Jump to content



Sign up for a free account to remove the pop-up ads

Signing up for an account is fast and free. As a member you can join in the conversation, enter contests and remove the pop-up ads that guests get. Click here to create your free account.

Photo
- - - - -

A few words about...™ The Master -- in Blu-ray

A Few Words About

  • You cannot start a new topic
  • Please log in to reply
16 replies to this topic

#1 of 17 OFFLINE   Robert Harris

Robert Harris

    Archivist



  • 7,922 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 08 1999
  • Real Name:Robert Harris

Posted February 23 2013 - 06:23 AM

Paul Thomas Anderson's The Master seems, for many, to be a love it or hate it situation. After incredibly positive word of mouth at film festivals, and numerous discussions on line regarding its 65mm origination, and release on both 70mm and 4k DCP, it seemed to lose it way at the box office. I'm very much middle of the road in my perspective for the film.  Beautiful large format cinematography, some superb performances, and a story that had some viewers scratching their heads, with some possibly trying to find more in it than there might have been. On Blu-ray, The Master is brilliant, and state of the art both visually and sonically.  Want to see what modern large format looks like on your high-end home theater system.  The Master should be your go-to disc. Image - 5 Audio - 5 Recommended. RAH

"All men dream: but not equally. Those who dream by night in the dusty recesses of their minds wake in the day to find that it was vanity: but the dreamers of the day are dangerous men, for they may act their dreams with open eyes, to make it possible. This I did." T.E. Lawrence


#2 of 17 OFFLINE   Peter Neski

Peter Neski

    Supporting Actor



  • 904 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 14 2005

Posted February 23 2013 - 07:58 AM

"modern large format" Too Bad The Ziegfeld screwed this up big time, no a good print at all I wonder now with so many theaters going digital ,I wonder if instead of seeing good 35mm prints we will get 2k instead of 4k on art movies,I hated the 2k version of Tree of Life I saw in a small art house ,maybe it was the Theater ,But there's no reason a New Film shot on 35mm should be in 2k ? The soundtrack of the Master really is painful to my ears

#3 of 17 OFFLINE   DP 70

DP 70

    Supporting Actor



  • 500 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 15 2011
  • Real Name:Derek

Posted February 23 2013 - 08:13 AM

I saw this in 70mm in the first week in London the print was scratched and a letter in the foyer said you could have your money back if the scratch put you off. Also the aperture plate was over cut ,but the picture and the DTS were really great. I think the scratch came from the Press Show when they lost sound and had to go over the the Digital, i think the projectionist laced through the Mag head after the DTS and put the film out of sync which caused the sound problem and also scratched the print. i was told Odeon were going to get a projectionist who could handle 70mm. Could be the last 70mm print screened in a West End cinema.

#4 of 17 ONLINE   Charles Smith

Charles Smith

    Extremely Talented Member



  • 4,515 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 27 2007
  • LocationNor'east

Posted February 23 2013 - 08:27 AM

Lordy.  It wasn't my intention to miss seeing this at the Ziegfeld, but miss it I did, and I'm sorry that it was one of our last chances at seeing any such thing there. However, I will definitely buy the BD.  It's okay with me that some of Paul Thomas Anderson's films take time to "grow on me", and I'm going to give this one all the time it wants.

#5 of 17 OFFLINE   TomTom

TomTom

    Agent



  • 41 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 09 2002

Posted February 23 2013 - 08:59 AM

"modern large format" Too Bad The Ziegfeld screwed this up big time, no a good print at all
I saw it pretty early in the run there---what did you not like about the print? What was great to me --was the 70mm closeups----the faces just filling up the screen.

#6 of 17 OFFLINE   Moe Dickstein

Moe Dickstein

    Filmmaker



  • 3,200 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 06 2001
  • Real Name:T R Wilkinson
  • LocationWest Hollywood, CA

Posted February 23 2013 - 10:05 AM

Derek - how was the aperture plate mis cut? The film was framed for 1.85 even though it's 70mm, so did they have it framed down to 2.1:1?
Yes, these strange things happen all the time - PT Anderson, Magnolia

#7 of 17 OFFLINE   DP 70

DP 70

    Supporting Actor



  • 500 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 15 2011
  • Real Name:Derek

Posted February 23 2013 - 08:12 PM

Moe, The picture was showing over the top and side masking , they could have cut a new 1.85 / 70 aperture plate , but the could have adjusted the masking much better.

#8 of 17 OFFLINE   Peter Neski

Peter Neski

    Supporting Actor



  • 904 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 14 2005

Posted February 24 2013 - 08:38 AM

I saw it the second week,, its been years since I saw a 70mm film other than Lawrence or that bad print of 2001 ,I didn't find this marked up print anything special ,it even seemed washed out in spots, I do know People have had the luck of seeing better versions

#9 of 17 OFFLINE   DP 70

DP 70

    Supporting Actor



  • 500 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 15 2011
  • Real Name:Derek

Posted February 24 2013 - 08:28 PM

Peter, I heard they replaced reel 1 on the end of the first week, remember the Todd-AO print of South Pacific lasted at the Dominion for 5 years, but that was projected on DP 70s.

#10 of 17 OFFLINE   Will*B

Will*B

    Second Unit



  • 477 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 12 2003
  • LocationLondon, England

Posted February 24 2013 - 09:26 PM

I saw the 70mm projection in London also. I must admit I was decidedly underwhelmed. It looked good, but it wasn't the revelation of clarity and brightness that I had anticipated. I felt as though the screen was way too small for the full effect to be appreciated (I saw it at the Odeon West End, Leicester Sq). I also found the considerable strobing quite distracting during bright scenes. (It was, of course, preferable to any digital projection I've seen, but I'm sure I've seen 35mm prints that looked far, far better).
 

 


#11 of 17 OFFLINE   JeremySt

JeremySt

    Screenwriter



  • 1,775 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 19 2001

Posted February 25 2013 - 05:48 AM

I saw this in Los Angeles in 70mm. The detail in the 70mm scenes was impressive. I was continually distracted by the switches between scenes shot in 35 and 70, and also by the flicker that I saw. The more I get used to digital, the more I notice the shortcomings of film projection. I see the flaws of digital as well, but often find them far less distracting.

#12 of 17 OFFLINE   Russell G

Russell G

    Fake Shemp



  • 10,307 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 20 2002
  • Real Name:Russell
  • LocationDeadmonton

Posted February 25 2013 - 10:21 AM

I saw it digitally since it didn't play in my town on film. Loved it, and have been anticipating the bluray ever since to revisit it. The film left me devastated at the end. It's rare that movies affect me like this one did. Fantastic news that everything is looking as it should.

#13 of 17 OFFLINE   Ken Volok

Ken Volok

    Stunt Coordinator



  • 145 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 27 2012
  • Real Name:Ken Volok

Posted February 27 2013 - 07:51 PM

Looked like hell in Santa Barbara, notoriously lousy projection. They won't hire real pros, just high school kids who don't care after they've watched it the first time if then.

#14 of 17 OFFLINE   Bryan^H

Bryan^H

    Screenwriter



  • 2,966 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 03 2005

Posted February 28 2013 - 06:04 AM

I enjoyed this film. The performances make the movie, and the peformances are outrageously good. Certainly not for everyone. The character of Freddie Quell is not very likeable, but he is a damaged spirit. What got him to the point of oblivion is the mystery. Of all the Blu-Ray titles I own, none look as good as this. Well, ' The Tree Of Life' comes close.

housekeeping 2.jpg

"She always does that, she just wanders away"

 

 

 


#15 of 17 OFFLINE   Everett Stallings

Everett Stallings

    Second Unit



  • 400 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 24 1998
  • Real Name:Everett
  • LocationWilmington,De

Posted February 28 2013 - 10:01 AM

Looked like hell in Santa Barbara, notoriously lousy projection. They won't hire real pros, just high school kids who don't care after they've watched it the first time if then.
My last job at a film theatre I would come back from my days off and fine the film showing on the wall !! The phone line down after a storm??? No body called the phone co. ETC. ETC. ETC.:confused:
Former projectionist @ all downtown theatres in Balto. City.Which are all closed. frown.gif

#16 of 17 OFFLINE   Dr Griffin

Dr Griffin

    Supporting Actor



  • 978 posts
  • Join Date: May 30 2012
  • Real Name:Stanley
  • LocationThe wilds of Pennsylvania

Posted March 06 2013 - 09:06 AM

Though very well acted, this film didn't grab me like There Will Be Blood. I've only seen it once so far. The large format does look fantastic on Blu-ray. The detail of 70mm is very noticeable, there is no new movie out there on Blu-ray that looks quite like this.

#17 of 17 OFFLINE   Lromero1396

Lromero1396

    Supporting Actor



  • 640 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 19 2012

Posted March 09 2013 - 10:46 AM

The Master is a well-acted and well-photographed film that transitions well to Blu-ray. But those are the only two good things about the movie IMO. In all other respects, I did not care for it.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users