:03 AM
Yes. I asked about that at the Warner chat.
Posted February 28 2006 - 09:21 AM
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
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.
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.
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
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 After all, Franz Kafka wanted to have all his unpublished manuscripts destroyed after his death.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.
Posted March 01 2006 - 01:25 AM
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.
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.
Posted March 01 2006 - 05:21 AM
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."
Posted March 01 2006 - 08:50 AM
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.
Posted March 01 2006 - 08:57 AM
Absolutely, and Vincent-P's question was taken right offa my keyboard
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...
Posted March 01 2006 - 09:06 AM
Yes, wait until the DVDs come out and THEN start bitching. But until then, please refrain.
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).
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
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.
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users