I encourage you all to try out DON'T LOOK NOW when Paramount releases it in September (1 Viewer)

[Esten]

Link Removed
Here is the cover art.
From all the good things i've heard about this,i think i'll make a blind purchase.

 

[Jeff Adkins]

I understand it's just a few snippets here and there. To me, it's the reason behind it. Paramount has chosen this censored version for the simple fact that they don't like to release unrated movies. The last unrated title I can remember them releasing was Thief Of Hearts on VHS and LD back in the 80's. I don't really care a whole lot about those extra snippets, but I do care about giving money to Paramount in this case. If we all buy it anyway, they'll say there's nothing to gain by releasing it unrated. This title is a perfect example of being able to vote with your pocketbook. On Eyes Wide Shut, Warner still got our money even though we bought it from Hong Kong. In this case, the money is going to a European label and Paramount won't see a penny.
Besides, it's going to cost me about the same amount and I won't have to wait until September.
Jeff

 

[Ronald Epstein]

A member of this forum was very gracious
to send me a copy of the German release of
Don't Look Now, released by STUDIO CANAL.
As one of the individuals who took part
in persuading Paramount to consider a release
of this title, I can't begin to describe the
excitement over finally having a copy -- any
copy of this film in my hands.
The first time I saw Don't Look Now
was in the early 1980's during the growth
of cable television. HBO was repeatedly
showing this 1973 film late at night.
I was initially attracted to the film because
of its highly stylish and suspensful storyline.
In addition, being 18 years of age, I was drawn
to the film's sexual sequence with Sutherland
and Christie -- to this day, the most explicit
sex sequence I have ever seen in an "R" rated
film. Hey, at the age of 18, you have your
priorities.
The German anamorphic transfer looks decent,
though hasn't been cleaned up to the standards
I would expect from Paramount. The audio is
pretty poor, with dialogue coming through as
a high shrill, often breaking up due to
overmodulation. Maybe it's the PAL to NTSC
conversion -- I don't know. Still, it is quite
watchable and I was able to revisit this film
after not having seen it in over 20 years.
The controversy surrounding Paramount's release
is over their decision to release the RATED version.
Of course, many of you know from reading this
thread that only seconds of footage separate
the RATED vs. UNRATED version of the film. The
cuts were made in the film's sex sequence.
I don't write porno reviews, so please excuse
the way I try to describe what I think was
probably cut...
Make no mistake about it, the film's bedroom
sex scene between Sutherland and Christie, while
tastefully done using flash-backs is also quite
steamy. While there is no genetalia shown, you
get plenty of footage of Christie's breasts and
enough physical motion to show that these two
actors were probably not faking anything.

One shot I noticed was the camera panning
down on Christie's butt (as she was on top
of Sutherland) as you see part of his shaft
beneath it. I am sure this quick shot was
questionable to the censors.


After all these years and now watching this
film as an older adult, the film has not lost
any of its eeriness nor suspense. It remains
a very thrilling, dark psychological thriller
that contains stylish photography against the
beauty of Venice (which I love).
Now....
I had the same problems watching this film
today as I did 20 years ago.
The film totally made sense to me until I
reached two scenes. Perhaps you can explain
these scenes to me...

I totally believed that the blind lady
was psychic -- that is until a 10-second
scene showed the two ladies alone in their
room laughing hysterically as if they were
playing a con game on Christie. What is this
scene all about?

And one more scene....

Sutherland goes to the Italian Embassy
to complain to the police about his wife
ending up missing back in Venice. He describes
the two old ladies. As he does this, the police
guy looks out his window and there are the two
ladies walking below. How come he does not
make this connection?

Otherwise, it was just absolutely cool
to watch this film again after all these years
and I heartedly recommend that everyone at
least rent this film when Paramount releases
it. Of course, there will be a review.

 

[Dick]

Geese, Ron, you mean even an owner of the site gets his spoilers censored? Anyway, I have a feeling I know what at least on of the two scenes you mention is, and trust me, the movie doesn't cheat. There are a few shots that are probably of a more symbolic than literal nature and what I am thinking of falls into that category. Everything makes sense if you take the time to put al the pieces into chronological order, rather like reversing MEMENTO, but also adding in psychic flashes.

 

[JulianK]

I got a review copy of the UK Region 2 disc this morning.

The 20m "introduction" is actually a brand new 20m documentary, which features interviews with (director) Nic Roeg, (director of photography) Anthony B. Richmond and (editor) Graeme Clifford.

The transfer is generally very good, for a film of this era, but, as Ron noted in his review, the audio is rather shrill.

 

[Anthony Thorne]

The word came up on another forum that DON'T LOOK NOW has been available in this 'uncut' form in Europe for years. Cuts were made to the American theatrical version on first release, and prints/video versions have remained that way in the States for perpetuity. The Studio Canal restoration features the same lengthier European version that folks in Germany/France/England have been seeing for years, cleaned up from the original film elements. (CROSS OF IRON is another Studio Canal release also available in a longer version on French DVD). The best comparison here is probably with EYES WIDE SHUT, where many other countries received the uncensored film but folks in the States were given the optically-covered version only. The sound on DON'T LOOK NOW is probably a product of its era.

The two scenes Ron noted in his spoilers have been discussed by a few critics here and there. I think Nic Roeg has always deliberately injected small moments of ambiguity into his movies, along with odd moments of coincidence. These are two of those, and different viewers will probably take them in different ways.

The one word that stayed in my mind from reading a review about DON'T LOOK NOW years ago was 'predestination' - knowing where you were going before you got there, and having everything that happened hint ever so slightly at what was to come. Anyone else feel this comes up, ever so subtly, in the film?

Another line of discussion I enjoyed onetime - what does the title mean? Why should we not look now..?

 

[Jussi Tarvainen]

Just to confirm: the UK DVD is as uncut as the film has ever been, right? So there's no reason to buy the French release, is there?

 

[Jay Blair]

Yes, no reason to buy the French DVD. All 3 of the European releases I'm familiar with are uncut.

I received the UK DVD this week. The sound is still shrill but improved over the French and German releases. The UK is 2.0 Dolby surround, the other two are Dolby Digital mono.

The transfer of the UK release is a little better than the German release and about equal to the French release. All things considered, the quality is excellant for a film of this era.

The documentary alone is well worth the purchase price for Roeg/DON'T LOOK NOW fans.

I also got the UK THE MAN WHO FELL TO EARTH this week. Just an OK transfer, but the soundtrack is Dolby 5.1. The transfer is vastly superior to the Fox Lorber US release, which is barely watchable, The UK release has another good 24 minute documentary with Roeg and Candy Clark. Hopefully Anchor Bay's special edition release coming out next year will be better, though maybe not since the documentary on the UK disc was produced by "Blue Underground In Association With Anchor Bay Entertainment."

 

[Paul_Scott]

just got mine yesterday and watched it this morning.
people were right- very good movie.
creepy and unsettling.

i have to say, while the video wasn't too bad (did seem to be a lot of artifacting in the backgrounds unfortunatly)
i found the audio unbearable.
shrill and very harsh. at times its hard to make out what is being said.
i don't know if its the fact i using higher-end speakers at the moment w/ an Onkyo reciever (which i find makes music somewhat harsher), but this was flat out the worst audio track i've heard.

i would be happy to lose a few seconds of sex for a much improved audio track from Paramount.

 

[Esten]

i would be happy to lose a few seconds of sex

I don't think anyone else will agree with you there.

 

[Thomas Reagan]

When is the Region 1 release date ?

Thos.

 

[Patrick R]

I saw this film many years ago, so I don't remember very much about it. I would love to see it again though. I do have a question about something that stuck out in my mind from it.

Thanks
Patrick

Possible spoiler.
Wasn't there some kind of scary photograph. I think it was in a part where you see an elevator going down from. You see the top of the elevator and there is a photograph sitting on top of it. If that is correct, what was that photograph?

 

[Dick]

Thomas - it's due out 9/03. I've pre-ordered it - one of maybe three titles I have done this for during the past year. Can't wait.

 

[Jan Strnad]

Don't Look Now is absolutely terrific, but remember that it's a mood piece and not a "jumper." Highly recommended!

Jan

 

[Deepak Shenoy]

The release date is just 2 weeks away now. Has anyone seen any reviews or received early copies of Don't Look Now ? By the way, DVDEmpire has just posted scans of the front and back covers.