Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Blu-ray and UHD' started by Ronald Epstein, Jun 17, 2010.
What's up with the "R" in the cover art?
Given the themes of the film and the position of the character (over sky and soldier) perhaps the fractured R symbolizes the discord between nature and man.
Looking forward to this, especially the outtakes (I hope they're presented in HD). I wonder just how much deleted footage Mallick will allow to be seen. I do wish they'd used the original theatrical poster, though, which was very evocative.
Criterion still hasn't posted the art on their website, so I don't think that is the finished cover art.
Odd that this and MERRY CHRISTMAS MR. LAWRENCE are $10 more than the DVD (or, to be more generous, that the DVDs are $10 cheaper than the other 2-DVD sets and Blu-Rays in the Collection.)
I still can never figure out what this film is supposed to be telling me. It always feels like a war film and a nature documentary were caught in an explosion and this film was the result. Still, the cinematography on this movie was very good and will look outstanding on Blu-ray. I'll probably pick it up for that alone.
Well, glad to see this will appear on blu soon but a bit sad to see that Malick did not revisit the film to present some kind of extended cut. As I understand it he was not thrilled with the theatrical cut and had a longer film in mind and I kind of feel this disc pretty much will be the final word on this film. Don't get me wrong here, I love the film, but as I have seen it now several times it "feels" as if there are things missing...as if it is a bit disjointed at times.
I don't expect to see him go back to the well on this one now so whatever the "outtakes" are I guess that will be our only glimpse of what he may have been pondering or they could be totally pointless because an "outtake" could be just about anything. I do look forward to hearing Toll, Fisk and Hill speak about the film, obviously Malick said all he had to say with the film itself so this looks like the definitive home version of "The Thin Red Line" now and sure, it is a must buy.
Where did you hear that Mallick wasn't thrilled with the theatrical cut? Given that this is Criterion, and Mallick has already released an extended cut of another of his films on Blu-ray/DVD, I have to believe that if Mallick was interested in putting together an "extended" cut of THE THIN RED LINE he would have been allowed to do so. The fact that he didn't suggests to me that the theatrical cut is his preferred cut of the film.
I don't think Mr. Malick has any warm fuzzies for this film and I think he has a lot of reasons for not wanting to return to it. I seem to recall somebody claiming at some point that this was not the film he intended to make and that he would like to recut it but he was not sure when or if he would. Basically everything with this guy exists in the realm of rumor and innuendo and it would appear that is how he prefers it.
The timing of putting this disc together had him smack in the middle of putting the finishing touches on Tree of Life so not much chance he would have put that off to recut Thin Red Line.
I'm sure you've already read this:
Wonderful link, but mentions nothing about Mallick not liking or being happy with the final cut of the film, just chronicals some problems he had with a couple producers. So again I ask, where did you hear that Mallick was unhappy with the final cut of the film? I'm not asking what you "think", I want some hard proof as to what you are asserting in your posts.
"Hard proof" and Terry Malick do not belong in the same sentence. I don't have a quote to give you from Mr. Malick as he never says anything publically. All I can tell you is I believe it was Emmanuel Lubezki that said he discussed it with him during their work on The New World and the story went that Malick felt the film had been compromised in some way (or ways) and that he would like to recut it but he felt it would be better to let some time pass before he did this.
I either saw this interview with Mr. Lubezki or read it, I can't recall which as it was some time ago but I'm not inventing it as I have no reason to do that.
I posted that link because I thought the article was very interesting and it also covered many things that indicate Mr. Malick may not be very thrilled with The Thin Red Line.
No worries, Vince, I'm not trying to trick you here...
So in other words, you have no proof that Mallick dislikes the current version of THE THIN RED LINE. You only have memories of things you recall having read sometime somewhere from folks other than Mr. Mallick but which you have no links or actual quotes for.
Again, I point to THE NEW WORLD. There were THREE "official' versions of that film released, and that film was not nearly as successful as THE THIN RED LINE was. If Mallick had any qualms with the final theatrical cut of THE THIN RED LINE, I have no doubt whatsoever that he would have been given a chance to address that with regards to this upcoming Criterion release.
If you can dig up some actual quotes I might consider your argument, but you have yet to do so, and it appears THE THIN RED LINE will be released on Blu-ray via Criterion in a Director-approved version of the theatrical cut with some outtakes as extras. This suggests strongly to me that Mr. Mallick approves the theatrical cut of the film, since I doubt Warner Bros./New Line would be more accommodating to him recutting one of his recent works as Criterion would.
Wow, Vince...ok, I get it, you are not interested in anything I have to say that's fine. For the record I don't have an "argument" I'm trying to make, I was just giving my thoughts on a film I really like. There have been rumors of Malick possibly presenting a longer version of the film from the moment the film was released and people understood how much film was shot. The first cut was 5 hours long and his first script was nearly 300 pages. Brody's once major role in the film was reduced to 5 minutes of screen time, greatly surprising the guy. Many actors that worked on the film never made it into the theatrical cut. Bringing the film to the screen was an uncomfortable experience for Mr. Malick and several people have discussed this and I pointed you to Mr. Biskind's article where many people who know Malick comment on him and his process and even the fact that he was unhappy with Days of Heaven. In that article Mr. Geisler claims (and the quote is in there) that Malick told him he never wanted or expected to direct Thin Red Line so based on all of what is said in that article it seems pretty likely that he does not want to revisit the film. I don't think it is a question of if anybody would let him, I think it is more about if or when he may want to recut it. I think he would prefer to remain divorced from The Thin Red Line and just let the past be past.
Sorry to trouble you with my thoughts...
This is how rumors get started. "I heard a rumor that Malick didn't like the theatrical cut..." Then it gets repeated enough times and eventually becomes a "fact." It has become more pervasive with The Thin Red Line because of all of the name actors who had their screen time cut down significantly or cut out all together. Naturally people want to see that footage. That doesn't mean that Malick wants it seen. The truth is, this is the way he works. He may shoot three times what he needs, unsure of exactly what he wants from the film and always questioning his decisions. He then completely constructs the finished film out of hours and hours of footage in the editing bay.
He is in no way trying to distance himself from The Thin Red Line now. It was, in fact, Malick who approached Fox about licensing it to Criterion. He supervised the DVD production and has personally approved the transfer. If he wanted a longer cut on the disc, it would be there. He doesn't.
Well, I'm not one for creating rumors and don't really care to go down that path but I'm always interested in what Mr. Malick is working on. This seems to be a big year for him with this release and Tree of Life, so we can all celebrate.
I've read the article in the link above and can find NO indication that Malick was dissatisfied with the film and wishing to distance himself from it. Dissatisfied with Geisler and Roberdeau, yes; dissatisifed with the overall process, yes, but these are very different things. Having a brutal development often makes great cinema, and Jaws is the diamond standard as far as this goes. Frustration often fuels creativity, and to say that Malick is distancing himself from The Thin Red Line is failing to look at the whole picture. I, for one, will be picking this and Days of Heaven up as soon as possible, so I can revel in the work of an artist.
"...and to say that Malick is distancing himsef from The Thin Red Line is failing to look at the whole picture."
Who said that?
Divorced, distanced; you say "potato", I say "potato". The one thing that is clear from this Criterion release is that it is "director-approved"; any other thoughts are pure speculation and reading between the lines for something for which there is no proof.
I meant the line about being "divorced" to be funny, it was supposed to be a play on what is in that article I posted. Malick "divorced" his wife during the making of Thin Red Line, "divorced" his two producers (who amusingly were allowed to thank 4 people in the credits of the film and made one of them his ex-wife!) and so the joke was he was "divorced" from the film too...not distanced...I guess the joke was not as apparent to others as I thought it might be.
All I meant by that was he probably does not have much desire to go back and recut it or do anything with it that might reopen a door to certain past relationships.
Actually looking back I guess it was Jeff that put the word "distance" out there so that's probably where the confusion came from.