A Few Words About A few words about...™ The Master -- in Blu-ray (1 Viewer)

[Robert Harris]

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

 

[Peter Neski]

"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

 

[DP 70]

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.

 

[Charles Smith]

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.

 

[TomTom]

"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.

 

[Moe Dickstein]

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?

 

[DP 70]

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.

 

[Peter Neski]

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

 

[DP 70]

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.

 

[Will*B]

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).

 

[JeremySt]

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.

 

[Ruz-El]

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.

 

[Ken Volok]

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.

 

[Bryan^H]

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.

 

[Everett S.]

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.

 

[Dr Griffin]

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.

 

[Lromero1396]

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.