A Few Words About A few words about...™ The French Connection : Filmmakers Signature Series -- in Blu-ray (1 Viewer)

[Stephen_J_H]

Mountain Dew just hasn't been the same since they removed the propylene glycol...

Most recently, brominated vegetable oil.

 

[Stephen_J_H]

Not Disney+! Criterion and maybe a few others.

Yes, Disney+ in Canada. I think we get most of the stuff that ends up on Hulu in the US.

Disney+ in Canada has the Star sub channel, which they use for Fox, Touchstone and Hollywood Pictures content, as well as Hulu content produced in house, but not all Hulu content. Hellraiser (2022), for example, went to Paramount+ in Canada because it’s distributed by Paramount here.

 

[JoshZ]

(Screencap borrowed from DVDBeaver.)

View attachment 187083

I pulled out both Blu-ray copies yesterday to grab some screenshots,

Yikes!

In case anyone thought these complaints were exaggerated, I put together some side-by-side comparisons from the two Blu-rays here:

A Public Advisory Regarding The French Connection (1971) on Blu-ray

With recent news that Disney, as current owner of the 20th Century Fox library, has censored Best Picture Oscar-winning police drama The French Connection across all streaming and TV broadcast outl…

videofileblog.com

 

[JC Riesenbeck]

You would hope that film preservation would be high on the studios’ priorities, but it looks like it’s up to those of us who bought all those shiny discs.

Film Preservation is a foreign, unknown word, and not in the dictionary for studios like Disney. What they've done or should I say not doing with the Fox Library is a film disaster, and unless some of these restoration people start calling the studios out on this, then they'll get nowhere.

 

[Robert Crawford]

Film Preservation is a foreign, unknown word, and not in the dictionary for studios like Disney. What they've done or should I say not doing with the Fox Library is a film disaster, and unless some of these restoration people start calling the studios out on this, then they'll get nowhere.

Film preservation and releasing home video products are two different things.

 

[cineMANIAC]

This film is trending both here and on the other forum - I was hoping there were developments regarding a fresh physical media release but it's the same old discussion about censorship.

 

[jayembee]

Another media release would be nice, to be sure, but there's been no indication beyond vagueries that Disney will change its mind about physical releases for back catalog.

 

[Stephen_J_H]

Film Preservation is a foreign, unknown word, and not in the dictionary for studios like Disney. What they've done or should I say not doing with the Fox Library is a film disaster, and unless some of these restoration people start calling the studios out on this, then they'll get nowhere.

Film presevation is in the dictionary for Disney, but like most things for Disney, it depends on the IP. For example, The external libraries Disney has acquired [ABC Pictures, the Selznick library and Fox], Disney is at the mercy of previous owners' decisions with the library [lest we forget Fox junking 3-strip Technicolor negatives because they didn't want to pay to store them and "Color by DeLuxe is just as good." ]. At the same time, Disney is a business, and it may not make financial sense to preserve certain things. As far as TFC goes, given Friedkin's history with editorial revision, there is some credence to be given to the theory that this was a Friedkin and not a Disney decision. It's unfortunate when things are removed/revised for whatever reason the creators see fit, but it happens. We can only hope that this strictly a digital revision and nothing has happened to the film elements.

 

[Josh Steinberg]

Disney has a first rate asset preservation program. Edits made to create new digital masters for home video and direct to consumer distribution have nothing to do with the archival functions of preserving film elements.

 

[Robert Crawford]

Disney has a first rate asset preservation program. Edits made to create new digital masters for home video and direct to consumer distribution have nothing to do with the archival functions of preserving film elements.

I don't think some of us accepts your comment.

 

[uncledougie]

No reasonable person would likely object to disclaimers included with films which have potentially offensive elements or historically outdated portrayals (Shirley Temple or Bing Crosby in blackface, Birth of a Nation, or even this now missing dialogue from The French Connection). But censorship only leads to another kind of offense such as not trusting adults to make their own decisions as to what’s acceptable or beyond the pale. And so now this misguided censorship has led to people actually wanting something that of course is objectionable to most fair minded unprejudiced viewers, so it gives it far more weight and notoriety than it should have if they’d just left it alone. Banning films (in part or in whole), books, or any artistic expression is simply wrong headed and that proverbial slippery slope.

 

[JoshZ]

Disney has a first rate asset preservation program. Edits made to create new digital masters for home video and direct to consumer distribution have nothing to do with the archival functions of preserving film elements.

"Preserving" film elements is a good thing, but seems like a futile effort if they're just going to hide them away and never let anyone see them again.

 

[ManW_TheUncool]

"Preserving" film elements is a good thing, but seems like a futile effort if they're just going to hide them away and never let anyone see them again.

Certainly not ideal (for us collectors/enthusiasts)... but may just be necessary nonetheless since they are for-profit businesses afterall -- at least they seem to see enough (future) value to do the (critical) preservation even though we may not benefit from it for foreseeable future (or maybe even in our lifetime)...

This issue is of course not isolated to Disney at all... as we see related complaints about other studios, including Warner and Sony... although part of the problem is Disney's buying up other studios/libraries w/ so much more seemingly ending up locked away in their vaults...

_Man_

 

[Robert Crawford]

"Preserving" film elements is a good thing, but seems like a futile effort if they're just going to hide them away and never let anyone see them again.

I agree with you there. Frankly, I don't understand Disney's inaction when it comes to Fox stuff. If Disney is against releasing more physical media, then at least show them on Hulu here in States?

 

[Stephen_J_H]

I agree with you there. Frankly, I don't understand Disney's inaction when it comes to Fox stuff. If Disney is against releasing more physical media, then at least show them on Hulu here in States?

It kind of feels like hoarding, but I'm more inclined to believe that Disney really doesn't know what they have in terms of Fox's classic library. They seem to have no issue with exploiting post-1970 media via streaming.

 

[JC Riesenbeck]

"Preserving" film elements is a good thing, but seems like a futile effort if they're just going to hide them away and never let anyone see them again.

Which was the point I was trying to make. And if they're sitting in a vault collecting dust, they will age and age badly. They can't even take care of most of their shows from the 50's to the 70's where there were many programs from their anthology series too numerous to name here.
I have not seen one iota of evidence from Disney regarding the Fox Library that they plan to do anything with it. So don't throw this fantasy around about how they're preserving it. If people aren't going to be able to see it, do you really think the slide rule guys really give a damn?

And that's another thing. We're preached to time and time again to donate to film preservation. I'm all for it. But if studios sitting on million-dollar profits are only going to give a damn about how much a movie can make in a weekend, why should the public foot the bill for a chosen few films? They can take almost a hundred million dollar write-off for Batgirl, spend probably more than that for promoting Flash, and Disney can flush millions of dollars down the commode on movies like Tomorrowland and John Carter but can't afford to make use of loads of material in their vault that will never be seen?

 

[Robert Crawford]

Don’t Censor Racism Out of the Past

The classic movie "The French Connection" was stealth edited to remove an offensive exchange.

www.theatlantic.com

To my surprise, TCM's Eddie Muller during last night's "Ask Eddie" episode talked about that censored cut of "The French Connection". According to him, he was told by a good source that William Friedkin himself was the person responsible for that cut which he did prior to his death. Eddie doesn't name his source, but if true then that shouldn't be surprising considering Friedkin constant re-working of his films. Another example being "The Exorcist".

Just after the 27-minute mark are TCM's Eddie Muller's comments about Friedkin and The French Connection censored cut.

 

[Robert Saccone]

To my surprise, TCM's Eddie Muller during last night's "Ask Eddie" episode talked about that censored cut of "The French Connection". According to him, he was told by a good source that William Friedkin himself was the person responsible for that cut which he did prior to his death. Eddie doesn't name his source, but if true then that shouldn't be surprising considering Friedkin constant re-working of his films. Another example being "The Exorcist".

Just after the 27-minute mark are TCM's Eddie Muller's comments about Friedkin and The French Connection censored cut.

What a kick in the stomach if true…

 

[Dave H]

Well, at least the current Blu-ray is unedited and still holds up pretty darn well in 1080p. I doubt this ever reaches UHD BD given it's a Fox title.

 

[Robert Saccone]

I wonder if the good source was Friedkin’s wife.