Anthony Neilson
Tony N
Sorry, but I'm getting a slightly different message here. Less than half the set reviewed and out of that six, three he's rated 3/5. And we still have some of the most problematic discs - according to Nick - to be assessed.
Now that's not terrible but it's not good either. It suggests that Uni have shoved this release out the door prematurely - most likely so they can sell this and get a few double-dips in before the bottom falls out of the packaged media market.
We also don't know whether anything's been "fixed" except for the FRENZY titles, so I don't know why we're being all congratulatory. Only Nick saw the check-discs and only he can say if anything's been altered.
RAH gives THE BIRDS a 5 whereas Nick found it problematic. Given that this was one of their 13 big remasters for this year, I very much doubt that they made any alterations. This leaves us with the disconcerting truth that all these views are subjective. We cling to RAH's assessments because we know and trust that he has specialist knowledge - we've all seen the spectacular results when he's allowed to do things his way. We respect and cherish his high standards but few of us - despite what some may like to think - have had our eyes opened to the same extent; and will be satisfied with less.
Nick we know less well, though we know he headed up a very respectable label. We got all worked up based on his blog comments and nothing else. I say this not to impugn his ability but merely to point out that - beneath a certain, very technical level of understanding - our views are entirely subjective; and above that point of specialisation, we are again into such a rarefied perspective that it may as well be subjective.
It seems to me that there are discs so bad, we can all agree on their lack of quality; and a hallowed few that are so good we can do likewise. But there's an immense grey area where all our personal peccadilloes, informed or not - even our personal histories - come into play.
It reinforces my feeling - which I am lucky enough to be able to afford - that one should just buy the discs you want, and trust in your own aesthetic. What distracts you from the film is bad, what does not is acceptable. Digital is not film, your home is not a cinema, the past is gone and profit always - always - comes before excellence.
Now that's not terrible but it's not good either. It suggests that Uni have shoved this release out the door prematurely - most likely so they can sell this and get a few double-dips in before the bottom falls out of the packaged media market.
We also don't know whether anything's been "fixed" except for the FRENZY titles, so I don't know why we're being all congratulatory. Only Nick saw the check-discs and only he can say if anything's been altered.
RAH gives THE BIRDS a 5 whereas Nick found it problematic. Given that this was one of their 13 big remasters for this year, I very much doubt that they made any alterations. This leaves us with the disconcerting truth that all these views are subjective. We cling to RAH's assessments because we know and trust that he has specialist knowledge - we've all seen the spectacular results when he's allowed to do things his way. We respect and cherish his high standards but few of us - despite what some may like to think - have had our eyes opened to the same extent; and will be satisfied with less.
Nick we know less well, though we know he headed up a very respectable label. We got all worked up based on his blog comments and nothing else. I say this not to impugn his ability but merely to point out that - beneath a certain, very technical level of understanding - our views are entirely subjective; and above that point of specialisation, we are again into such a rarefied perspective that it may as well be subjective.
It seems to me that there are discs so bad, we can all agree on their lack of quality; and a hallowed few that are so good we can do likewise. But there's an immense grey area where all our personal peccadilloes, informed or not - even our personal histories - come into play.
It reinforces my feeling - which I am lucky enough to be able to afford - that one should just buy the discs you want, and trust in your own aesthetic. What distracts you from the film is bad, what does not is acceptable. Digital is not film, your home is not a cinema, the past is gone and profit always - always - comes before excellence.
