"Punch-Drunk Love" is confirmed an SE for 6/10 (1 Viewer)

[Chad Ferguson]

In commentaries you don't have to explain the film. The second track on Boogie Nights were he interviews the actors is good enough for me. Or just stories of what happened on set. I wonder if another edition is in the works for later on... and that's his reason.
THanks

 

[Marc Colella]

Greg has thrown up the details on this release, and a low-res and hi-res image of the back cover.

http://www.ptanderson.com/latestnews/main.htm

Thanks Greg!

The site is fantastic and is a wonderful resource for all things PTA.

Time to edit my Signature.

 

[Ryan Peter]

I wonder what the front cover will look like or has it already been posted? Sticking to a slightly modified version of the original poster/artwork (the shadow hug) designed by PTA would be fantastic.

 

[Greg Mariotti]

yep, the front cover is essentially the theatrical poster..

 

[Seth Paxton]

I'm very comfortable with directors choosing to not do commentaries, though I don't necessarily agree that they dispel the magic of a film.

For example, I have found that the films I have studied for class and discussed in great detail, or the films I have read heavily about, are all films I come to love even more.

I certainly agree that the first time viewing shouldn't be with a commentary, you want the "magic" for that, but at some point all films take on different meaning after repeat viewings, with or without commentary/documentary assistance.

I do respect PTA's concept of the DVD being a film centered presentation, meaning that all features/aspects keep you in the film rather than out of it (like behind the scenes).

But I think one thing that director's are most afraid of is probably not as serious a problem as they think - the idea that if they "explain it" that everyone will automatically "get it". Lynch could do a lot of explaining and get nowhere with me for certain.

Beyond that though, what I'm saying is that the film won't stop being personal after the explanation. Yes, a scene may take on a new meaning, but the original interpretation won't just disappear. A person can not so easily forget what the original meaning to them was, and many people like to continue to see art in their own way even after hearing the "explanation".


The commentary track, as we all can attest to, is a widely varied beast featuring limitless different approaches to it. Hey, Spinal Tap has the in-character commentary which certainly puts you further into the film world rather than take you out of it.

I think directors have quite diverging views of what a commentary track can or should be, and that might be part of why some directors feel uptight with them...and also why at least 25% of the commentaries aren't so hot (probably being kind with that).

 

[Shane Martin]

Interestingly enough on the back of the cover you see the Superbit Logo.

I'll buy it regardless.

 

[Christ Reynolds]

at least 25% of the commentaries aren't so hot

i agree with you there. my favorite commentary for a film is pta's for boogie nights, on the orange dvd, but his commentary on the criterion ld about the john holmes documentary is priceless. the WORST commentary ive heard is blood simple, that guy is very unfunny. and heres a story from greg's great site that i thought was kinda funny.

Director Anderson Gets into Fight
Punch Drunk Love director Paul Thomas Anderson got into a tussle at a celebrity-studded charity event in New York last week - and was nearly thrown out by security as a result. Anderson was at the Night Of Too Many Stars event at the Roseland Ballroom which featured stage performances by comics like Adam Sandler, Jack Black and Dana Carvey of Wayne's World fame. The maverick director began arguing with a sound technician who was recording the event, raising money for the Autism Coalition. A guest who witnessed the disagreement says, "He was saying it wasn't loud enough and that nobody could hear anything." The argument got so heated that several security guards intervened and began to escort Anderson to the door. The guards reluctantly allowed the fuming director to stay after Sandler's fiancee, Jackie Titone ran over to diffuse the situation.

Maybe he thought the bass was taking away from the vocals.

CJ

 

[Adam_S]

Here's my take on commentaries:
I don't care about the directors explaining whatever the film is or isn't supposed to mean, that would probably only deeply disillusion me. What I want to know is why Spielberg/Lynch/Gilliam/PDA decided to compose that shot that way, what factored into their decision to shoot the film with this or that look, why they had the actors do this instead of that, what they did to get the actors to do this instead of that. and so on. The nitty gritty of how they operate, as though you were an apprentice on set and they were the master thats training you to be a journeyman. That's my ideal commentary. the meanings I'll keep to myself (looking back on this I suppose that discussing such things in depth would most likely lead to discussing the meaning, but not in the way I think people are thinking of with Lynch or Gilliam).

Adam

 

[Jefferson Morris]

I'm very comfortable with directors choosing to not do commentaries, though I don't necessarily agree that they dispel the magic of a film

Here here. I've never had my enjoyment of a film or its supposed "mystery" lessened one iota by listening to a commentary. The opposite, in fact, is usually the case.

--Jefferson Morris

 

[Marc Colella]

DVDFile's news item today has the release date set at June 24th.

So which is it?

 

[ScottJH]

DVDFILE is also reporting that it will indeed be a Superbit Deluxe version and this is going to be the only release.

 

[Lowell_B]

Fantastic news. It's always welcome when your favorite movie of the year gets a release date with some solid specs. A documentary would be nice; considering the Magnolia doc was very good, but it's not the end of the world.

 

[Marc Colella]

Here's the cover (according to DigitalBits):



I'd prefer the theatrical poster, but this one is obviously approved by PTA himself. Not too shabby, nice and clean/simple.

 

[Joseph Young]

I really preferred the theatrical poster... by a long shot. I mean, obviously I'm happy this is finally getting released in about 3 months (!!) and am happy PTA made the film and all that.

That beautifully composed shot of their silhouettes against the Hawaiian backdrop was perfect for a DVD cover... why they decided for something else is beyond me.

~j

 

[JonBoriss]

When I first saw it, it seems like the studio knew the film is a tough sell so they threw Sandler on the cover, but maybe Anderson didn't want it so went with a more weir approach instead of his face blown up. I love the poster art and wish they would have used it, but I guess I understand why they did what they did.

 

[Randy Torres]

I was in Hawaii a few years ago. Got off the plane in Honolulu, Walk into the terminal and saw a sign saying filming is in progress for a movie tentively called project X100, if you go down this terminal you agree to be in the movie if they film you. When I looked up the terminal, there I saw Adam Sandler in his blue suit walking down the terminal looking around and then I saw the film crew behind him. I freaked and took a couple of pictures. Cut to 2 years later and I find out that movie is Punch Drunk Love. Thought I'd share the picture.

 

[Randy Torres]

Sorry about the formatting of above post. First time trying to include picture.

 

[MatthewLouwrens]

Why change it from the theatrical poster? OK, Sandler isn't terribly prominent in the poster, but if it was fine for marketing the movie in theatres, it should surely be fine for DVD.

The problem is, giving prominence to Sandler will attract the wrong people for the film - i.e. Sandler fans, most of whom seem to dislike PDL - and will put off people who would like the film but hate Sandler - I know when I saw it at the movies, I walked out and heard a couple of women deciding not to see PDL because of Sandler, and I had to take several minutes pleading with them before I convinced them that it is worth seeing.

They need to understand - PDL is not a star vehicle and you do not promote it as a star vehicle.

That said, if we need a full Sandler face on the cover, I prefer the darker shadow profile shot to any front-on image. That at least promsies something a bit different.

 

[Julian Lalor]

The fact is, PDL bombed big time at the box office. Columbia probably needs as much money as it can get from the DVD rentals and sales, and there's one sure way of obtaining that: by putting Sandler on the cover. They'll still get their money, even if people hate the film because it isn't dreck like Anger Management.

 

[Nathan V]

Sure, the theatrical one-sheet was WAYYYY better, but let's not forget that this is, in fact a good cover. There's no idiotic quote that says "smart and funny" or something to that effect. So many of those quotes end up being unintentionally humorous. Imagine what Columbia Tri-Star would do! I like that Sandler's face is in the darkness, as it accurately reflects major themes of the film.
That aside, I must say I'm quite disappointed with the disc's contents. A good commentary does not dispel the magic of the film. My interpretations on a movie are not going to be wiped out when I hear the director's, or anyone else's, opinion. No making of??? What in the sam hell is 'Blossoms and Blood?' Not even the great-grandmother of dvd extras, the trailer?
Despite all this, I'll be getting this on street date.

Regards,
Nathan

btw, thank goodness there's no FF or barebones edition of this coming out!