Andrei Tarkovsky

Discussion and info on people in film, ranging from directors to actors to cinematographers to writers.

Moderator: DarkImbecile

Post Reply
Message
Author
User avatar
FrauBlucher
Joined: Mon Jul 15, 2013 8:28 pm
Location: Greenwich Village

Re: Andrei Tarkovsky

#276 Post by FrauBlucher » Tue May 03, 2016 5:29 pm


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

Re: Andrei Tarkovsky

#277 Post by MichaelB » Tue May 03, 2016 5:48 pm

...and I suspect this may be the reason why the BDs have been slightly delayed, in order to benefit from the theatrical exposure.

User avatar
tenia
Ask Me About My Bassoon
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 11:13 am

Re: Andrei Tarkovsky

#278 Post by tenia » Tue May 03, 2016 5:57 pm

Are these 2 things (theatrical vs home video) handled by 2 different teams who just happened 2 weeks ago to realise there might be some synergy to capture ?
Because except if the theatrical run just came out of the blue, it seems as if the home video team might have issued an adequate planning some time ago.

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

Re: Andrei Tarkovsky

#279 Post by MichaelB » Tue May 03, 2016 6:24 pm

I've been out of the theatrical distribution loop for a good couple of decades, but I suspect what happened is that venues suddenly became available and Curzon Artificial Eye reacted accordingly.

If you remember a year or so ago, Arrow delayed The Long Good Friday because a theatrical reissue opportunity suddenly came up once the restoration had been seen by people in the industry.

User avatar
FrauBlucher
Joined: Mon Jul 15, 2013 8:28 pm
Location: Greenwich Village

Re: Andrei Tarkovsky

#280 Post by FrauBlucher » Tue May 03, 2016 6:35 pm

The trailer is a very small sample but it does look quite good. The excitement level has increased.

User avatar
Trees
Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2015 4:04 pm

Re: Andrei Tarkovsky

#281 Post by Trees » Tue May 03, 2016 8:04 pm

Hoo-rah! Got me amped. \:D/

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

Re: Andrei Tarkovsky

#282 Post by kekid » Tue May 03, 2016 9:49 pm

MichaelB wrote:...and I suspect this may be the reason why the BDs have been slightly delayed, in order to benefit from the theatrical exposure.
If this is the reason for the delay, then by the time they start issuing the BD's, all films should be ready to go. In that case they should lead with the box set, and follow up with individual releases.

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

Re: Andrei Tarkovsky

#283 Post by MichaelB » Wed May 04, 2016 2:48 am

Given that they haven't announced a box set but they have announced, taken preorders for and delayed individual releases, I suspect that that wouldn't be a very sensible strategy.

User avatar
tenia
Ask Me About My Bassoon
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 11:13 am

Re: Andrei Tarkovsky

#284 Post by tenia » Wed May 04, 2016 5:33 am

Isn't it what happenned with the Truffaut ?

User avatar
FrauBlucher
Joined: Mon Jul 15, 2013 8:28 pm
Location: Greenwich Village

Re: Andrei Tarkovsky

#285 Post by FrauBlucher » Wed May 04, 2016 6:04 am

With the individual release dates going from May to December, a box set first seems unlikely if Curzon/AE does not want to wait to get them out.

User avatar
Roger Ryan
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 12:04 pm
Location: A Midland town spread and darkened into a city

Re: Andrei Tarkovsky

#286 Post by Roger Ryan » Wed May 04, 2016 12:52 pm

If an on-line trailer can be trusted, the picture quality looks excellent on all of the films...apart from Stalker which seems to have some issues. Hopefully, the trailer excerpts are not indicative of the overall look of that particular film.

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

Re: Andrei Tarkovsky

#287 Post by MichaelB » Wed May 04, 2016 1:11 pm

Stalker has always been massively problematic.

User avatar
StevenJ0001
Joined: Mon May 05, 2008 12:02 pm
Location: Los Angeles

Re: Andrei Tarkovsky

#288 Post by StevenJ0001 » Wed May 04, 2016 2:15 pm

MichaelB wrote:Stalker has always been massively problematic.
It's odd though because I saw a 35mm print of Stalker at LACMA a few years ago and it was beautiful.

User avatar
Roger Ryan
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 12:04 pm
Location: A Midland town spread and darkened into a city

Re: Andrei Tarkovsky

#289 Post by Roger Ryan » Wed May 04, 2016 4:39 pm

StevenJ0001 wrote:
MichaelB wrote:Stalker has always been massively problematic.
It's odd though because I saw a 35mm print of Stalker at LACMA a few years ago and it was beautiful.
My primary concern with the Stalker clips is what looks like odd digital noise. I know I shouldn't take a YouTube video as representative, but the issue doesn't appear during clips from the other films.

User avatar
Steven H
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 3:30 pm
Location: NC

Re: Andrei Tarkovsky

#290 Post by Steven H » Thu May 05, 2016 10:59 am

Does Arrow typically send out review copies before a release date? In other words, what is the likelihood that there will be an early review for me to base a purchase on? Apology and confession: I have not been keeping up with Arrow releases well enough to know this and a good bit of searching the web on my part was inconclusive.

User avatar
swo17
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 10:25 am
Location: SLC, UT

Re: Andrei Tarkovsky

#291 Post by swo17 » Thu May 05, 2016 11:05 am

Assuming you mean Artificial Eye, I think it's hit and miss.

User avatar
Steven H
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 3:30 pm
Location: NC

Re: Andrei Tarkovsky

#292 Post by Steven H » Thu May 05, 2016 11:06 am

swo17 wrote:Assuming you mean Artificial Eye, I think it's hit and miss.
Right, Artificial Eye. Thanks for the information.

Robin Davies
Joined: Sat Sep 22, 2007 2:00 am

Re: Andrei Tarkovsky

#293 Post by Robin Davies » Thu May 05, 2016 1:28 pm

I can't get used to the yellow look of that clip of the jeep in Stalker.
I don't remember it being like that when I saw the film on its initial release. The monochrome scenes were very close to black and white.

User avatar
Brian C
Joined: Wed Sep 16, 2009 11:58 am
Location: Chicago, IL

Re: Andrei Tarkovsky

#294 Post by Brian C » Thu May 05, 2016 6:50 pm

StevenJ0001 wrote:
MichaelB wrote:Stalker has always been massively problematic.
It's odd though because I saw a 35mm print of Stalker at LACMA a few years ago and it was beautiful.
I saw one in Chicago a few years ago, too, and it was gorgeous.

User avatar
StevenJ0001
Joined: Mon May 05, 2008 12:02 pm
Location: Los Angeles

Re: Andrei Tarkovsky

#295 Post by StevenJ0001 » Thu May 05, 2016 10:35 pm

Brian C wrote:
StevenJ0001 wrote:
MichaelB wrote:Stalker has always been massively problematic.
It's odd though because I saw a 35mm print of Stalker at LACMA a few years ago and it was beautiful.
I saw one in Chicago a few years ago, too, and it was gorgeous.
Nice to know I wasn't just imagining how good it looked. So if this new Blu-Ray turns out to be disappointing, it wil be extremely frustrating!

User avatar
Trees
Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2015 4:04 pm

Re: Andrei Tarkovsky

#296 Post by Trees » Thu May 19, 2016 6:58 am


User avatar
Trees
Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2015 4:04 pm

Re: Andrei Tarkovsky

#297 Post by Trees » Mon May 30, 2016 11:13 pm

AidanKing wrote:Like most people here, I have serious reservations about the idea of ranking directors but I do think it's interesting to see how the critical stock of certain directors rises and falls.

I suspect Tarkovsky has retained his status partly because of the relatively small number of his films, the extent which you can identify them as being by Tarkovsky very quickly (style and content, I suppose), the influence cited in Nick James' article and the general sense of a kind of transcendence, but one which seems anchored in an almost tactile materialism (which you can also see in Bresson, Malick and, I think, the Dardennes, for example), which seems very current in 'arthouse' cinema at present (e.g. Alonso, Serra). I was at the London Film Festival showing of The Sacrifice in either 1985 or 1986 (can't remember exactly) and there was a genuine sense of almost reverence which doesn't appear to have diminished in the years since.

Other directors who were very highly regarded at the same time (e.g. Visconti and, possibly, Fassbinder) seem to have fallen in levels of critical regard. I think possibly the use of melodramatic elements in their work doesn't fit as well within the current art film parameters so they could easily come back into fashion at some point.

I wonder why Kieslowski's critical status has changed. There's the same interest in metaphysics and realism, particularly in the later films, but I suppose there is the contrast with the films funded in Poland and a possible loss of cultural specificity when the films became transnational.

For what it's worth, I like all the directors I've cited and wouldn't want to rank them but the issue of why the critical consensus flows up and down for particular directors does interest me.
It seems like time tends to distill only a small handful of masters, based strongly on the merits of their great works. How many Russian writers of the 19th Century were hailed in their time, only to be mostly forgotten since, while Tolstoy, Dostovesky and to a lesser extent Gogol have survived the ages and reign supreme to this day. Perhaps we are just observing the whittling of time in Tarkovsky's case. Perhaps Tarkovsky's films have come to be considered superior works of art, and this has lead to his esteemed reputation remaining intact, or even elevating. Tarkovsky seems to have many of the trappings of an artist who might survive the passing of time and emerge as a figure of note or renown in the pantheon of cinema.

User avatar
Brian C
Joined: Wed Sep 16, 2009 11:58 am
Location: Chicago, IL

Re: Andrei Tarkovsky

#298 Post by Brian C » Tue May 31, 2016 12:07 am

Well, I for one will sure be rooting for him!

Numero Trois
Joined: Sun Sep 20, 2009 5:23 am
Location: Florida

Re: Andrei Tarkovsky

#299 Post by Numero Trois » Tue May 31, 2016 12:49 am

AidanKing wrote:Other directors who were very highly regarded at the same time (e.g. Visconti and, possibly, Fassbinder) seem to have fallen in levels of critical regard. I think possibly the use of melodramatic elements in their work doesn't fit as well within the current art film parameters so they could easily come back into fashion at some point.
In Visconti's case it's probably undeniable that his "stock" has fallen. And definetly not because of melodramatic qualities but the increasing clinical nature of his films as his career wore on. I don't remember much melodrama in The Damned, The Stranger or (ugh) Death In Venice.

I don't buy that Fassbinder's regard has fallen in any respect. Especially considering how much of his work has been made available in the DVD age.
Trees wrote:It seems like time tends to distill only a small handful of masters, based strongly on the merits of their great works.
There is some truth to that, but it's also true that language, cultural biases and (in film's case) technical barriers help impede who gets raised up to the so-called "pantheon." Not every film has been available in every region of the world at all times.

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

Re: Andrei Tarkovsky

#300 Post by MichaelB » Tue May 31, 2016 3:24 am

A case in point being František Vláčil, revered in his native Czechoslovakia/Czech Republic since the 1960s, but whose work was pretty much off limits to non-Czech speakers until less than a decade ago.

Post Reply