Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Blu-ray and UHD' started by Ronald Epstein, Mar 15, 2019.
Its a scope reduction print.
DVD Beaver has a review of the Blu-ray. Never seen the film so i will be very excited when I have it in my player.
The DVD Beaver review is up and the Blu-ray is in Scope:
I know you are not a fan of caps in general but they should be quite useful for checking aspect ratio and framing
The following paragraph is comment on how the caps look on my calibrated TV so those who do not believe in caps may skip this:
Clearly the detail is not at the level of even western 35mm productions but it is a huge upgrade over the previous DVD's.
Colors and contrasts are quite variable and may often seem a bit disappointing but this is probably accurate as it was the same with the two 70mm prints that I saw and I am pretty sure that Criterion / Janus did not think it was right to make this look a lot more pleasing than it originally did. The director would have liked it to look better by the way but couldn't achieve that with the available Soviet film stock.
Edit: atcolomb beat me to it
Hopefully it was a 35mm interpositive, but we'll probably never know. I'm still at a loss as to why Criterion crammed it all on to just two discs. Anyway, not being released in the UK now.
You know I think Gary already has a place in hell for all his "pulled out of his ass" technojargon Tooze-ism bullcrap, but this new Zavitz guy is now really starting to tick me off by straining to find a teal bias where there isn't one.
Well he explicitly writes that isn't the case so you seem to strain to find a fault with what he writes especially when the conclusion of the review is very positive
this will make 8(!!!) titles i'll be buying on the next Criterion sale, LORD help me!!!
It may be "positive" but he ALWAYS mentions a "teal" push or bias when there isn't one. It's completely irritating. And of course the techno-jargon referred to is malapropism at its finest.
Since it is also a French language movie, we should mention the French title:
Guerre et Paix
After peeking into a few of his reviews I will say that what he writes about the technical side of a Blu-ray does not do much for me so this is another writer whose reviews on disc quality I will skip. I will say that he picked a few rather weird movies recently that piqued my interest so I will give him that.
John, I only just read this post from you from a few weeks ago.
Amazon (US only) has been shipping into Australia again for some months now, but only for items that it carries itself. It will not send fulfillment items or 3rd party marketplace items.
Unfortunately, none of the other international Amazon outlets ship into Oz yet, which is a real pain, as I bought a lot of product from UK, Germany and France. The UK situation isn’t too bad, as Zavvi carries most lines, and the studios themselves provide decent online stores that ship anywhere.
Thanks for your reply above Ramin.I was able eventually to order W&P from Amazon US.
They still have a problem with some "third party"orders though as you say.That makes getting some older titles difficult,
You must have hated this Tooze.
Why don’t you forget the Tooze for a moment?
(Arthur - with typos)
As a promotion for the release of her 2014 book, this 34 page .pdf was released, describing the production history and critical reception of Russia's WAR AND PEACE.
This paper is adapted from my forthcoming book, Bondarchuk’s War and Peace: Literary
Classic to Soviet Cinematic Epic (University Press of Kansas, 2014).
A Weapon in the Cold War: Sergei Bondarchuk’s War and Peace
Denise J. Youngblood, University of Vermont, USA
In 1959 American director King Vidor’s 1956 adaptation of War and Peace,
starring Henry Fonda, Audrey Hepburn (a favorite with Soviet audiences), and Mel
Ferrer, was released in the USSR. It was one of a wave of American films imported
following a US-Soviet cultural exchange agreement in 1958. Although some Soviet
critics have claimed that the film was not well received by Soviet audiences, 31.4 million
spectators bought tickets, putting it in second place for foreign films and tenth place
overall, belying those claims. Surprisingly, it was the only adaptation of Tolstoy’s
masterwork in the past forty-one years.
After the release of Vidor’s film in the Soviet Union, sentiments began to grow that it
needed to be “answered” with a bigger and better epic. In the opinion of Russian film
scholar Fyodor Razzakov, Vidor’s War and Peace was a weapon in the Cold War,
intended to show that the United States was richer than the USSR. These rumblings
increased in 1961 as the 150th anniversary of Napoleon’s invasion approached and plans
were made to open the Museum-Panorama “Battle of Borodino” on Kutuzov Avenue in Moscow.
There can be little doubt, however, that the primary impetus for a Soviet War and
Peace was the cultural Cold War. Some Soviet citizens were outraged that “their”
masterpiece had been appropriated by the Americans, who presented merely a facsimile
of Russian culture. In February 1961 the Central Committee of the Communist Party
received a letter from scientists, cultural figures, and military officers complaining that an
“American” War and Peace had appeared on Russian screens. Shortly thereafter a group
of leading cinematographers also wrote a letter demanding a Soviet War and Peace,
stating: “As is well known, the American film, based on this novel, communicated
neither the artistic nor the national aspects of Tolstoy’s epic, nor the great, liberating
spirit of the Russian people.” Bondarchuk himself wrote letters to friends and
colleagues: “Why is it that this novel, the pride of Russian national character, was
adapted in America and released in their cinema halls? And we ourselves are not able to
adapt it? It’s a disgrace to the entire world!” The Central Committee took these
complaints seriously and turned the project over to the minister of culture, Yekaterina
Furtseva. The film was going to be a goszakaz, a state ordered picture that guaranteed
good distribution and lots of prestige....
Is the Blu-ray going to be vertically cropped compared to 70mm prints?
Depends on if the reduction was made from a 65mm element that had its magnetic strips already applied or not.
All wide gauge elements would be in 70mm.
Russian cameras used 70 not 65 mm stock.
So the 35 would probably have the complete width but loose a fraction of the height.
Technical documentation that supports that claim please.
Not a claim but fact. Still documentation is pretty hard to come by, I will see if I can find somthing that goes into a bit more depth.
Regarding Socscope 70 strangely enough not much comes up, only a few passing paragraphs here and there that mention the 70mm wide negative:
With the number of films shot in the format ( a lot more than all the Western 65mm formats from that ime taken together) one would think that it is easy to find more information about Sovscope 70 but there is not that much of it around.