A Few Words About A few words about...™ Kill Bill: Volumes 1 & 2 -- in Blu-ray (1 Viewer)

[Felix Martinez]

Rockin' good news. On order.

I was also impressed by the clips of Kill Bill in the Miramax promo which preceded Nixon, and I'm happy to read that the quality extends to the final product.

 

[Bryan^H]

I figured it would look very pretty. Seeing volume 1 in the theater was quite an experience. When Hanzo handed Black Mamba the sword, I felt like I was in another realm. Masterful. I hope when I see it in HD, I get that feeling again

 

[Ed St. Clair]

What Blu-bashers write "worse" stuff than that! ;-)
"Dumbed Down"
&
"Format Looks Bad"
Jeez, if I wrote that, I'd be thrown off the forum!!! :-0 ;-)

 

[RickER]

So, anyway...

I assume this is the US cut of KB1, with the black and white fight scene?
I only wish i liked part 2. I tell you true, this should have been ONE movie. Just cut out an hour, and it would be fantastic!
Thanks as always Mr. Harris for your informed opinions.

 

[Ed St. Clair]

Yeah, that Tarantino guy doesn't know what the heck he's doing! ;-)

 

[Douglas Monce]

I don't think anyone was bashing blu-ray, but rather 2 less than stellar releases. And bashing is a rather strong word.

Doug

 

[Edwin-S]

I don't see how you can interpret his comments as bashing Blu-ray. The comments were specifically about the weaknesses of two titles. He would have done the same thing if the two films in question were weak releases on DVD. If that was the case would you say that he was bashing DVD? Over time, smilies aside, some of the comments you have aimed at the fellow seem unnecessarily combative in tone.

Also taking words like "dumbed down" and "Format looks bad" out of context with the rest of the sentence does not strengthen the argument. In any case, I doubt that you would have been "thrown off the forum" for using those terms in a post.

The word "censored" seems to be rather a strong one to use when referring to the black and white sequence in "Kill Bill 1". Did they force him to do that sequence in B&W or could it fall under the term "artistic licence"? The scene is there in all of its viciousness, just the color was removed. Does that really equate to complete removal or suppression?

 

[Robert Crawford]

What in the world are you talking about?

 

[Ken Seeber]

You're partially quoting and outright misquoting RAH to make your argument.

 

[Robert Harris]

Accurate quotes, but a bit meaningless in that form and out of context.

My position has always been simple.

In the high definition arena of home theater we had HD and BD, with the latter rushed to market.

Both were essentially "holding systems," or buckets if you will.

One, BD, had the ability we were told, to eventually hold more stuff. And this became fact, giving it a HUGE advantage over its competitor.

Whatever the studios decided to pour into those buckets defined them, and set their attributes as recognized by the public.

Both formats came out of the gate stumbling.

Problematic masters from Sony; bad chipsets from Samsung; 1080i transfers from Warner.

With two systems available, the buying public... weren't.

Both overcame their initial problems.

When Warner ended the competition, and Toshiba withdrew, it was all up to those filling the Blu-ray buckets to position the system to make it a no-brainer purchase.

For about six months things progressed well, with an expanding consumer base. Then within 30 days three major releases arrived, which defied all logic, and flew in the face of one of the most basic points set forth by the Blu-ray concept -- near theatrical quality in the home.

As a fierce supporter of Blu-ray, my fear was that the public -- which should be able to purchase or pre-order Blu software simply because it has the Blu-ray logo on it, and KNOW that it would be a quality release -- might pull back, and seeing these releases might consider throwing the proverbial baby out with the bath water.

And yes, the problems absolutely needed to be reported, making the point that Blu-ray supporters were best to steer clear from three problematic Blu-ray pieces of software.

And, that the Blu-ray system itself was sound.

Someone had poured garbage into the bucket, and this was not a good thing.

There is a bond of trust between the consumer and those that publish via an electronic format that quality will not be an issue. The public wants simplicity.

Once it becomes an issue, that bond is broken.

That is my concern.

And it made Blu-ray as a format look "dumbed down," with releases that "looked bad."

If you do your research, you'll find that HD freedom fighters were quick to pick up on it, posting in not always obvious ways. But those posts are available to make potential Blu-ray consumers think twice about finally making the big purchase.

And THAT is what we don't need.

One of the studios that made what can be considered an error of judgment was Disney in releasing a technically crippled, old master on BD of Gangs of New York -- an important film.

The release of Kill Bill brings them back to the stellar heights that can be accomplished via the Blu-ray system.

That is where they and the other studios belong.

If Disney doesn't make the Gangs error again with Cold Mountain, which was created by the same post house, all should continue to be well.

RAH

 

[Xylon]

Good post. Its totally within the consumer rights to complain if the end product is not what they claim to be. No excuses. No head in the sand syndrome. They may call it hyperbole by format supporters but to HT enthusiasts its well within reason.

It's all about the highest level of accuracy in film reproduction possible.

Not "good enough".

 

[TravisR]

There's a big difference between 'head in the sand' and people who aren't willing to run for the pitchfork and torches after reading reading one post from a self-proclaimed expert or making a diagnosis after seeing a screencap or the people who make "I zoomed 400x at 1:08:00 and I think I see some DNR!!!!!!!!!!" posts or the ones who are parrots and just read someone else's post and they keep reciting it.

I'm not trying to say that you fall into those categories but just because someone doesn't go crazy immediately doesn't mean that they aren't HT enthusiasts.

 

[Douglas Monce]

I think most people, on this site anyway, who complained specifically about Patton and The Longest Day did so after seeing it for themselves. I know I waited to get a rental of Patton before I made any comments on it.

Doug

 

[Ed St. Clair]

Too everyone,
Any thing after "EDitEDbyED:" in my last post was a JOKE!
(and I thought people thought "everything" I posted was a "joke"!)
Hence, all the "winks & similes".
Too me its not just the same post house; its a similar situation w/the SD DVD's both looking overly processed & w/"GoNY" following the look of the SD on HD so we don't want "CM" too fall into the same 'trap'!
(cause there as some STUNNINGLY beautiful shots in that film)

RAH,
If you don't reply don't worry. This post may be more so for those/others that replied too my last post anyway ( ;-) ). Thanks for taking the time too previously address my question. I'd rather you'd be spending your energy saving cinema, than 'talking' too "me" anyway!
All the best.

 

[Ed St. Clair]

"KB Vol. 1" was forced too change the sequence from the intend color version which was shot, too B&W too receive a lighter (p.i.) rating. No, it was not originally an artistic decision, yet the film was an original artistic vision (JJ). Yes, the removal of the color from the scene really does equate too complete removal of color from the scene.
["KB Vol. 1" was rated "R", it would have too be rating "NC17" (the Hollywood equvalate too a kiss of death) w/color (& the additional moments of violence that this version all so censored*)]
So, yeah, this is the censored version of "KB Vol. 1".

*additional censored parts of "KB Vol. 1":
Anime sequence
Sophie in trunk scene
(please, please, please, don't ask me too explain why the MPAA thinks the scene is OK in B&W butt bad in color! :-0 )

 

[Douglas Monce]

One of the reasons that Psycho (1960) was shot in b&w rather than color was because it was felt that the blood in the shower scene would be too shocking. I believe it was that thinking that prompted the use of B&W in KB. It was probably that or radically cut the scene down.

I don't know why the color hasn't been restored on a video version as the rating wouldn't be an issue, unless Tarantino just decided he liked it in B&W.

By the way, in the 60s and 70s hong kong films were shown on American tv in black and white to cover all the blood, so in effect, doing it in black and white is a choice that solves a problem (getting an NC-17) and also pays homage to the old hong kong films that used the same device for the same reason.

Doug

 

[Jari K]

I can live with the "US versions" of these films, but I probably at least wait for the reports of the Asian BD-releases (Japan, Hong Kong..). They just might include these alternate versions in 1080p (just like with SD DVDs).

Not sure when they´re coming, though.

 

[OliverK]

Thank you Robert for your words, please keep them coming and please do continue to speak out about high profile releases that are problematic.

Criticism is something we need, too in order to get superior product and with your standing in the industry your words carry more weight than those of most if not all other members of this forum.

 

[PaulDA]

I think you are misunderstanding RAH's comments. He is not saying BD has failings--he is saying the releases fail to live up to BD's potential. There is an important distinction between the two points of view.

 

[PaulDA]

This is what I thought was intended when I saw these films. I have to say I enjoy them 'as is' and will likely add them to the collection at some point (since I'm about to pick up a PS3 later today so I can finally go "purple").