It is currently Tue Oct 17, 2017 1:06 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 177 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jul 19, 2005 3:42 am 
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 1:56 pm
Location: Dublin
Quote:
Looks like there will be a second printing soon

For that the correct negative will have to be sourced... Note MK2 seem to have the same problem sequence, which bodes badly...


Top
 Profile  
 

 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jul 19, 2005 5:43 pm 

Joined: Mon Nov 15, 2004 6:06 pm
I'm no expert but I believe these few flipped shots could be unflipped in the digital realm without having to go back to the elements.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jul 19, 2005 5:44 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 3:41 pm
Location: Nederland
I noticed that the fragment (WITH the flipped shot) can also be seen during the interview with Raoul Coutard. It's incredible that no one noticed during the editing of that particular piece. :?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jul 19, 2005 6:00 pm 
What interests me is that if there is a reprint will there also be a recall? If not, will the incorrect DVD be a collector's item [as in stamps] and be worth more?


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jul 19, 2005 9:49 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2004 7:24 pm
solent wrote:
What interests me is that if there is a reprint will there also be a recall? If not, will the incorrect DVD be a collector's item [as in stamps] and be worth more?


Given the nature of collectors, and the nature of this particular collection, I believe the answer would be, idiotically enough, yes. I think we proved that conclusively with the 'Jimmy Crack Corn' incident. (And, yes, I don't care).


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jul 19, 2005 10:06 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2004 4:13 pm
That is presumably Criterion will regard that as a mistake and fix it in the reprint. Or it could be something to live with like the international cut of Kwaidan and the 1.85:1 a.r. of Gertrud.

Until JM gets back to us, we shouldn't jump to any conclusion.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jul 20, 2005 3:10 am 
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 1:52 pm
Location: www.criteriondungeon.com
If TOHO could have Criterion reprint Seven Samurai because of the restoration demo, I think there are many people/companies that could demand a reprint in this incident. I think Criterion should do a re-print no matter what, as you can't just flip scenes in a movie, that is too big a mistake for me to swallow at least... (phew - my English sucks in the morning - sorry)!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jul 20, 2005 3:38 am 
User avatar

Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2004 4:13 pm
hammock wrote:
If TOHO could have Criterion reprint Seven Samurai because of the restoration demo, I think there are many people/companies that could demand a reprint in this incident.

Still (AFAIK) MK2, as of today, hasn't acknowledged the flipping problem themselves. And the same problem has occured on other Region's versions* too and no one has made a fuss about it before. (Don't think Panorama has fixed their DVD yet.) So the demand for a reprint are pretty much coming only from the end users' side.

And that's my only concern cos Criterion usually do a fixed reprint when there's a technical glitch on a DVD title. We are talking about an entire remastering here (don't think it can easily be fixed by branching the correct framings into the movie :P ). I don't think there's ever been another Criterion DVD title with a similar problem (or dare I say, such a screw-up) before?

*I wonder if there's anyone who owns the French or Japanese DVD and if the same flipping problem occurs on them?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jul 20, 2005 3:46 pm 

Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 1:00 pm
Yes the same flipping occurs on the French MK2 DVD. Which leads me to questions: Does that mean that the actual 35mm camera negative that MK2 & Criterion used had some frames spliced in backwards? Or did that somehow happen when the master positive was printed?

Quote:
Director of photography Raoul Coutard supervised this new high-definition digital transfer, created on a Spirit Datacine from a 35mm fine-grain master positive made from the original camera negative.

This implies to me that they did NOT use the MK2 telecine (which was presumably done direct to PAL).


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jul 21, 2005 3:46 am 
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 1:56 pm
Location: Dublin
Yes, I suggested this some posts back... It is likely that at some stage in the 1990's the negative got damaged at this point... In reconstructing it/restoring it, dupes were taken from existing prints, framing them tighter and inadvertently editing them on 'flipped'... The confusion would be exacerbated in the duping process moving from internegative to interpositive etc. where the orientatiuon of images will get moved around...

Quote:
I wonder if possibly the negative got damaged at this point, and in duping these shots off existing prints, the shots were accidentally flipped by the lab...

Quote:
I still think it is likely to have arisen during repair of a short damaged section of the negative...


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jul 27, 2005 9:30 pm 

Joined: Sat Nov 06, 2004 7:07 pm
Another odd thing about this DVD is that it has burned-in *French* subtitles in a couple of scenes -- the early scene where Jules says to Jim, "But not this time, Jim", and the scene where Jules writes a letter home during the war. They were not on the Criterion LD and Fox Lorber DVD.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Aug 31, 2005 8:45 am 

Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 2:27 pm
Location: London, UK
I could well be totally missing something here, but what on earth happens to Sabine, Jules and Catherine's daughter?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Sep 01, 2005 5:58 am 

Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 6:55 am
Narshty wrote:
I could well be totally missing something here, but what on earth happens to Sabine, Jules and Catherine's daughter?

Jules, Jim and Catherine couldn't care less about her, so why should you?

I thought that she was just a plot device to make us understand the selfishness of our trio of 'heroes'.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Sep 01, 2005 6:16 am 
User avatar

Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2004 4:13 pm
Sabine's probably living with Jules after Jim and Catherine are gone. - Just because she hasn't showed up at the funeral doesn't mean she's out of Jules' life as well.

(This assumption is based on the film, not the movel or the Roché's real-life affair with the Hessels. :P )


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Sep 01, 2005 6:37 am 

Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 2:27 pm
Location: London, UK
N. Wilson wrote:
Narshty wrote:
I could well be totally missing something here, but what on earth happens to Sabine, Jules and Catherine's daughter?

Jules, Jim and Catherine couldn't care less about her, so why should you?

I thought that she was just a plot device to make us understand the selfishness of our trio of 'heroes'.

That's what I thought. I knew there was something that left a bad taste in my mouth, but that nails the essential dislikeability of the film for me. The whole cascade of petit-bourgeois narcissicism just did my head in.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Sep 01, 2005 12:01 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 3:30 pm
Location: NC
N. Wilson wrote:
Jules, Jim and Catherine couldn't care less about her, so why should you?

I thought that she was just a plot device to make us understand the selfishness of our trio of 'heroes'.

Narshty wrote:
That's what I thought. I knew there was something that left a bad taste in my mouth, but that nails the essential disikeability of the film for me. The whole cascade of petit-bourgeois narcissism just did my head in.

While I was watching The Key to Jules and Jim something struck me as incredibly interesting about Roche's reductive writing style. It brings up how in his original manuscript there are whole pages marked out with only a few words, or a sentence, left. With that kind of backbone, it's amazing we got to know Sabine at all. With such a near total negation of sub-plot (and probably plot), to not just concentrate on the three main characters wouldn't have fit the film (not that this makes it likeable, or takes away the narcissism). I want to read the book.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Sep 01, 2005 4:37 pm 
script girl
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 4:55 pm
Location: Where Streams Of Whiskey Are Flowing
I think Sabine was in the trunk with Sprittle and Chim-Chim.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Sep 02, 2005 8:15 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 1:45 am
I'm watching my Criterion disc of "Jules and Jim" for the second time, and I just realized that there isn't a chapter list in the booklet. Very strange! Is this the only Criterion release that doesn't have them listed?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Sep 16, 2005 6:16 pm 

Joined: Tue Sep 13, 2005 11:00 pm
Location: Chicago
Just wanted to weigh in on the Criterion Jules et Jim reverse frame controversy. I have two earlier non-DVD editions of J&J, both on laserdisc. The earlier Criterion LD of Jules et Jim and the very early CBS/FOX LD of Jules et Jim are exactly the same as the Fox Lorber DVD edition of Jules et Jim in terms of preserving the "correct" visual bearings on the aforementioned scenes that were compared by those on this forum.

The new Criterion DVD is definitely in error! But, oh mammy, what a collector's item it'll be one day, me hopes.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Sep 29, 2005 10:18 am 

Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2004 8:04 pm
So no word yet from Criterion? I'm fighting the very strong temptation to purchase, even though I already own the Fox Lorber.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Sep 30, 2005 2:54 am 
No. 33 Killer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2004 4:22 am
Location: Ogden, UT
scotty wrote:
So no word yet from Criterion? I'm fighting the very strong temptation to purchase, even though I already own the Fox Lorber.


Don't fight it. The dvd is incredible.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Dec 22, 2005 12:15 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 6:05 pm
Location: Connecticut
I haven't purchased this DVD yet but it's on my gift list so I'm probably going to get it in a few days. But all the talk of it being the most dissapointing release is worrying me. How bad is the flipped frames? How many seconds in total? Did Criterion say they would fix it? Do you think Criterion will actually fix it?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Dec 22, 2005 12:20 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 9:48 am
Location: The Shire
Don't let this stop you from getting J&J.Minus the little flipping error it is a great transfer and a great film.The extras are bountiful on this must own package from Criterion.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Dec 22, 2005 12:36 pm 

Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 2:27 pm
Location: London, UK
They're two really quick shots that are simply flipped. Frankly, Truffaut's camera is so all over the place I doubt I'd ever have noticed had I not been a member of this forum. And even now I don't care. It's an absolutely amazing package, ramjammed with goodies. Don't miss it.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Dec 22, 2005 1:04 pm 

Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2005 5:31 pm
JusteLeblanc wrote:
I haven't purchased this DVD yet but it's on my gift list so I'm probably going to get it in a few days. But all the talk of it being the most dissapointing release is worrying me. How bad is the flipped frames? How many seconds in total? Did Criterion say they would fix it? Do you think Criterion will actually fix it?

Whether you'll appreciate Jules et Jim depends upon your threshold for irritating niggles, which is all that this problem amounts to. As Narshty said, the error itself is almost unnoticeable, but even so, knowing that this 'flipping' occurs at all is, to me, an annoyance in and of itself.

As for Criterion rectifying this problem in the future, well, I wouldn't hold your breath, blind as Criterion are to perfectly legitimate criticism of their transfers (see Gertrud and Kwaidan).


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 177 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: flyonthewall2983


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group




This site is not affiliated with The Criterion Collection