The Last Emperor on Blu-ray (1 Viewer)

[PaulDA]

I may be in the minority, but the colour differences are far more striking to me than the cropping (not that I don't favour OAR, it's just that in this case, the colour difference would bother me more).

 

[TonyD]

i think Storaro is currently a bit loopy but what do i know, he;s the expert.

I netflixed the long version a few months ago ut returned before finishing
because the BR was announced.

oh well.

 

[Brandon Conway]

The Disney comparison is not apt because the modern corporation is not the original artists. Walt's own cropping of Fantasia upon its re-release to excise the more stereotypical black centaurs is a closer comparison. In that case, I'm again okay with it because the creator okay'd it, though again having both versions would be ideal.

 

[RobertR]

"Experts" can be critiqued like anyone else. Being an expert is no guarantee of being right.

 

[Douglas Monce]

To me it would be different if this were a case of Columbia Pictures arbitrarily decided to crop the film. But when the director and the director of photography say this is the way the film should now be seen, I don't see much point in arguing with it.

I can't say that I understand it, and I would do something like that to a film of my own, but its not my film its Bernardo Bertolucci's, and he says this is the way it should look.

Doug

 

[Mike Frezon]

Maybe Bertolucci's a bit loopy, too!

 

[RobertR]

We may not be able to change their minds, but we don't ever have to agree with a filmmaker's choices--not with changes, and not with the original choices for that matter. We're always free to say "hey, I think what you did was a bad idea".

 

[Douglas Monce]

I agree completely with this and it is one of the reasons I won't be buying The Last Emperor or Apocalypse Now or any other film that Storaro chooses to crop in this way.

I support his right to make these choices, but I don't have to watch them.

Doug

 

[Vern Dias]

ditto. :frowning:

Vern

 

[Peter Neski]

"But when the director and the director of photography say this is the way the film should now be seen, I don't see much point in arguing with it."

Where does it say Bertollucci had anything to do with the cropping,From
What I know of Bertoollucci, hes designs the frame,and the Frame for that
film was (2.35;1 ) When he was looking through the camera People weren't
beeing cut in Half at the edge of the frame,I do think Storaro is more
intrested in getting rid of curves in walls caused by the anamophic len,and
his intrest in his (Pre HD) format.

 

[Jari K]

I have said this earlier and I'll say it again; Somebody should stop Vittorio Storaro for cropping "his" films, plain and simple. I *highly respect* the man as an artist/cinematographer, but he can´t just "change" the ORIGINAL aspect ratio after several years, just like that. He already did that with "Apocalypse Now" and now with "The Last Emperor" (I´m quite sure the same version will be released in BD). What´s next?

It´s quite clear, that Storaro is now obsessed with his "Univisium - 2.00:1" aspect ratio (e.g. Univisium - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia ) and he can obviously use that ratio in his NEW films. But, he has no right to "reframe" older films that have always been 2.35:1. "DoP", "cinematographer", "artist", whatever. He still hasn´t got the right to do that.

Further more, I don´t see where´s the problem in the first place? Most people have 1.78:1 TV-sets at home and they´ve got used to those "black bars" (2.35:1/2.40:1 films and also 4:3 films). What´s the big deal? Storaro should wake up and smell the coffee. There´s no "aspect ratio problem". When there´s no problem, no need for any "solutions" either.. At least "cropping" is not the answer for crying out loud..

 

[Mike Frezon]

And who exactly does he think he is to decide that the world needs a standard such as this anyway? Should all paintings hung in one's home use the same height-width ratio in their canvas?

I guess the electronics industry didn't get the memo about consulting Storaro during the development of high-def technology.

Loopy. I like that word.

 

[Brandon Conway]

This is directly from the Criterion Blog from February:

"From the start of this project, Bertolucci has insisted that Storaro have ultimate approval of the mastering of the feature. This master was made in Rome under Storaro’s direct supervision, with Bertolucci’s approval. When we asked Storaro about the framing of the film, he unhesitatingly told us that the correct aspect ratio for The Last Emperor was 2:1, even though the film was commonly projected at 2.35:1. He told us that The Last Emperor was the first film he shot specifically for 2.0 framing, and Bertolucci backs him up. Our mission is to present each film as its makers would want it to be seen, and in this case the director and cinematographer asked that we release their film in the format they say they had always envisioned. We had quite a lot of discussion over this, and we certainly knew it would be controversial, but in the end the decision was not made by us. It was made, as it should be, by the filmmakers."

 

[Jari K]

I´m sure, that Criterion didn´t really have a choice on this matter. If Storaro wanted 2.00:1 and Bertolucci said that Storaro has the "ultimate approval of the mastering" (2.35:1, 2:00:1, whatever Storaro wants), I guess 2:00:1 was the only way to go. Sadly, it´s still not the OAR.

Well, I won´t be getting this in full price. From the sales then..

edit:
I guess this "2.00:1"-thing for Storaro started quite early, from the Laserdisc-days (from the first WS-release of "Apocalypse Now" LD - which was cropped to 2.00:1, if you believe Wikipedia). Anyway, I remember some links where Storaro stated, that he was displeased how his 2.35:1-films looked on home video (and in 4:3 TVs back then, I assume).

So, I guess the man hated "black bars" so much, that is now willing to crop legendary films that won two Oscars for "Best Cinematography"; "Apocalypse Now" and "The Last Emperor". These films were 2.35:1 when the Academy saw these films... And the rest of the world, I might add. Too bad, that all of them were looking at the "wrong aspect ratio"...

 

[Peter Neski]

Criterion is not to blame ,its Storraro's ,its Apocalypse Now all over again.
Hes been is charge of transfers of all of Bertollucci's films hes work on.

And has the best record in the History of Color film ,when you think of the
way the films looked in the Theatre

Even the earlest Films he did with Bertollucci looked Fantastic in the Theatre.
How much filmakers know or care about there work beeing cropped is anyone's guess,Storaro has done such a amazing job with the way his
films looked in the Theatre,Its seems strange to me he wouldn't have
shot those films Flat,Whats the piont of using 2.35:1 Lens if in the end
hes going to Crop it,and If the film was really 2.0 like the Criterion
Statement above said ,why wasn't in the theatre that way,

Remmeber when Apocalypse Now Redux was in the Theatre it was 2.35;1(or Close) not 2.00

 

[Mike Frezon]

Storaro must've been beside himself with guilt and displeasure when the films were in theaters that they were not being shown in his "vision" of 2:1. He was probably embarrassed beyond belief. I'm surprised he didn't mention it at the Oscar ceremonies when he picked up the awards for Best Cinematography.

It would be one thing for Storaro to try and carry out this argument that the films should be cropped for home displays...but I think it's even harder to swallow that he originally intended for them to be shown as such in theaters.

 

[Douglas Monce]

Bertollucci by all accounts is fully aware of Storaro's cropping of the images and he approved these transfers.

And it would be the camera operator looking through the camera, not Bertollucci.

Doug

 

[Douglas Monce]

He can and he has.

Doug

 

[Douglas Monce]

I don't think he said that he shot TLE for 2.0, but rather with 2.0 in mind. I assume he means that they were protecting for 2.0, much as some TV shows shot 1.33 but protected for 1.85 for theatrical reasons.

Doug

 

[Brandon Conway]

I agree. That's the most logical interpretations. Shooting The Last Emperor with the intention to have 70mm blow-ups meant that they were protecting for 2.2:1, so I find it reasonable that they were protecting for 2:1, at least in principle. Of course, some shots are better protected than others, but I can honestly say it didn't phase me when I watched the Criterion DVD a few months ago.