17 Marketa Lazarová

Discuss releases by Second Run and the films on them.
Post Reply
Message
Author
User avatar
MichaelB
Joined: Fri Aug 11, 2006 6:20 pm
Location: Worthing
Contact:

#76 Post by MichaelB » Wed Oct 31, 2007 6:59 pm

Well, I should be getting a sneak preview tomorrow if all goes according to plan, which will hopefully kill off most of the speculation.

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

#77 Post by jbeall » Wed Oct 31, 2007 9:46 pm

MichaelB wrote:[...] which will hopefully kill off most of the speculation.
Fat chance! :lol:

I realize you may not be able to post a detailed report about what you see, but please let us know whatever you can. The wait is almost over, and the suspense is killing me!

User avatar
Der Müde Tod
Joined: Thu Sep 21, 2006 9:50 am

#78 Post by Der Müde Tod » Wed Oct 31, 2007 10:17 pm

jbeall wrote:the suspense is killing me!

I've enjoyed all Second Run's releases in the past. Every single film was a blind buy for me, and I was always very pleasantly surprised by the film.
Sometimes, the transfer wasn't stellar, but I have started trusting Second Run to put out what they can afford to put out. I'll be happy to watch their Markéta Lazarová --

The complaints about an unseen release of this film already surpass the complaints about the lack of a better quality re-release of films like Andrei Rublev at this forum.

Why don't you guys wait, watch, and then make up your minds whether you want a better release (and then complain with the right people who can pay for it)???

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

#79 Post by MichaelB » Thu Nov 01, 2007 3:54 pm

OK, I now have a dual-layer checkdisc containing the final transfer.

I haven't had anywhere close to a chance to watch it yet (I'm trying to clear an uninterrupted three hours out of this evening), but I can provide a few answers right now.

First of all, as everyone expected/feared, it's not sourced from the original negative. My various educated guesses turned out to be pretty much bang on - the bottom line is that without hefty funding from someone with deep pockets, probably associated with the Czech Ministry of Culture, there's no way a small DVD label could realistically have ponied up the cost on its own.

So why didn't they wait, as so many have suggested? Well, the one point that I missed (and I'm kicking myself, as it was so obvious) is that the clock is always ticking on DVD projects. Licensing deals are almost invariably for a limited time period, dating from the time the contract is signed, not from the final release date. This means that if you sign a five-year contract and spend four-and-a-half years trying to create the perfect DVD, you have just six months to recoup your expenditure before you have to take it out of circulation (or gamble that the rights are renewable, which may not be the case).

Now we know from this very thread that Second Run have been sitting on Marketa Lazarová rights for nearly two years (at least), as it's unlikely they'd have announced it in public if the contract hadn't been signed... so at some point or other they were going to reach a crunch point: do they write off their expenditure on the rights and any preliminary transfer/encoding work, or make the best of what they had?

Anyway, I've watched the opening scenes on my laptop, and it's a real shame that all this original-negative argument was allowed to poison the debate - because on the evidence of what I've seen so far, this is one of the very best transfers that Second Run have done for a forty-year-old film (i.e. far closer to Intimate Lighting than Mother Joan of the Angels). It's anamorphic, appears to be framed correctly, the greyscale has a perfectly acceptable dynamic range (i.e. we're talking proper black and white instead of grey and grey), and although there are some minor blemishes, they're not remotely distracting - and you almost certainly will be too diverted by Zdeněk Liška's ravishing score in any case.

I'll hopefully have watched the whole thing on a much bigger screen within the next 4-5 hours and will try to post framegrabs along with a more accurate account. But it's already clear that this is a phenomenal bargain for £12.99.

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

#80 Post by rs98762001 » Thu Nov 01, 2007 4:51 pm

Fantastic news. Now hopefully everyone can stop whining and just enjoy the film.

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

#81 Post by MichaelB » Thu Nov 01, 2007 5:26 pm

Sadly, I can't - although it plays fine on my laptop, my domestic player can't handle DVD+R discs.

I don't particularly want to have to watch the whole thing on a 13" screen (certainly not when there's a 43" alternative), so I'm trying to convert it to DVD-R, but it's clearly not going to be a five-minute job - so I suspect I'm going to have to postpone a full viewing till tomorrow night.

But I'll try to get frame grabs uploaded tonight whatever happens.

UPDATE: And now I've just discovered that my burner can only burn dual-layer DVD+Rs, not DVD-Rs. So it looks like it's 13" or nothing...

User avatar
What A Disgrace
Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2004 10:34 pm
Contact:

#82 Post by What A Disgrace » Thu Nov 01, 2007 6:03 pm

I assume the disc does not contain any bonus features?

I'm glad that I can worry less about the transfer quality.

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

#83 Post by MichaelB » Thu Nov 01, 2007 6:36 pm

What A Disgrace wrote:I assume the disc does not contain any bonus features?
Nope. Two were pursued, but neither turned out to be available. Though the final package will include a booklet with an essay by Peter Hames - and the film itself is hefty enough at 2:38:42.

Interestingly enough, when you convert this from PAL to theatrical, it comes out at 165 mins 18 secs, which is three minutes longer than the 162 mins given by both the IMDB and the BFI database. The IMDB also claims 180 minutes as an alternative, but that looks suspiciously rounded to me.

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

#84 Post by rs98762001 » Thu Nov 01, 2007 6:51 pm

This was posted today on the IMDB message board for Marketa by someone under the moniker "Lakeywhite." Obviously have no idea how reliable he/she is, but it can't hurt to add to the speculation.
I recently assessed this film before it went off to be mastered onto DVD. I hope you enjoy it, the soundtrack has been improved (many crackles and pops have been removed) though the sync was out in places on the version I checked (I think that this was because the film was post dubbed originally), the picture has been treated too (though I didn't see the original so I can't tell by how much) I didn't see any major scratches or dirt. The contrast is still very high, I believe this is intentional as the contrast has been noted on another thread.

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

#85 Post by MichaelB » Thu Nov 01, 2007 7:41 pm

Here's a selection of framegrabs - genuinely random as I still haven't had a chance to watch the film yet.

(Tomorrow night, hopefully)

User avatar
domino harvey
Dot Com Dom
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:42 pm

#86 Post by domino harvey » Thu Nov 01, 2007 8:57 pm

what's the story with that rampant pixelation?

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

#87 Post by MichaelB » Fri Nov 02, 2007 3:00 am

domino harvey wrote:what's the story with that rampant pixelation?
I've just done tests, and it's definitely a side-effect of the frame grabbing process - the original freeze-frames look fine. It's never been an issue before as I normally reduce the size of the end result, but in this case I presented them in their original size. So don't worry!

(UPDATE: since this exchange, I've uploaded better grabs to the same URL, so the "rampant pixilation" is no more.
Last edited by MichaelB on Sat Dec 01, 2007 4:20 pm, edited 3 times in total.

User avatar
Faeton
Joined: Thu Sep 21, 2006 4:31 am
Location: Madrid, Spain
Contact:

#88 Post by Faeton » Fri Nov 02, 2007 3:31 am

ML is available for pre-order at Amazon.co.uk for 8,98 GBP

It's 9,99 GBP at other sites as play.com or Moviemail.

User avatar
domino harvey
Dot Com Dom
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:42 pm

#89 Post by domino harvey » Fri Nov 02, 2007 3:43 am

MichaelB wrote:If you'd care to nominate a transfer that you think is absolutely perfect (and which I also have), I'll happily do frame grabs using the same process for comparison!
No need, I already pre-ordered my copy from Amazon and truth be told it could look like your caps and for the ~$15 American it'd still be worth picking up. Glad to hear it doesn't look like that in motion tho

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

#90 Post by MichaelB » Sat Nov 03, 2007 5:43 am

I've now watched the whole of Part 1 on a 43" CRT, and it generally looks gorgeous. Admittedly not quite up to the standard of Second Run's Intimate Lighting or My Way Home, largely because I felt the contrast was a tad high at times - though this isn't consistent across the print, as some shots look damn near perfect, so Lakeywhite's speculation may well be accurate about it possibly being intentional. But the print is in excellent physical condition for its age - there are occasional minor blemishes, but the images are so intricate and the camera movement so constant that these really aren't an issue.

As Lakeywhite observed, some of the sound is also poorly post-synced, but I'm convinced this is inherent in the original - the camera choreography is so spectacular at times that there's every likelihood that VláÄ

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

#91 Post by NABOB OF NOWHERE » Sat Nov 03, 2007 10:24 am

Thanks to MichaelB for the early report on this. It's reassuring to hear it's not as scuzzy as the caps on the MoC site might have suggested . It seems that the highlights look clipped as a result of some contrast boosting but although my order was never under threat it's good to know I won't be watching this with gritted teeth.

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

#92 Post by rs98762001 » Sat Nov 03, 2007 12:34 pm

[quote="MichaelB"]I felt the contrast was a tad high at times - though this isn't consistent across the print, as some shots look damn near perfect, so Lakeywhite's speculation may well be accurate about it possibly being intentional. But the print is in excellent physical condition for its age - there are occasional minor blemishes, but the images are so intricate and the camera movement so constant that these really aren't an issue.

As Lakeywhite observed, some of the sound is also poorly post-synced, but I'm convinced this is inherent in the original - the camera choreography is so spectacular at times that there's every likelihood that VláÄ

kekid
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 9:55 pm

#93 Post by kekid » Sat Nov 03, 2007 11:22 pm

Is the Second Run version of My Way Home an improvement over the Clavis version or are they about the same quality? I am debating whether to double-dip.

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

#94 Post by MichaelB » Sun Nov 04, 2007 4:03 am

kekid wrote:Is the Second Run version of My Way Home an improvement over the Clavis version or are they about the same quality? I am debating whether to double-dip.
You might have to double-dip on posting, as this is the Marketa Lazarová thread...

kekid
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 9:55 pm

#95 Post by kekid » Sun Nov 04, 2007 1:39 pm

MichaelB wrote:
kekid wrote:Is the Second Run version of My Way Home an improvement over the Clavis version or are they about the same quality? I am debating whether to double-dip.
You might have to double-dip on posting, as this is the Marketa Lazarová thread...
Sorry about the oversight. Will do.

User avatar
thirtyframesasecond
Joined: Mon Apr 02, 2007 1:48 pm

#96 Post by thirtyframesasecond » Mon Nov 05, 2007 7:32 am

I went to the Curzon Mayfair screening yesterday. Great introduction by Peter Hames, whose book on the Czech New Wave I really should purchase. It's interesting to hear that the source novel is a really unique piece of work in terms of narrative and so on, because the film really echoes that - it's pretty unconventional. I'm quite glad of the title cards before each segment because I think I'd have been lost at times. Certainly a terrific piece of film making, and it's great that Second Run and the Czech centre have invested so much time and effort into this project because as Hames said, this was only the THIRD screening of this film ever in London.

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

#97 Post by MichaelB » Mon Nov 05, 2007 8:55 am

thirtyframesasecond wrote:Great introduction by Peter Hames, whose book on the Czech New Wave I really should purchase.
Indeed you should - few film books are truly definitive, but I'm hard pushed to think of any other English-language publication about Czech cinema that comes anywhere close to its scope (which is much wider than just the New Wave itself - he also gives a pretty decent overview of Czech film history as a whole).

User avatar
Gregory
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 4:07 pm

#98 Post by Gregory » Mon Nov 05, 2007 5:40 pm

Strange goings-on with the release date: I preordered it weeks ago at Amazon UK. Today I got an email saying the "release date was changed by the supplier" and that the new estimated arrival date is "03/12/07 - 06/12/07". On the Amazon site they still list the release date as Nov. 26.
EDIT: Their latest e-mail now says Dec 27 - Jan 11.
Last edited by Gregory on Mon Nov 19, 2007 1:10 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
domino harvey
Dot Com Dom
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:42 pm

#99 Post by domino harvey » Fri Nov 16, 2007 3:39 am

release date's changed to Dec 3 now

User avatar
SoyCuba
Joined: Tue Jul 24, 2007 3:30 pm
Location: Finland

#100 Post by SoyCuba » Sun Nov 18, 2007 6:15 am

The delivery estimate for my pre-order at amazon now says 21 - 23 april 2008. Has it really been postponed this much?

Post Reply