2001 Special Edition? (1 Viewer)

[dpippel]

No John, I'm talking about the anamorphic WB release. Bad EE. Bad. Down boy!

 

[DaViD Boulet]

Ok so maybe the EE on the new 16x9 disc isn't *that* benign...

Hey...I watch Miramax DVDs all day so my "EE" threshold gets numbed after a while...



Other than the EE however, the current 16x9 version looks decent. However, having just seen the BREATHTAKING 35mm presentation last summer at the Laffayette theater in NY at the sci-fi-film festival (which those of you who didn't go should spank-yourselves for missing), the reference for how this film SHOULD look is now pretty high. The 35mm print was absolutely pristing...film grain was so fine it was like an almost invisible mist...clarity was razor sharp and black-level/contrast was astonishing for the film medium. 1080P HD will have a hard time keeping up with that 35mm print. Bring it on!

-dave

 

[Dave Mack]

True, John. I do have both the original non-annie and the latest annie one. Still too much my EE for my taste though.

Dave... Being FORCED to review some of the miramax disaters like "Gangs" and "Cold Mountain"... The horror... The horror...

d

 

[DaViD Boulet]

 

[Geremia P.]

And just think, your experience probably can't compare with seeing a 70mm print projected. You really have something to look forward to.

 

[Heinz W]

Absolutely. In some scenes it's just terrible, and it mars an otherwise excellent transfer. Looking forward to the SE, hopefully it will be released in hi-def as well as on standard DVD. It'd be nice to only have to buy it once more!

I think the large format films, like 2001, will benefit more from hi-def treatment than those shot in 35mm, and it will be interesting to compare the two versions side-by-side.

Either way, it's a must have for me.

 

[Vincent_P]

Since 35mm negatives can contain at least up to 4K resolution in video terms, 35mm shot movies will still benefit greatly from not-quite-2K HDTV, which can only resolve about 1/4 the available resolution in the 35mm film frame.

Vincent

 

[Vincent_P]

It DEFINITELY exists, since "Making of THE SHINING" outtakes were used in the STANLEY KUBRICK: A LIFE IN PICTURES documentary included in the newer Warner Bros. Kubrick box-set. These out-takes included shots where you can see the actual video tap monitors on-set, which were interesting in that Kubrick was indeed looking at the full, unmasked 35mm frame, but there were clear markings for the 1.85:1 theatrical framing, as well. This pretty well proved that Mr. Kubrick was indeed keeping his eye on both framings during shooting (many directors have their video-tap monitors "hard-matted", often by such low-tech methods as black tape, so that they are only looking at the theatrical framing during shooting).

Vincent

 

[Heinz W]

Well, I guess that means that the first hi-def incarnation of 2001 will NOT be the last version I have to buy. Somehow that doesn't really surprise me. Good to know all films will benefit the same from HD treatment. With HD DVD suffering from a probable launch delay (Spring '06 instead of this Fall) it looks like I'll be buying the DVD of the SE first.

As long as the EE is addressed I really have no problem with that. 2001 is one of only a handful of films I'll re-buy for even minor improvements in audio/video.

 

[Mark_vdH]

I remember hearing that two actual cuts of the doc were made: one by Stanley and one by Vivian (which was aired).

Regarding 2001, I have some snippets of interview footage of Kubrick at the NY premierre. I'd like to see the full version of this. Anyone remember this footage?

 

[john mcfadden]

I just read that 2010 just went out of print , Just in case anyone wanted to know .

 

[Jim Barg]

It'd be nice if WB put out an anamorphic reissue of 2010 to tie in with the 2001 SE, especially if they can get Arthur Clarke involved with a commentary or a new interview.

 

[Jack Briggs]

Oh, please. Let's keep this focused on the Stanley Kubrick film.

 

[Rich Malloy]

No tie-in's with "2010"! NOOOOO!!!!

 

[Kevin M]

 

[Jim Barg]

My apologies. I'd gladly settle for some new Clarke material on the SE...

 

[Anthony Neilson]

There's an article in a UK paper today about the forthcoming book, "Are We Alone ? The Stanley Kubrick Extraterrestrial Intelligence Interviews". Due to be published on 8th November, the book contains transcripts of interviews with scientists and writers that were originally to have been part of a prologue to 2001.
Here's part of the article that may also be relevant to the forthcoming 2001 DVD :

"Although long discarded, (long-time Kubrick assistant) Tony Frewin wanted to trace (the prologue) for a DVD release of 2001, but despite a lengthy search was unable to find any trace. He believes it probably still exists, perhaps mislabelled and sitting with miles of other reels in a laboratory.
'Stanley wouldn't have given it away and he wouldn't have destroyed it. He never threw anything away. He still had chequebook stubs going back to the 1940s', said Frewin.
However, during his search, he found the transcripts of the interviews . . . Frewin has now edited them for a book of the complete interviews to be published next month"

So the article at least hints that Frewin is involved in the creation of these upcoming Kubrick S.Es, which is good news. They're obviously being created with the full involvement of the Kubrick estate.
It might also mean that the texts of these interviews may be presented as an extra feature.
It also possibly contradicts the widely-held belief that Kubrick had out-takes and deleted scenes from his films deliberately burned.

 

[RobertR]

Agreed! If David thinks 1080p would have a hard time "keeping up" with a 35 mm print, it would be left utterly in the dust by a 70 mm print. The experience of watching this film in the large format always makes me smile at those who think HD has caught up to film. Not by a long shot.

 

[Tiago_J]

Absolutely. I think we're extremely lucky that he's still around and very lucid at the incredible age of 88. An audio commentary by him would be absolutely priceless.

 

[MatthewLouwrens]

Oh, I hope so. Just to see the scenes he cut from 2001 after its release would be great. I love the fact that he still had cheque-book stubs from the 1940s, (a) because I think it's a wonderful insight into Kubrick's mentality, and (b) because, as you suggest, it is unlikey that such a person would destroy important material as deleted scenes.