17 Marketa Lazarová

Discuss releases by Second Run and the films on them.
Post Reply
Message
Author
ivuernis
Joined: Wed Nov 15, 2006 2:35 pm

#51 Post by ivuernis » Fri Oct 26, 2007 5:21 pm

petoluk wrote:So no - at the moment, nobody is actually working on a DVD release that goes back to the original negative... :(
This is disappointing, the sample transfer from the negative shows how absolutely amazing it could look. Unless SecondRun can enhance the positive to such an extent that it comes close to the negative I can't see how this release is not going to be a bit of a let-down for all those who hoped the transfer would come from the negative.

Would you have any idea how much the 10 minute sample reel that was transferred from the negative cost? I have no idea of the financial cost of this process but seeing as 1,500 people signed the original petition would it be foolish to think that a transfer from the negative could be viable through some group scheme if enough people were interested in funding such a venture??

This is not a slight on SecondRun, I think they (along with other small labels such as MoC) do fantastic work in bringing neglected films to a wider audience in what I appreciate is a very competitive market exposed to piracy via the internet. I have bought several of their releases and will continue to do so including this one it's just that this release in particular I had very high hopes for.
Last edited by ivuernis on Fri Oct 26, 2007 5:44 pm, edited 1 time in total.

rs98762001
Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2005 6:04 pm

#52 Post by rs98762001 » Fri Oct 26, 2007 5:42 pm

From what I understand, the process would be far too expensive for a small company like Second Run to undertake. Perhaps only Criterion would have been able to bankroll something like that. Clearly they passed, so I think rather than bitching and moaning about SR's release, we should just be thankful that the film is coming out at all, and just hope it will be in a perfectly watchable condition.

User avatar
NABOB OF NOWHERE
Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2005 12:30 pm
Location: Brandywine River

#53 Post by NABOB OF NOWHERE » Fri Oct 26, 2007 6:24 pm

[quote="rs98762001"]From what I understand, the process would be far too expensive for a small company like Second Run to undertake.

Well my understanding is that there are many telecine suites that can be booked for lowish rates particularly in downtime that would not cost a fortune. Given the amount of signaturies to the original petition and level of global interest in an otherwise unobtainable DVD I cannot understand why the original neg wasn't used.
Maybe SR did their sums and came to the conclusion that realistically in terms of potential hard sales they would not be covered for the costs of a new transfer, signatures after all cost nothing, but what irks is that after all the trumpeting about an 18 month delay to ensure top rate product etc etc there has been complete silence about the source materials. Particularly after the Krzyacy experience we end up with this end result and not a peep from SR themselves.
Looking on the bright side(pun intended) maybe they have been able to boost the transfer but this is also a costly business if done properly and still no substitute to going off the neg. So we'll have to wait and see. It'll be a tough call if there's no alternative planned as I have all their other releases but this time it's pulled my chain.

Bajaja
Joined: Wed Aug 09, 2006 2:39 pm
Location: Baltimore, MD

#54 Post by Bajaja » Fri Oct 26, 2007 8:43 pm

As for the "e" with an accent, I stand corrected by petoluk and Bikey himself, who promptly responded to my PM. The title on the SR cover is indeed correct. I checked my VHS and, even more importantly, the original book by Vladislav Vancura, who was a recognized, albeit somewhat idiosyncratic, master of the Czech language. Even though it is in discord with the modern form of the name (which caused my error), his Marketa is indeed spelled with the simple, normal "e".

As for the bigger issue of the source for the SR transfer, everyone is entitled to his opinion and can make his own purchasing decision. I do not see SR as forcing anything on anyone. I personally look forward to the release. And if one day, by any chance, a DVD from the negative does come by, well, I have double dipped on much less important films before... Thanks, Second Run.

Narshty
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 2:27 pm
Location: London, UK

#55 Post by Narshty » Sat Oct 27, 2007 4:57 am

NABOB OF NOWHERE wrote:Well my understanding is that there are many telecine suites that can be booked for lowish rates particularly in downtime that would not cost a fortune. Given the amount of signaturies to the original petition and level of global interest in an otherwise unobtainable DVD I cannot understand why the original neg wasn't used.
If they didn't have the money or couldn't find the partners, then that's it. We'll get the film, but in a slightly lower quality than possible.
Maybe SR did their sums and came to the conclusion that realistically in terms of potential hard sales they would not be covered for the costs of a new transfer, signatures after all cost nothing, but what irks is that after all the trumpeting about an 18 month delay to ensure top rate product etc etc there has been complete silence about the source materials. Particularly after the Krzyacy experience we end up with this end result and not a peep from SR themselves.
That's not at all accurate and I never heard the word "ensure" being bandied around by Second Run; the delays were an attempt to see if a better product could be put together and if it turns it out it wasn't possible, it wasn't for lack of trying. Aside from anything else, DVD delays are costly, especially if you're sitting on the rights for something you only have for a fixed contractual period.

User avatar
Bikey
Joined: Wed Aug 17, 2005 4:09 am

#56 Post by Bikey » Sat Oct 27, 2007 8:38 am

MARKETA LAZAROVÃ

User avatar
jbeall
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2006 9:22 am
Location: Atlanta-ish

#57 Post by jbeall » Sat Oct 27, 2007 9:26 am

I'm thrilled this film is finally getting a proper, if not definitive, dvd release, and I'll be picking it up for sure. I wish it was from a neg transfer, but there's no sense complaining when the positive transfer is consistent with SR's track record. This is not an outfit that can splurge on their dvds like Criterion, and it's not even part of their mission. They're bringing some truly lesser-known titles to light, but unlike Criterion, they don't have those automatic sellers like Bergman, Kurosawa, et al that help pay for the more obscure releases. Perhaps those of us who signed the petition (myself included) had unrealistic expectations, given that SR never actually indicated that a neg transfer was in the works.

User avatar
NABOB OF NOWHERE
Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2005 12:30 pm
Location: Brandywine River

#58 Post by NABOB OF NOWHERE » Sat Oct 27, 2007 12:10 pm

Narshty wrote:
NABOB OF NOWHERE wrote:Well my understanding is that there are many telecine suites that can be booked for lowish rates particularly in downtime that would not cost a fortune. Given the amount of signaturies to the original petition and level of global interest in an otherwise unobtainable DVD I cannot understand why the original neg wasn't used.
If they didn't have the money or couldn't find the partners, then that's it. We'll get the film, but in a slightly lower quality than possible.
Maybe SR did their sums and came to the conclusion that realistically in terms of potential hard sales they would not be covered for the costs of a new transfer, signatures after all cost nothing, but what irks is that after all the trumpeting about an 18 month delay to ensure top rate product etc etc there has been complete silence about the source materials. Particularly after the Krzyacy experience we end up with this end result and not a peep from SR themselves.
That's not at all accurate and I never heard the word "ensure" being bandied around by Second Run; the delays were an attempt to see if a better product could be put together and if it turns it out it wasn't possible, it wasn't for lack of trying. Aside from anything else, DVD delays are costly, especially if you're sitting on the rights for something you only have for a fixed contractual period.
Well here's that original statement and seeing as we're in quibbling mode have a look at the comparative tests on the MoC site and tell me again that it's "slightly lower quality"

From Mastersofcinema.org...
Second Run plans to release Markéta Lazarová (FrantiÅ¡ek Vlácil, 1967) on DVD by "mid-summer". Says Mehelli Modi of Second Run, "Plans for our Markéta are going very well. So much extra material to look at that [we] don't want to rush the release. [We] want our release, as much as possible, to be fully respectful of this wonderful film and the Czech community for whom this is very important. At the moment, we are in the midst of doing the all-new subtitles." Based on Second Run's stellar track-record, we have full confidence that this will be a first-class release indeed. The film has repeatedly been voted best Czech film of all time by critics, and Mark Le Fanu recently (see our June 27, 2005 news update) called it "...as remarkable in its own way as Tarkovsky's Andrei Roublev. In short: long overdue on DVD". - T.T.
Finally I am still miffed by the lack of comment from SR on the subject given a similar experience surrounding the release of Krzyzacy which they had appeared to take to heart.

rs98762001
Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2005 6:04 pm

#59 Post by rs98762001 » Sat Oct 27, 2007 12:43 pm

Where on earth have SR ever even mentioned the new negative? The only thing discussed in that blurb is the subtitling. This seems like a case of someone putting two and two together and making five on Second Run's behalf, and then getting angry at their own inaccurate math.

And with regards to your comments on Krzyzacy - have you thought that it was precisely because of that experience that SR have pointedly not promised anything about the new negative, in order not to build up unrealistic expectations?

Again, the only company who could probably have afforded to go back to the new negative was Criterion. They didn't. SR has indeed taken a long time to put out the film, but that seems to be a constant with a lot of their releases. Would you rather have no release at all of this legendary, hard-to-see film?

User avatar
NABOB OF NOWHERE
Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2005 12:30 pm
Location: Brandywine River

#60 Post by NABOB OF NOWHERE » Sat Oct 27, 2007 12:57 pm

rs98762001 wrote:Where on earth have SR ever even mentioned the new negative? The only thing discussed in that blurb is the subtitling. This seems like a case of someone putting two and two together and making five on Second Run's behalf, and then getting angry at their own inaccurate math.

And with regards to your comments on Krzyzacy - have you thought that it was precisely because of that experience that SR have pointedly not promised anything about the new negative, in order not to build up unrealistic expectations?

Again, the only company who could probably have afforded to go back to the new negative was Criterion. They didn't. SR has indeed taken a long time to put out the film, but that seems to be a constant with a lot of their releases. Would you rather have no release at all of this legendary, hard-to-see film?
For the record I have never read into their original statement that they were going to/expecting to/ whatever to use the neg. The fact of the matter is that the neg transfer was within grasp and there are many enquiries over the last 18 months whether they were going for it in the light of them wanting to be "fully respectful". I can't help noticing that you yourself wrote that you were "hoping for a worthy release" and this echoes my sentiments entirely. It is the deafening silence from SR that is extraordinary otherwise why participate on this forum at all.

Bajaja
Joined: Wed Aug 09, 2006 2:39 pm
Location: Baltimore, MD

#61 Post by Bajaja » Sat Oct 27, 2007 2:48 pm

Nabob, seriously, what do you want SR to say? Why are you insisting that
The fact of the matter is that the neg transfer was within grasp
? What do you know?

Even without divulging details of (nota bene: failed) attempts of their company, I perceive SR as extremely open and communicative; certainly more so than the company that shares its name with our forum. Bikey's presence here is beneficial both to our community and to his company. And I hope it will continue to be so.

User avatar
MichaelB
Joined: Fri Aug 11, 2006 6:20 pm
Location: Worthing
Contact:

#62 Post by MichaelB » Sat Oct 27, 2007 3:41 pm

NABOB OF NOWHERE wrote: It is the deafening silence from SR that is extraordinary otherwise why participate on this forum at all.
You're damned if you do and damned if you don't, aren't you? Maintain a Sicilian-style omertà and divulge nothing, and the rumour machine takes over. Build a reputation for openness and you're berated for not responding to every single query, even if such a response might involve revealing commercially sensitive information, or discussing projects whose contents haven't been locked down yet.

I can't speak for Second Run, but some of the speculation I read in the BFI thread makes me laugh out loud - sadly, I'm contractually barred from correcting much of it (I can't discuss releases that haven't been formally announced), but... well, let's just say that you shouldn't believe everything you read, especially if you can't trace the source back to the actual company.

Nowhere has Second Run ever claimed that they were going back to the original negative, so you can hardly blame them if this isn't in fact the case - especially as I echo others' comments that such a transfer would probably be way outside a realistic budget for what was always going to be a niche release. By the way, how many of SR's other releases were sourced from the original negs?

User avatar
NABOB OF NOWHERE
Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2005 12:30 pm
Location: Brandywine River

#63 Post by NABOB OF NOWHERE » Sat Oct 27, 2007 4:27 pm

MichaelB wrote:
NABOB OF NOWHERE wrote: It is the deafening silence from SR that is extraordinary otherwise why participate on this forum at all.
You're damned if you do and damned if you don't, aren't you? Maintain a Sicilian-style omertà and divulge nothing, and the rumour machine takes over. Build a reputation for openness and you're berated for not responding to every single query, even if such a response might involve revealing commercially sensitive information, or discussing projects whose contents haven't been locked down yet.

I can't speak for Second Run, but some of the speculation I read in the BFI thread makes me laugh out loud - sadly, I'm contractually barred from correcting much of it (I can't discuss releases that haven't been formally announced), but... well, let's just say that you shouldn't believe everything you read, especially if you can't trace the source back to the actual company.

Nowhere has Second Run ever claimed that they were going back to the original negative, so you can hardly blame them if this isn't in fact the case - especially as I echo others' comments that such a transfer would probably be way outside a realistic budget for what was always going to be a niche release. By the way, how many of SR's other releases were sourced from the original negs?
I feel like I'm a lone wagon train looking up and seeing the silhouettes of apparatchik SR apologists massing on the hilltops. For the last time I'll try and set out my gripe.

Firstly surely the whole driving force of most of this forum is speculation, in all its forms from informed comment to nerdy whinnying.

Secondly and most importantly this is not about spine numbers or window boxing and getting peeved about "why don't they answer my dumb questions by return e-mail". This question has been going on for 18 months and came to light principally because of the screen caps shown on the MoC site for a film that many people expressly wanted the best possible result. Also ostensibly by Second Run themselves, however you want to choose to interpret their statement of intent.

As regards a niche market. With regard to the question how many times have SR gone back to the original neg? I would answer- How many of those films had a petition going for them and examples of an alternative original neg transfer.

SR were castigated,not by me I may add, for their handling of he Krzyzacy release and yet this time they could have surely dealt with sympathetic enquiry in a non-sensitive way rather than keeping stumm.

Finally let me re-iterate I am a huge supporter of SR and all of their titles sit on my groaning shelves where I daresay no. 17 will join them.

rs98762001
Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2005 6:04 pm

#64 Post by rs98762001 » Sat Oct 27, 2007 4:34 pm

And all this before any of us have even seen the final result.

User avatar
NABOB OF NOWHERE
Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2005 12:30 pm
Location: Brandywine River

#65 Post by NABOB OF NOWHERE » Sat Oct 27, 2007 4:43 pm

rs98762001 wrote:And all this before any of us have even seen the final result.
Absolutely. What else are we sad fuckers going to do on a Saturday night.

As a last shot please refer to the comments on this thread

19 Knights of the Teutonic Order

to contrast and compare the then incumbent Bikey's responses and also those of some sorely indignant consumers.

rollotomassi
Joined: Thu Mar 23, 2006 3:23 pm
Location: Kendal

#66 Post by rollotomassi » Sat Oct 27, 2007 6:42 pm

I do fully sympathise with Second Run's predicament, but I think perhaps they should ensure that they only release films that can be seen in as good a condition as possible. I don't remember a single release of theirs that couldn't be improved upon in some way or another.

It is great that some rare films are getting treatment, and this ML will be a massive improvement over the Learmedia and assorted other bootlegs. But it seems about 2 years of prevarication has come to nothing, this following the debacles with the A Ford and A Munk releases. Then there's Diary for my Children and the Jancsos, continually promised and always put back, and when we get them they will be no improvement on the Eng subbed French Clovis Films DVDs long released.

I will buy Marketa, but there was talk of a simultaneous release in the Czech Republic. The fact that that doesn't seem to be happening - see all Czech sites - shows that the Czechs seem to be waiting for the film to be seen properly.

The 2nd Run is cheap enough to get anyway, but a proper release will have to come out of Prague or from Criterion, much as it pains me to say it.

It's a shame that such a masterpiece - one of the top three films of the sixties anywhere - will be seen in such an inferior condition after a delay of two years.

User avatar
MichaelB
Joined: Fri Aug 11, 2006 6:20 pm
Location: Worthing
Contact:

#67 Post by MichaelB » Sat Oct 27, 2007 7:54 pm

rs98762001 wrote:And all this before any of us have even seen the final result.
Indeed. Slag it off after it's released by all means (and DVD Beaver and DVD Times usually get detailed reviews published before the pre-order period has ended), but advance damning on the basis of pure speculation is just ridiculous. Not to mention grossly insulting to people who work harder than anyone I've encountered in this business to produce high-quality, generously-priced DVDs on shoestring budgets.

It's all very well bringing up that petition, but the fact remains that just 1,420 people signed it (here's the link). Even if every single signature translated into a sale, that's hardly a blockbuster, especially as they'd be spread at least three ways amongst distributors in the UK, the US and the Czech Republic. And when set against the cost of a fully-graded (or even a best-light) transfer from the original negative of a nearly three-hour film, the sums just don't add up.

petoluk
Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2007 7:31 am
Location: Czech Republic

#68 Post by petoluk » Sun Oct 28, 2007 3:17 am

MichaelB wrote:And when set against the cost of a fully-graded (or even a best-light) transfer from the original negative of a nearly three-hour film, the sums just don't add up.
Just wanted to say that Michael is right - as Petr Soukup says here, they (the "Marketa Lazarová z negativu" group) estimated the cost of the transfer from the original negative + the restoration work at "7 až 8 miliónů korun" (7 - 8 million CZK = ~ $ 375,000 - 425,000 / £ 180,000 - 210,000) - that's quite a lot of nuts!

If SecondRun were to finance this, and still sell the discs for £ 12.99, they'd have to sell like 15,000 copies just to get their money back (and that's not counting the production of special features, DVD authoring & manufacture, printing of covers & booklets, etc.)...

The thing is, that the people involved here are trying to get a grant from the government to finance this (and once done, I guess SR, or somebody else could license the finished thing for a fraction of the above sum), but as you maybe know, after the "unsuccessful" 2006 elections, there was basically no working government for like half a year, which put the negotiations on hold... :(

(True, we've got a working government now, but you know how they are - bickering about "petty" things with the opposition all the time, trying to stuff as much money as possible into their own pockets... Who cares about the all-time best Czech film!?)

Cheers! :wink:

Peto

User avatar
MichaelB
Joined: Fri Aug 11, 2006 6:20 pm
Location: Worthing
Contact:

#69 Post by MichaelB » Sun Oct 28, 2007 3:51 am

petoluk wrote:If SecondRun were to finance this, and still sell the discs for £ 12.99, they'd have to sell like 15,000 copies just to get their money back (and that's not counting the production of special features, DVD authoring & manufacture, printing of covers & booklets, etc.)...
...plus marketing and physical distribution, not to mention the fact that Second Run will only get a small cut of that £12.99 once the retailers and distributors have taken their cut.

And banking on selling 15,000 copies of a UK-only release of an obscure Czech film ("obscure" in terms of recognition even among well-informed British film buffs) is total fantasy economics. Even a tenth of that figure would be considered a huge hit in this market.
The thing is, that the people involved here are trying to get a grant from the government to finance this (and once done, I guess SR, or somebody else could license the finished thing for a fraction of the above sum), but as you maybe know, after the "unsuccessful" 2006 elections, there was basically no working government for like half a year, which put the negotiations on hold.
Realistically, a government grant is the only sensible option, short of a Czech philanthropist agreeing to underwrite it. But what happens until then? Do Second Run go down the Rollotomassi-recommended route and say "Nothing but perfection will do, even if it means waiting years, if we even release it at all" (cue countless more complaints in these forums!), or adopt a more pragmatic attitude and say "OK, at least we can release a decent transfer of this important film, even if it's not going to be ideal".

There's no question which option I'd have picked - and in fact I did have to make a similar decision last year with the BFI's Jan Å vankmajer box. For various reasons largely to do with an ongoing rights dispute (one of the curses of working in this field is that there are always going to be loads of post-1989 wrangles over rights to films previously held by the Communist state), I simply couldn't get access to the original negatives of most of the films. Obviously, I'd love to have been able to do this across the board (especially as this DVDFreak comparison of one of the cases where I was able to wangle an original-neg transfer shows just how dramatic the improvement would have been), but it just wasn't possible, and no amount of weeping and wailing would have made any difference.

So would people really have preferred the box to have been postponed indefinitely on the basis of a (probably illusory) promise of perfection across the board?

User avatar
Cold Bishop
Joined: Tue May 30, 2006 9:45 pm
Location: Portland, OR

#70 Post by Cold Bishop » Sun Oct 28, 2007 4:11 am

MichaelB wrote:
petoluk wrote:If SecondRun were to finance this, and still sell the discs for £ 12.99, they'd have to sell like 15,000 copies just to get their money back (and that's not counting the production of special features, DVD authoring & manufacture, printing of covers & booklets, etc.)...
...plus marketing and physical distribution, not to mention the fact that Second Run will only get a small cut of that £12.99 once the retailers and distributors have taken their cut.

And banking on selling 15,000 copies of a UK-only release of an obscure Czech film ("obscure" in terms of recognition even among well-informed British film buffs) is total fantasy economics. Even a tenth of that figure would be considered a huge hit in this market.
Which is why I still like my idea thatr dvd/distribution/ect. companies in different countries/regions/etc. should team up for projects like this. Certainly a collabo between UK/US/French/German-whatever parties could produce enough money to fund something like this. Individual licensing rights would, of course, be a different problem, but it would knock the main obstacle out of the way. Of course, a film like this having enough interested parties in different countries would probably be rare, and my idea exists in an ideal world where different companies could actually work together (plus I'm sure there's other problems which people who actually work for film companies would know of), but I still say something like it could work.

Either way, It's still better than nothing (which is what people forget sometimes). They're not Facets, releasing crap when it's perfectly possible for them to put out something decent with a little effort (which seems may have been the case with some earlier releases or am I wrong?). The negative is completely out of there reach, so I just see know reason to complain.

User avatar
MichaelB
Joined: Fri Aug 11, 2006 6:20 pm
Location: Worthing
Contact:

#71 Post by MichaelB » Sun Oct 28, 2007 4:35 am

Cold Bishop wrote: Certainly a collabo between UK/US/French/German-whatever parties could produce enough money to fund something like this. Individual licensing rights would, of course, be a different problem, but it would knock the main obstacle out of the way. Of course, a film like this having enough interested parties in different countries would probably be rare, and my idea exists in an ideal world where different companies could actually work together (plus I'm sure there's other problems which people who actually work for film companies would know of), but I still say something like it could work.
This certainly does happen (the restorations at the heart of the BFI's Quay Brothers DVD were funded along these lines, which is why the US and French editions are all but identical), but it does require a huge amount of diplomacy and delicate negotiation.

Part of the problem is that you generally have to persuade interested parties to pay money upfront - which they're (understandably) reluctant to do if they can't see the end result. I know of several DVD projects that are currently in limbo because these issues haven't yet been resolved.

And in the case of Marketa Lazarová the costs are so astronomical that it would need loads of distributors to chip in if it's to be achieved without some kind of grant. Speaking from experience, it's hard enough getting two or three to agree!

(And even when collaborative projects actually happen, you still get people popping up on these forums to complain about them!)

Tim
Joined: Thu Nov 04, 2004 8:27 am

#72 Post by Tim » Sun Oct 28, 2007 5:34 am

Well I remember engaging in correspondence with Second Run, inspired by the comparison of the negative and the positive that Masters of Cinema drew attention to, in which I made suggestions for fundraising among enthusiasts for the film (pay £100 or whatever, get the DVD and a screen credit). As I recall, the answer I received was that they were considering that and other methods of financing. Now all this may have been fantasy, as MichaelB says, but if so it would have been sensible for Second Run to have gently dispelled it, particularly given that they had previously engaged in it, at least in my case. I have no doubt that they would have been damned whatever they did, but to say that is simply to beg the question of what they should have done. What would have been the great harm in letting people know that the possibility of using the negative had been thoroughly explored and found to be financially unfeasible?

That said I will wait for reviews before I come to conclusions about the quality of the transfer. That means that I'm not about to condemn the release before seeing it but, on the other hand, I'm not about to blind buy it either, as I certainly would have had the negative been used.

If truth be told, the false hopes (if that is what they were) were raised by the Czech comparisons of the positive and the negative and the attention that the MoC website drew to those comparisons. Second Run was in the difficult position of negotiating with and ultimately deflating those hopes. That was never going to be an easy task, but it seems clear to me that they could have managed it better. They came too close to endorsing the hopes, if those hopes were merely fantasies, and then were unduly reticent when the moment for realism arrived. To say this is not in any way to diminish the dedication that Second Run have consistently shown, or the value of their enterprise, including that of bringing Marketa to DVD.

User avatar
NABOB OF NOWHERE
Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2005 12:30 pm
Location: Brandywine River

#73 Post by NABOB OF NOWHERE » Sun Oct 28, 2007 8:18 am

Tim wrote:Well I remember engaging in correspondence with Second Run, inspired by the comparison of the negative and the positive that Masters of Cinema drew attention to, in which I made suggestions for fundraising among enthusiasts for the film (pay £100 or whatever, get the DVD and a screen credit). As I recall, the answer I received was that they were considering that and other methods of financing. Now all this may have been fantasy, as MichaelB says, but if so it would have been sensible for Second Run to have gently dispelled it, particularly given that they had previously engaged in it, at least in my case. I have no doubt that they would have been damned whatever they did, but to say that is simply to beg the question of what they should have done. What would have been the great harm in letting people know that the possibility of using the negative had been thoroughly explored and found to be financially unfeasible?

That said I will wait for reviews before I come to conclusions about the quality of the transfer. That means that I'm not about to condemn the release before seeing it but, on the other hand, I'm not about to blind buy it either, as I certainly would have had the negative been used.

If truth be told, the false hopes (if that is what they were) were raised by the Czech comparisons of the positive and the negative and the attention that the MoC website drew to those comparisons. Second Run was in the difficult position of negotiating with and ultimately deflating those hopes. That was never going to be an easy task, but it seems clear to me that they could have managed it better. They came too close to endorsing the hopes, if those hopes were merely fantasies, and then were unduly reticent when the moment for realism arrived. To say this is not in any way to diminish the dedication that Second Run have consistently shown, or the value of their enterprise, including that of bringing Marketa to DVD.
Precisely. Very neatly summed up.

"God bless everyone" said (Tiny) Tim

User avatar
MichaelB
Joined: Fri Aug 11, 2006 6:20 pm
Location: Worthing
Contact:

#74 Post by MichaelB » Sun Oct 28, 2007 8:27 am

Tim wrote:If truth be told, the false hopes (if that is what they were) were raised by the Czech comparisons of the positive and the negative and the attention that the MoC website drew to those comparisons. Second Run was in the difficult position of negotiating with and ultimately deflating those hopes. That was never going to be an easy task, but it seems clear to me that they could have managed it better.
Personally, I think what they're doing now - i.e. keeping schtum and leaving the verdict on the transfer to independent reviewers (and let's face it, news on the final version is going to spread like wildfire round these forums) - is as sensible a policy as any. Especially as it's abundantly clear that anything they say now is merely going to fuel another wave of unhelpful speculation tinged with irrational optimism (or pessimism).

In fact, it's probably healthiest right now to assume that the transfer is going to be dreadful - that way it's much more likely to be a pleasant surprise.

gordonovitch
Joined: Wed Oct 25, 2006 10:14 am

#75 Post by gordonovitch » Wed Oct 31, 2007 3:21 pm

Back in January of this year, I received the following response from a Second Run representative:

Ah yes... the Marketa question. We are looking into sourcing a decent transfer of the negative. I think it would be counter productive to release such a film from any other source. [my emphasis] We just have to find a way to make the financing work for us. It is the film that we get most mail about by a large margin and is obviously close to a lot of peoples hearts so we would want to deliver as good a disc as possible.

Nothing new here, but they seemed pretty dedicated to the original neg idea at the time and were thinking financing was possible.

Gordon Thomas

Post Reply