Who Gives Good Commentary?

Discuss North American DVDs and Blu-rays or other DVD and Blu-ray-related topics.
Post Reply
Message
Author
User avatar
Monterey Jack
Joined: Fri Jan 12, 2018 1:27 am

Re: Who Gives Good Commentary?

#351 Post by Monterey Jack » Tue Feb 23, 2021 10:52 pm

Bey Logan did a number of wonderful commentaries on the defunct "Dragon Dynasty" DVD label, sadly much of which isn't available on Blu. These were enthusiastic, well-researched and engaging.

User avatar
Maltic
Joined: Sat Oct 10, 2020 1:36 am

Re: Who Gives Good Commentary?

#352 Post by Maltic » Wed Feb 24, 2021 12:59 am

At least a dozen of Logan's commentaries can be found on YouTube. He'll often use the film merely as a jumping-off point for talking about the HK industry in general, but yeah, it's well-informed and engaging.

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

Re: Who Gives Good Commentary?

#353 Post by MichaelB » Wed Feb 24, 2021 4:41 am

He certainly used to be a benchmark for the quality of his research and the inclusion of info that you simply couldn’t find anywhere else in English - and a major reason why I turned down Eureka’s Mr Vampire is that I knew I’d never be able to match that level of engagement or come anywhere close.

I love the film and have done for decades, but personal enthusiasm isn’t enough - with commentaries in particular, I think people should stay firmly inside their comfort zone. They’re so demanding in terms of overall word count and detailed engagement (unless you favour lengthy digressions into issues only tangentially related) that if you’re ultimately not up to the task it becomes painfully obvious.

Orlac
Joined: Tue Apr 14, 2009 4:29 am

Re: Who Gives Good Commentary?

#354 Post by Orlac » Wed Feb 24, 2021 8:44 am

Logan was very much my introduction to audio commentaries. The recent revelations about him actually stung me a bit, as I had corresponded with him in the past, and was so used to his voice, it was like finding out something bad about an old friend.

I do recall a gag backfiring on his original Fist of Fury commentary where he points to an random white-haired Caucasian extra as a young Steve Martin! He then apologised for that on the Platinum Edition commentary five years later!

The "new " Logan on some of the recent BDs is Mike Leeder but he is much sloppier in terms of research - getting actors and locations mixed up. On his recent Shaolin Wooden Men commentary, he makes about half a dozen references being made in Korea when in fact it was made in Taiwan. When he says "these extras don't look Korean", I went "Gee, I wonder why?"
Last edited by Orlac on Wed Feb 24, 2021 8:59 am, edited 1 time in total.

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

Re: Who Gives Good Commentary?

#355 Post by MichaelB » Wed Feb 24, 2021 8:56 am

I don't know this for certain, but I wouldn't be at all surprised if his well-publicised (and indeed Harvey Weinstein-connected) #metoo problems have made current labels fight shy of licensing his stuff, as he's recorded a Mr Vampire commentary in the past that presumably would have been easy enough to get hold of.
Orlac wrote:
Wed Feb 24, 2021 8:44 am
The "new " Logan on some of the recent BDs is Mike Leeder but he is much sloppier in terms of research - getting actors and locations mixed up.
That's why I wouldn't personally take on a Hong Kong title, despite being a fan of HK cinema for nigh on forty years - I don't speak and can't read Chinese and have never been to Hong Kong, and so would be totally reliant on other people's research presented in English, and of course if it's inaccurate I most likely simply wouldn't notice. And while I've certainly made tiny mistakes in my own stuff (show me a commentator who hasn't), the risk of making huge and glaring ones in a situation like this is far too great.

Orlac
Joined: Tue Apr 14, 2009 4:29 am

Re: Who Gives Good Commentary?

#356 Post by Orlac » Wed Feb 24, 2021 9:47 am

MichaelB wrote:
Wed Feb 24, 2021 8:56 am
I don't know this for certain, but I wouldn't be at all surprised if his well-publicised (and indeed Harvey Weinstein-connected) #metoo problems have made current labels fight shy of licensing his stuff, as he's recorded a Mr Vampire commentary in the past that presumably would have been easy enough to get hold of.
88 Films was commisioning new commentaries from him for their Shaw Brothers releases until the news broke. I expect if that hadn't happened, 88 and Eureka (and maybe Criterion) would have retained his old HKL commentaries for their Golden Harvest titles.

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

Re: Who Gives Good Commentary?

#357 Post by MichaelB » Wed Feb 24, 2021 11:22 am

Very likely indeed, I'd have thought. Unless the licensing fees were unrealistically high (which sometimes happens - put it like this, you don't see Criterion commentaries ported over to other labels very often), why reinvent the wheel unless there's a pressing reason for doing so?

beamish14
Joined: Fri May 18, 2018 3:07 pm

Re: Who Gives Good Commentary?

#358 Post by beamish14 » Thu Feb 25, 2021 1:01 pm

Another one of my absolute favourite directors to listen to is Keith Gordon, who is just so incredibly articulate, passionate, and informative when speaking over his films Waking the Dead, Mother Night, The Chocolate War, etc. He's also a pleasure to see in interviews, as indicated by his discussions on Indicator's Birdy and All That Jazz. He used to be a frequent contributor to the Kubrick usenet group, and I had a few lively discussions with him there, including taking him to task on why he changed author Robert Cormier's ending for his film on The Chocolate War (although I've come around to what he did and completely believe he made the right choice; interestingly, during an on-camera interview included with said film, he mentions the criticism he received from people online, so I like to imagine he's referring to our interaction!).

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

Re: Who Gives Good Commentary?

#359 Post by MichaelB » Thu Feb 25, 2021 1:37 pm

Oh, he's terrific - as you say, we've hired him as an on-camera appreciator on a number of Indicator releases (Birdy, Blue Collar and Missing), and he's always given superb value.

User avatar
Monterey Jack
Joined: Fri Jan 12, 2018 1:27 am

Re: Who Gives Good Commentary?

#360 Post by Monterey Jack » Thu Feb 25, 2021 1:47 pm

Gordon also did a delightful commentary with John Carpenter on Christine. He's also contributed great on-camera interviews for that film as well as Dressed To Kill and even Jaws 2.

beamish14
Joined: Fri May 18, 2018 3:07 pm

Re: Who Gives Good Commentary?

#361 Post by beamish14 » Thu Feb 25, 2021 2:03 pm

Monterey Jack wrote:
Thu Feb 25, 2021 1:47 pm
Gordon also did a delightful commentary with John Carpenter on Christine. He's also contributed great on-camera interviews for that film as well as Dressed To Kill and even Jaws 2.
MichaelB wrote:
Thu Feb 25, 2021 1:37 pm
Oh, he's terrific - as you say, we've hired him as an on-camera appreciator on a number of Indicator releases (Birdy, Blue Collar and Missing), and he's always given superb value.

It's a credit to the immense number of special features on Indicator's discs that I completely forgot that he was on Blue Collar and Missing! I have seen the Jaws 2 interview, and he did enhance my appreciation of it. I need to listen to all the commentaries on Kino Lorber's Blu-Ray of the limited series Wild Palms, which has Gordon speaking over the 2 episodes he helmed. There is also a commentary from Phil Joanou, who's also made highly enjoyable commentaries on his films Three O'Clock High and State of Grace.

User avatar
Ovader
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 1:56 am
Location: Canada

Re: Kino Lorber Studio Classics Acquisitions

#362 Post by Ovader » Fri Feb 26, 2021 9:24 am

Maltic wrote:
Fri Feb 19, 2021 9:00 pm
Adrian Martin had an article last year about life as an audio commentator and the future of commentaries in an age of streaming. I read it at some point, but it's behind a paywall now, unfortunately.

A veteran of DVD and Blu-ray extras laments the decline of this particular form of cinephile expression, and calls out the current state of play.

He says you'll often have just a few weeks to prepare and record the commentary, from the time you get the assignment.

FWIW, he makes a distinction between what he calls cinephile commentaries and cult commentaries, respectively.
Martin has made his essay available to read on his website. He addresses the criticism of his essay at the beginning of the piece.

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

Re: Who Gives Good Commentary?

#363 Post by MichaelB » Fri Feb 26, 2021 9:56 am

Just to respond to this passage...
A case in point: how about a halfway decent match-up of films, directors or genres with the people out there who are genuine experts on them? We’ve reached an anything-goes situation in which filmmakers even vaguely assimilable to “cult” cinema and its circuits of fan appreciation – Buñuel, Bergman, Godard, Jodorowsky, Chytilová, Borowczyk, Melville, Pasolini, you name it – automatically get the down-home treatment. I often have the sense that some disc producers are simply unaware of the best writings (and thus potentially the best contributors) out there, including those that are easily accessible online.
Although the question that he then proceeds to ignore (or, more likely, quietly elide) is to ask how many of these outstanding scholars would be up to the task of recording a commentary given all the various timing and budgetary constraints, plus of course the deeply peculiar nature of the medium itself. As a highly experienced commentator himself, Adrian knows full well that it demands a highly unusual skillset, and plenty of outstanding writers either won't touch commentaries at all or will do it once but never again.

The Scott Eyman piece that I linked to above is still one of the best I've read about the often dramatic differences between producing scholarly writing and creating a scene-specific 90-minute-plus commentary. I've hired commentary debutants (from the day I was first given commissioning powers, I made a point of hiring newcomers for whatever medium I've had the power to commission for, as I strongly believe in giving people similar breaks to ones that I've enjoyed myself), and while some discoveries turned out to be naturals, others decidedly weren't - I've already mentioned the guy who started noticeably running out of material after twenty minutes (if that), and his credentials as a scholar/researcher were precisely along the lines that Adrian's calling for. And I've just remembered someone who's unquestionably one of the leading scholars when it comes to one of the filmmakers that Adrian singles out (and with multiple books on that particular topic to prove it), but whose first commentary was less than enlightening, with far too much unnecessary description of what was happening onscreen. Which, again, illustrates the difficulties people have in adjusting to the commentary medium, no matter how impressive their qualifications going in.

Incidentally, thus far Indicator's Columbia Noir boxes are making a point of using a different commentator for each and every title - including Adrian, as it happens - and it's been fascinating working with the end results, because the approaches have been so diverse. Most of the contributors are known to be safe pairs of hands, but there've also been at least two debutants thus far.

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

Re: Who Gives Good Commentary?

#364 Post by MichaelB » Thu Oct 14, 2021 6:07 pm

MichaelB wrote:
Mon Feb 22, 2021 2:37 pm
hearthesilence wrote:
Mon Feb 22, 2021 2:44 pm
That reminds me of a funny story I heard about one commentary track. I want to say it was for a mob-related film based on a real-life figure - I'm not 100% sure which one, but regardless, whoever they got 1) refused to reign in his language and 2) made wild accusations about everyone portrayed in the film. The producer sent the commentary transcript to the studio, and sure enough, they returned it all marked up in red (which is kind of amusing in itself - it probably looked like Sonny Corleone after his stop at the toll booth). The producer freaked out because it was close to the deadline and the studio was more or less asking for a lot of dead air. I forgot how they got around it.
I've never had this issue with a commentary I've commissioned/edited...
I have now! I can't name the film as it hasn't been announced yet, but for the first time ever I've had to provide not just a recording but also a full transcript for rightsholder approval prior to disc authoring - and six minutes of it wasn't approved, because in discussing the development of the script we identified people who'd made uncredited contributions, and the rightsholder's legal department wasn't happy with this. Fortunately, I was able to record a fresh six minutes on an entirely different topic, splicing in my commentary partner (who lives 200 miles away) going "Yeah" and "Mm-hmm" via snippets lifted from elsewhere in the recording (this was with his enthusiastic approval), so it's still going to be a continuous commentary track - but I've known other instances where deletions under similar circumstances haven't been replaced, with the film soundtrack being faded up at those points.

We were also warned in advance which topics were off limits - anything mocking or negative about either the film or any of the people involved, any reference to negative reviews or disappointing box office, and we weren't even allowed to quote anyone without their explicit written permission, even if the quotation would normally fall well within the standard legal definition of "fair dealing" (for instance, a couple of lines of a review), unless the written material was unarguably in the public domain - and of course this had to be demonstrated, not merely asserted. But if you know all that going in, it's much easier than having to fix things later.

User avatar
soundchaser
Leave Her to Beaver
Joined: Sun Aug 28, 2016 12:32 am

Re: Who Gives Good Commentary?

#365 Post by soundchaser » Thu Oct 14, 2021 6:08 pm

Clearly it's for the Ishtar redux.

User avatar
Maltic
Joined: Sat Oct 10, 2020 1:36 am

Re: Who Gives Good Commentary?

#366 Post by Maltic » Fri Oct 15, 2021 10:17 am

MichaelB wrote:
Thu Oct 14, 2021 6:07 pm
MichaelB wrote:
Mon Feb 22, 2021 2:37 pm
hearthesilence wrote:
Mon Feb 22, 2021 2:44 pm
That reminds me of a funny story I heard about one commentary track. I want to say it was for a mob-related film based on a real-life figure - I'm not 100% sure which one, but regardless, whoever they got 1) refused to reign in his language and 2) made wild accusations about everyone portrayed in the film. The producer sent the commentary transcript to the studio, and sure enough, they returned it all marked up in red (which is kind of amusing in itself - it probably looked like Sonny Corleone after his stop at the toll booth). The producer freaked out because it was close to the deadline and the studio was more or less asking for a lot of dead air. I forgot how they got around it.
I've never had this issue with a commentary I've commissioned/edited...
I have now! I can't name the film as it hasn't been announced yet, but for the first time ever I've had to provide not just a recording but also a full transcript for rightsholder approval prior to disc authoring - and six minutes of it wasn't approved, because in discussing the development of the script we identified people who'd made uncredited contributions, and the rightsholder's legal department wasn't happy with this. Fortunately, I was able to record a fresh six minutes on an entirely different topic, splicing in my commentary partner (who lives 200 miles away) going "Yeah" and "Mm-hmm" via snippets lifted from elsewhere in the recording (this was with his enthusiastic approval), so it's still going to be a continuous commentary track - but I've known other instances where deletions under similar circumstances haven't been replaced, with the film soundtrack being faded up at those points.

We were also warned in advance which topics were off limits - anything mocking or negative about either the film or any of the people involved, any reference to negative reviews or disappointing box office, and we weren't even allowed to quote anyone without their explicit written permission, even if the quotation would normally fall well within the standard legal definition of "fair dealing" (for instance, a couple of lines of a review), unless the written material was unarguably in the public domain - and of course this had to be demonstrated, not merely asserted. But if you know all that going in, it's much easier than having to fix things later.
That's funny

You'd think such film maudit factors would be part of the appeal for fans of the film today... and that the rest of the world wouldn't care one way or the other

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

Re: Who Gives Good Commentary?

#367 Post by MichaelB » Fri Oct 15, 2021 10:45 am

Maltic wrote:
Fri Oct 15, 2021 10:17 am
You'd think such film maudit factors would be part of the appeal for fans of the film today... and that the rest of the world wouldn't care one way or the other
I can't comment on Ishtar, but the issue with the film that I recently recorded a commentary for was that although it dates from the last century, virtually everyone involved is not only still alive but still working - and of course may work again with the rightsholder. And of course it's their film and their rules - some rightsholders clearly aren't bothered (which, happily, has been my experience the vast majority of the time), but others very much are.

User avatar
Maltic
Joined: Sat Oct 10, 2020 1:36 am

Re: Who Gives Good Commentary?

#368 Post by Maltic » Fri Oct 15, 2021 5:12 pm

That makes sense when it comes to "mocking the people involved," arguably less so when it comes to references to negative reception on initial release (a matter of public record anyway). But yeah, it's their IP

Curious as to how you handled the "nothing negative about the film" requirement, but I guess we'll have to wait and see (hear) :)

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

Re: Who Gives Good Commentary?

#369 Post by MichaelB » Fri Oct 15, 2021 5:28 pm

Maltic wrote:
Fri Oct 15, 2021 5:12 pm
Curious as to how you handled the "nothing negative about the film" requirement, but I guess we'll have to wait and see (hear) :)
That restriction was actually quite stimulating, as it's a film that has never been particularly highly thought of - but because we were banned upfront from mocking it, that forced us to delve rather deeper, at which point we discovered that there was actually quite a lot there worth taking seriously.

User avatar
Maltic
Joined: Sat Oct 10, 2020 1:36 am

Re: Who Gives Good Commentary?

#370 Post by Maltic » Fri Oct 15, 2021 6:41 pm

As I recall, I only ever listened to one mostly negative commentary - Lem Dobbs, Julie Kirgo, and Nick Redman on Eureka's Khartoum release ("Lawrence of Arabia knock-off" etc.)

John McTiernan cringes a lot in his commentaries, though, about things he would've done differently :D
Last edited by Maltic on Sat Oct 16, 2021 3:53 pm, edited 1 time in total.

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

Re: Who Gives Good Commentary?

#371 Post by domino harvey » Fri Oct 15, 2021 6:54 pm

Richard Schickel dissed Preminger and the film itself on his Whirlpool track. And going with the same star, the little twerp from Leave Her to Heaven criticizes Gene Tierney’s acting, oblivious to the fact that her perf is iconic and no one ever heard of him and his actor’s studio

User avatar
colinr0380
Joined: Mon Nov 08, 2004 4:30 pm
Location: Chapel-en-le-Frith, Derbyshire, UK

Re: Who Gives Good Commentary?

#372 Post by colinr0380 » Sat Oct 16, 2021 1:29 am

The best example is probably the critic's commentary tracks over The Matrix Reloaded and Revolutions. After pretty much unanimously praising the first film (apart from the relatively "boring" real-world bits) Todd McCarthy, John Powers and David Thomson go on to mercilessly rip into what they found wrong with the sequels including the great, perfectly timed "Who?" puncturing of the cliffhanger shot at the end of Reloaded. But they do it in such an entertaining way that it has meant that I have watched the Matrix sequels many more times than I ever would have otherwise!

The Wachowskis provided a little contextual note on the critics and philosophers commentaries on that initial DVD collection, stating that they included a generally positive philosopher's commentary and a negative critics one, but if they had the space they had wanted to also do a generally negative-leaning philosopher's commentary and a generally positive-leaning critics track too, so there would be a full range of voices. I think that was a great moment of showing confidence in their film (and being able to push through such a thing on a major studio produced boxset), recognising that even being discussed negatively was still having your film discussed in some form or other rather than being ignored, and that people even mocking some aspects of the film can be entertaining too as well as provide their own perspectives that may lead in a fruitful direction! But of course we are talking about the "too big to fail" Matrix films here which can take negativity in its stride, rather than the seemingly relatively obscure and apparently already negatively received film that probably needs all the help it can get that MichaelB is talking about.

I think that also ties in with domino's comment too, about subjectivity and objectivity in comments: if you are saying how something is objectively poorly done, that can be bad enough in itself, but when you get into casual comments about actors and how good/bad they are or were in their role it becomes a lot about the commentator too and their proclivities. Which can be helpful if the commentator acknowledges their bias and the listener can do what they will with that information and slotting it into the bigger picture of the commentator's interests and tastes (for an example of how this can work the other way too, you are pretty much never going to get anything but the most positive comments from Mark Kermode on The Exorcist, The Wicker Man or Local Hero, even if others may potentially have reservations, so he'd be the obvious go-to guy to talk about them because you know its a pretty safe bet that he's not going to surprisingly turn around after decades of being a vocal supporter and shockingly say how terrible the films now are, or something equally out of leftfield. Though maybe he'd have some tangential comments on Exorcist II, Gregory's Two Girls or The Wicker Tree that would need to be cut out? But I would assume that if he had such opinions he would probably tactfully skirt around them unless forced to tackle such films head on!), but I can see why it can be frowned at if its just personal foibles being presented as cold, hard 'truths'.

Maltic's comment reminded me of the amusingly feisty commentary between Lem Dobbs and Steven Soderbergh on The Limey! And one of the best 'duelling commentaries' is probably Cannibal Ferox in which the director Umberto Lenzi is upbeat and positive about the film whilst (recorded separately) actor Giovanni Lombardi Radice is amusingly scathing about how much he hates the film, and particularly the animal violence.

I suppose one of the issues with being so candid, as much as I appreciate it when people are (if there is nothing else to talk about of interest to skirt around the issues if they possibly can), just by acknowledging the flaws (that may nevertheless be glaringly apparent with anyone with eyes to look!) it invites a general audience expecting everything they watch to be of a certain level of competence to say "Hey, I just spent $30-50 on this deluxe Blu-ray/UHD boxset and now you are telling me all these films are bad?!". Which sadly may lead to certain films dropping out of the public eye altogether. But I suppose it also explains why that one guy was quickly, amusingly, shushed upon asking why anybody would have paid money for the DVD on that Border Radio commentary track!

(I paid money for the Border Radio disc, and don't regret it!)
Last edited by colinr0380 on Fri Dec 24, 2021 3:51 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Mr Sausage
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 9:02 pm
Location: Canada

Re: Who Gives Good Commentary?

#373 Post by Mr Sausage » Sat Oct 16, 2021 4:46 pm

I remember the Dalton Trumbo commentary on Spartacus being highly, tho’ informatively, critical of the film at many points, including slagging off Tony Curtis in his totality as an actor. Trumbo was pretty down on Douglas as well. Of course the text was not written to be a commentary, but it was effectively repurposed as one by Criterion.

User avatar
dustybooks
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2007 10:52 am
Location: Wilmington, NC

Re: Who Gives Good Commentary?

#374 Post by dustybooks » Sat Oct 16, 2021 5:08 pm

domino harvey wrote:
Fri Oct 15, 2021 6:54 pm
Richard Schickel dissed Preminger and the film itself on his Whirlpool track.
Schickel also seems to really dislike, or at least to be wholly unimpressed with, A Tree Grows in Brooklyn. I’m frankly surprised that Eureka felt that track was worth porting. I understand he’s similarly thorny on his Rebecca track which I could never bring myself to listen to.

To answer the original thread’s question, I’ve been catching up on the kevyip and greatly enjoyed John Fricke’s track for Meet Me in St. Louis (recorded for the old two-disc DVD and transferred to WAC’s blu), which was much more extensive and interesting than I expected. Hugh Martin is such a delightful interview, I love hearing clips of him.

User avatar
colinr0380
Joined: Mon Nov 08, 2004 4:30 pm
Location: Chapel-en-le-Frith, Derbyshire, UK

Re: Who Gives Good Commentary?

#375 Post by colinr0380 » Sat Oct 16, 2021 5:18 pm

Mr Sausage wrote:
Sat Oct 16, 2021 4:46 pm
I remember the Dalton Trumbo commentary on Spartacus being highly, tho’ informatively, critical of the film at many points, including slagging off Tony Curtis in his totality as an actor. Trumbo was pretty down on Douglas as well. Of course the text was not written to be a commentary, but it was effectively repurposed as one by Criterion.
And those Trumbo script notes were praised by Kirk Douglas for being frank and incisive about the movie. Even if he did not act on them!

Post Reply