Shawshank delay (1 Viewer)

[Carlo_M]

That is excellent news indeed! I will be double-dipping for this wonderful movie (having owned and watched the original at least five times in the two-plus years I've owned it makes me not regret the $14.99 I paid for it (and that Mr. Darabont signed it is also cool).

For the record we "never said never" - just that Mr. Darabont was not one who liked extras. Shawshank initially was bare-bones, The Green Mile came with one documentary and that was it. Didn't see nor own The Majestic but the back of the box says "additional scenes & Movie within the movie" so that sounds pretty minimal by today's standards.

But of course time can indeed soften people's stances on things. Read what Mr. Darabont says at the end of the AICN announcement:

No, there will be no additional scenes or re-editing, since I was lucky enough to be able to release my director's cut the first time around, thanks to Castle Rock. (Besides, I've always had mixed-to-negative feelings about films being mucked around with years after the fact.)

(unrelated note, re: that last sentce...don't we all! )

Finally - for Glenn, the magician reference was just an example. Clearly audiences today are very knowledgeable about the filmmaking process (though not as much as we'd like to think, if you've ever erally been around a movie in progress, not just shooting but post production, it's awe inspiring). Mr Darabont just preferred to let the film stand on its own. Note how he's finally caving in and doing the commentary. Clearly this was something he wouldn't have wanted to do back when the first version was relased on DVD. And given that Matthew was being sarcastic, I still stand by my assertion that since Mr. Darabont did not support extras at the time the original DVD was erleased, I see nothing that Warner was at fault for regarding the first DVD. NOte in the link how Mr. Darabont just broached the subject with WB and they met it with enthusiasm. So this shows WB's willingness to make an SE of this film.

This is not one of those titles I think merits the inevitable complaints that accompany a double-dip announcesment (like how Columbia does a "special edition" then a Superbit, then a Deluxe Superbit all within 18 months)

As for me, I'll probably watch my current DVD again at lteast once before Q4 2004, and then WB's gfot another $20 from me.

 

[Carlo_M]

OH one more thing: I'm definitely seeing this one on the big screen - anyone interested in getting together in Los Angeles for this one? I guess the appropriate LA people will start the new thread upon the theatrical re-release.

 

[Tim Glover]

The current edition does have a fine transfer and good audio that serves the film well. Not too sure I would double dip for this one, unless there was big improvement. I can wait until HD-DVD :b

 

[Jay W]

Great news!, and Carlo that sounds like fun - we'll see about it when the release rolls around.

 

[Ray H]

Excellent news. I've been waiting for an SE. And the news of documentaries and even commentary makes it even better.

Maybe we can even get a commentary by Robbins and Freeman? Maybe even King himself? And how about an SE of The Green Mile? Next year will be its 5th anniversary. I know I'm asking for too much, so I'll shut up now.

 

[PaulP]

I would love a commentary by Stephen King. After all it's the best (in my opinion) adapation of his work. He's done several commentaries, but admittedly, only on projects where he was somehow directly involved.

 

[PaulP]

Tim, the current edition is servicable, but by no means does it have "a fine transfer". Just watch the opening sequence. The pixelation is visible outright. I'm sure this 10th Anniversary Edition will have a brand-new transfer.

 

[MarkHastings]

Double Dipping on a title like this is most DEFINITE! When this movie was on pay-per-view, I watched it back-to-back 3 times in a row, it was mesmerizing! What other movie makes you feel SO sympathetic toward criminals. Truly Amazing and well deserved of any special treatment they decide to do with it.

 

[Seth Paxton]

Besides, I've always had mixed-to-negative feelings about films being mucked around with years after the fact.

I don't mind an artist wanting to explore their previous work some more, as long as they recognize that this will be new art and not a replacement for the original. But I wonder how often this (for art's sake) is the real motivation behind such "remakes" and "edits".

 

[Lee_eel]

Region 2 transfer is awful so i'm delighted at the news!

 

[Tim Glover]

Haven't watched this disc in awhile...perhaps I was too positive about the current disc's transfer. What I remembered about it was good. Certainly not the best, but good. I'll pop it in later and re-assess.

 

[Greg_Y]

.

 

[MarkHastings]

It's on TV about once per day on TNT, TBS, etc.

Which is the definitive way to watch a movie. LOL

 

[Chad R]

Actually all three of these did very well at the box office. The Godfather was a limited release and more than paid for its prints. Grease had little restorations costs and made it back in spades. And The Exorcist was so popular in its re-release it has led Warners to produce another sequel. It made close to $40 million in its re-release which is awesome for a movie that's been on TV and video for 25 years.

Darabont's point of trying a re-release for Shawshank is that it found its audience on video, making very little at the theater. He just wants to give people the opportunity to see it in a theater which is always better than a TV, and as a theater geek I applaud his decision.

 

[Glenn_Jn]

I agree with Chad. I too used to wonder why they rereleased films at the theater. Until in 1992 after 10 years of watching Blade Runner on T.V, video and laserdisc, I got to see it (the directors cut) at the cinema and it was like watching an entirely different movie (and not just because of the changes made to the film).

 

[Carlo_M]

Yeah I don't think a revival of The Shawshank Redemption is going to make as much money as Harry Potter or The Lord of the Rings...

But I know no shortage of people, among my friends, family and coworkers, who wouldn't want to watch this fantastic and uplifting movie on the bigscreen. No matter how nice my HT setup is, a movie is supposed to be an overwhelming experience. That's why they show these things on 50-60 foot screens! Sure not everyone is going out there, but I sure would love to see it.

Sure it's been on TBS, HBO, etc a ton. But it's not the same. Not even taking into account that it ain't OAR, it still isn't the same. Seeing it on a 100" FP system still wouldn't be the same. I think the re-release of any worthwhile movie is a good thing.

 

[TonyD]

Beyond that, I'll also be doing a Ten Year Anniversary Special Edition DVD for release later in 2004 (before Christmas). The set will include some fabulous documentaries (one of which was superbly done by a company called Noblesgate for Channel 4 in England), as well as a CD of Tom Newman's score. Very exciting stuff.

so we will have to wait almost 2 more years before we see the new dvd.

 

[ScottR]

Columbia originally released the film...but you wouldn't know it anymore. The dvd omits the original Columbia logo as well as the end logo.

 

[Greg_Y]

.

 

[MarkHastings]

Yeah, that was my point.

Unless your original post was being sarcastic, I doubt that was the point you were making.