What's new

Barry Lyndon and Lolita - show your support here. (1 Viewer)

AdrianTurner

BANNED
Joined
Dec 5, 2007
Messages
400
Real Name
Adrian Turner
I've just Google Earth'd Stanley's Childwickbury estate and to my amazement the usual image has been cropped to 1.66:1.
 

Josh Steinberg

Premium
Reviewer
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jun 10, 2003
Messages
26,250
Real Name
Josh Steinberg
1.75:1 (as stated above, the widest Kubrick wanted it) is so close to 1.77:1 that it's practically the same thing - I'm guessing that's what the disc is, and if that's the case, sounds good enough for me.
 

Powell&Pressburger

Screenwriter
Joined
Feb 26, 2007
Messages
1,820
Location
MPLS, MN
Real Name
Jack
WB's replaced the opening WB Saul Bass style logo with a a B/W Warner Bros logo. (they just can't leave their logo's alone. I would love to have the suits in charge thrown out for these logo changes. WB's that is used is seen below.


 

Kevin_Kinto

Auditioning
Joined
Nov 8, 2004
Messages
2
OK, well, aspect ratio aside (not that I'm happy about that!!), my biggest gripe is the butchering of the opening sequence thanks to that dreadful monochrome 'new' logo replacement. Like no other movie I've seen the visuals, action and editing of BL are synced to the music track to an extraordinarily high degree and the logo change just pisses all over that, right at the most important moment - the grand opening. Without question a hallmark of Stanley Kubrick movies is that the mood and pace is set from the first frame, always coinciding with and synced to the music.


In the 'original' the docking of the zooming "W" logo (and the rest...like "presents") is synced perfectly to the opening chords (probably a lucky accident sequencing it in the edit room but intentional nevertheless) and there is one beat cut to black before the beat cut to "A Film By Stanley Kubrick" - now this has been replaced by a overly long section of black screen which completely destroys that rhythm and renders this once powerful opening quite lame and disjointed, especially the now 'sudden' appearance of his own credit card.


Why is there so little respect granted to the movies of a man who must surely rank as one of the greatest filmmakers ever? Honestly, its pathetic and shameful and all concerned should hang their heads in shame at this kind of alteration of one of the great movies of that great filmmaker. Damn, I so love this movie, have seen it so many many times (and will many more times). Fortunately I have a 720p recording of an HDTV broadcast and I will stay with that copy and bin the blu-ray.


Jeez Warners/Vitali et al. Do it properly or give the rights to someone who has sufficient respect.

If you *really have to* to put this crappy new B&W logo on, Warners, put it before the old zooming black on red one. In 10 years you'll change it again anyway. Who cares about it. Are you also going to butcher all the current movies that use this logo in animated fashion when the corporate lackies decide to change the look of the logo again?

As far as AR's go, why not include a couple more disc with the options for krisakes? Look at the airtime the discussions get - doesn't that tell these guys something? Everyone who buys these discs would no question pay the extra cost. No doubt whatsoever. So? Spielberg, Scorcese and other Hollywowd names- you guys often speak about how great Kubrick is, and preserving film heritage, (Marty especially about this movie): where are your powerful voices? Stand up and be counted and speak up for the films on behalf of the man who longer can...
 

Vincent_P

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Sep 13, 2003
Messages
2,147
Originally Posted by Kevin_Kinto

OK, well, aspect ratio aside (not that I'm happy about that!!), my biggest gripe is the butchering of the opening sequence thanks to that dreadful monochrome 'new' logo replacement. Like no other movie I've seen the visuals, action and editing of BL are synced to the music track to an extraordinarily high degree and the logo change just pisses all over that, right at the most important moment - the grand opening. Without question a hallmark of Stanley Kubrick movies is that the mood and pace is set from the first frame, always coinciding with and synced to the music.


In the 'original' the docking of the zooming "W" logo (and the rest...like "presents") is synced perfectly to the opening chords (probably a lucky accident sequencing it in the edit room but intentional nevertheless) and there is one beat cut to black before the beat cut to "A Film By Stanley Kubrick" - now this has been replaced by a overly long section of black screen which completely destroys that rhythm and renders this once powerful opening quite lame and disjointed, especially the now 'sudden' appearance of his own credit card.


Why is there so little respect granted to the movies of a man who must surely rank as one of the greatest filmmakers ever? Honestly, its pathetic and shameful and all concerned should hang their heads in shame at this kind of alteration of one of the great movies of that great filmmaker. Damn, I so love this movie, have seen it so many many times (and will many more times). Fortunately I have a 720p recording of an HDTV broadcast and I will stay with that copy and bin the blu-ray.


Jeez Warners/Vitali et al. Do it properly or give the rights to someone who has sufficient respect.

If you *really have to* to put this crappy new B&W logo on, Warners, put it before the old zooming black on red one. In 10 years you'll change it again anyway. Who cares about it. Are you also going to butcher all the current movies that use this logo in animated fashion when the corporate lackies decide to change the look of the logo again?

As far as AR's go, why not include a couple more disc with the options for krisakes? Look at the airtime the discussions get - doesn't that tell these guys something? Everyone who buys these discs would no question pay the extra cost. No doubt whatsoever. So? Spielberg, Scorcese and other Hollywowd names- you guys often speak about how great Kubrick is, and preserving film heritage, (Marty especially about this movie): where are your powerful voices? Stand up and be counted and speak up for the films on behalf of the man who longer can...

You've got to be kidding me. Changing the logo "butchers" the entire opening scene? Hyperbole much? As for Scorsese et al., I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that 1. they are thoughful individuals who don't go into intense internet outrage mode when a minor change is made i.e. changing the corporate logo, and 2. they are likely busy making their own films.


Also, as stated above the notes sent with the film reels said "no wider than 1.75:1". Seeing as how the screen-caps posted elsewhere reveal that the BARRY LYNDON Blu-ray has some slight additional picture info on each side as well as the slight matting top-and-bottom compared to the 1.66:1 version, I'd wager that the top/bottom framing is exactly at the 1.75:1 frameline, and they opened up that small smidgen on the sides to bring it out to 1.78:1.


Vincent
 

Kevin_Kinto

Auditioning
Joined
Nov 8, 2004
Messages
2
Sweet Vince, your opinion but I wager you don't know the movie very well or care much about details. One thing Stanley really did...
 

Josh Steinberg

Premium
Reviewer
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jun 10, 2003
Messages
26,250
Real Name
Josh Steinberg
If there's anything I'd be slightly upset about with this release, I'd pick the lack of inclusion of the original mono soundtrack before the missing old-school logo. I would have loved to have had the original logo (with the new WB logo before the film began if they felt the need to include it), but it's not the end of the world to me. But in addition to the 5.1 remix, the mono track would have been nice to have. That said, it's not gonna stop me from buying the disc.
 

Vincent_P

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Sep 13, 2003
Messages
2,147
Originally Posted by Kevin_Kinto

Sweet Vince, your opinion but I wager you don't know the movie very well or care much about details. One thing Stanley really did...


So I "don't know the movie very well or care much about details"...


Uhm.. okay...


Well, what about Robert Harris? He has actually had conversations with Mr. Kubrick (since Mr. Harris restored Mr. Kubrick's film SPARTACUS among many other films, so he damn well knows a thing or two about film formats and what film should look like, etc...) and Mr. Harris has praised this Blu-ray. Does Robert Harris not "know the movie very well or care much about details", as well?


And not for nothing, but my point re: 1.75:1 having been shown to be Kubrick's expressed 'widest' aspect ratio for BARRY LYNDON to be shown theatrically combined with the fact that- as shown by the screen caps being used to attack this release- the 1.78:1 Blu-ray shows a bit more on both sides compared to the 1.66:1 version supports my hypothesis that the 1.78:1 Blu-ray most likely uses the 1.75:1 top/bottom frame-lines and opens up the sides ever so slightly to as to fill out the 1.78:1 full HDTV frame.


By the way, my name isn't "Vince". It's Vincent.


Vincent
 

Josh Steinberg

Premium
Reviewer
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jun 10, 2003
Messages
26,250
Real Name
Josh Steinberg
Warner does keep the logos intact for it's catalog of 30s and 40s titles, for instance. I'm wondering this - Saul Bass I believe designed the original logo that had been used on the theatrical release of Barry Lyndon - perhaps he had copyrighted the design and WB's license to use it expired. The change may have been for legal rather than artistic reasons. But whatever the reasoning behind it - sure, I miss the original logo, but it doesn't detract from the experience for more than a brief second. Once the first title card kicks in, I'm over it.


I'm very, very excited to see this disc - as I mentioned, the only complaint I'd have (and it's a very minor one) is I would have loved to have seen the original mono track included. I don't, at this time, have a surround sound setup in my home, so when I have the choice between an original mono or stereo track and a surround remix, I always prefer to put on the original track instead of letting my player downmix it to stereo. But with that said, upgrading mono tracks to surround is by no means a new practice, and if I stopped buying discs because they didn't include the original mix of the soundtrack, I'd probably be down quite a few titles.


Vincent, as far as I'm concerned, your credentials here are beyond reproach. I think you signed up as a member of HTF right around the time I did, and for years I've enjoyed your contributions to numerous threads. I'm sure I'm far from being the only one who feels this way.
 

Martin Teller

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Aug 24, 2006
Messages
2,414
Real Name
Martin Teller
If you ever see me complaining about a studio logo before a movie, please, PLEASE kill me.
 

Powell&Pressburger

Screenwriter
Joined
Feb 26, 2007
Messages
1,820
Location
MPLS, MN
Real Name
Jack
Originally Posted by Martin Teller

If you ever see me complaining about a studio logo before a movie, please, PLEASE kill me.


The point is the film history. For those who don't care about the logo's then you wouldn't mind if we got the original theatrical presentation experience Right?
 

dana martin

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Oct 28, 2003
Messages
5,722
Location
Norfolk, VA
Real Name
Dana Martin
Originally Posted by Powell&Pressburger





The point is the film history. For those who don't care about the logo's then you wouldn't mind if we got the original theatrical presentation experience Right?


thats why, the bonds should have the UA logo prior, and i honestly like when Universal has the new, but follows with the correct, just wish that the other studios would follow that lead
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Latest Articles

Forum statistics

Threads
356,710
Messages
5,121,103
Members
144,146
Latest member
SaladinNagasawa
Recent bookmarks
1
Top