Imprint

Vinegar Syndrome, Deaf Crocodile, Imprint, Kino, and more
Post Reply
Message
Author
User avatar
swo17
Bloodthirsty Butcher
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:25 pm
Location: SLC, UT

Re: Imprint

#426 Post by swo17 »

I have a soft spot for 12 Angry Men, having been assigned to watch it in school in lieu of the original. Are you aware Kino put it out on Blu-ray?
M Sanderson
Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2016 7:43 am

Re: Imprint

#427 Post by M Sanderson »

swo17 wrote: Sat Jul 02, 2022 7:41 am I have a soft spot for 12 Angry Men, having been assigned to watch it in school in lieu of the original. Are you aware Kino put it out on Blu-ray?
Sure. I still have one player that is region B locked (it’s a 4k UHD player, which cannot play standard Blu rays outside of my normal region) in one of my residences; so if possible I prefer to get region B titles.

I rented 12 Angry Men back in the video shop days - I also have a soft spot for Friedkin’s late ‘90s version.
User avatar
domino harvey
Dot Com Dom
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 6:42 pm

Re: Imprint

#428 Post by domino harvey »

Imprint titles aren’t Region B, they’re region free
User avatar
PfR73
Joined: Sun Mar 27, 2005 10:07 pm

Re: Imprint

#429 Post by PfR73 »

Right, but the Kino Lorber Blu-ray of the Friedkin 12 Angry Men under discussion is Region A-locked.
User avatar
Maltic
Joined: Sat Oct 10, 2020 5:36 am

Re: Imprint

#430 Post by Maltic »

Heller-Nicholas commentary on Lolita. I bet she'll still get complaints for focusing on the film's sexual politics.
User avatar
dustybooks
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2007 2:52 pm
Location: Wilmington, NC

Re: Imprint

#431 Post by dustybooks »

I haven't seen Lyne's Lolita in years (since a few years after its original release in fact) but I remember it being distressingly humorless in comparison to both the novel and to Kubrick's film. Has anyone revisited it lately?
User avatar
Aunt Peg
Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2012 9:30 am
Location: Sydney

Re: Imprint

#432 Post by Aunt Peg »

dustybooks wrote: Sun Jul 03, 2022 4:30 am I haven't seen Lyne's Lolita in years (since a few years after its original release in fact) but I remember it being distressingly humorless in comparison to both the novel and to Kubrick's film. Has anyone revisited it lately?
I hated Lyne's version when I first saw it and somebody would have to pay big big bucks for me to ever sit through it again.
User avatar
Yakushima
Joined: Mon Dec 01, 2008 5:42 am
Location: US

Re: Imprint

#433 Post by Yakushima »

I loved Lyne's Lolita (was lucky catching it in a theater during its original run) and have almost gave up hope for a Blu-ray. A very different beast obviously than Kubrick's version. Hope it's a shiny new transfer.
M Sanderson
Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2016 7:43 am

Re: Imprint

#434 Post by M Sanderson »

PfR73 wrote: Sat Jul 02, 2022 6:57 pm Right, but the Kino Lorber Blu-ray of the Friedkin 12 Angry Men under discussion is Region A-locked.
Indeed.

I am hopeful Imprint will release more Friedkin titles. Certainly Jade would fit in with the recent trend of releasing “neo noir”. As well as being of value for a fairly tough title to get hold of.
User avatar
therewillbeblus
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2015 7:40 pm

Re: Imprint

#435 Post by therewillbeblus »

domino harvey wrote: Wed May 18, 2022 7:10 pm I actually really enjoyed I Married a Monster From Outer Space, which is transparently a film about domestic abuse hiding behind aliens. It’s incredible how much more effective it is at tackling such an adult and downbeat theme than most contemporary “adult” films
This was indeed very good, though for me it signaled less of a domestic abuse allegory in the traditional sense of that term, than the feeling of being forcibly trapped in a dynamic where one person falls out of love but maintains fixed in the union due to selfish drives. It’s unquestionably meant to be an examination of a gendered dynamic within its specific context: patriarchal emotional abuse perpetrated when the dream bubble of What Marriage Should Be to women is popped as their beaus settle into complacency and refuse to converse or engage to any extent with reciprocal intimacy regarding their wives’ wants and needs. But today this text broadens to include a partner of any gender who will not allow a breakup to occur because they need to feel safe and protected, need financial support, want children in a vacuum no matter who with, not to be ‘alone’, etc. It’s a disturbingly common trend today across demographic spectrums, but for no different reasons: we fear change, and confronting truths that we are with someone who we may not love anymore, or who does not love us back, is terrifying. So terrifying that it’s worth deluding ourselves into whatever narrative we need to hide behind to safely avoid such vulnerability- especially a dangerous thought or feeling that we need to take on alone because our partner is not capable or trusted to hold space to support that disclosure. I loved how the alien husband was willing to openly communicate at a certain point but was unable to hear or internalize a different point of view- as that is in some ways more disturbing for the partner who takes that risk to initiate an uncomfortable topic than a situation where the other party negates the concern. At least the latter would assume there’s a mutually-understood ‘problem’ going unaddressed, and thus dual fear, even if those separate fears are sourced in different, individualized and isolated perspectives. This kind of emotionless response to an emotional one abolishes any opportunity of common ground, two people completely talking past each other, and cements the fatalism of the death of the union as far as the passionate one craves it to be. Anyways, I related a lot to this, just not in the way the film intended to pitch it back in the 50s, and that’s the beauty of recontextualization!
User avatar
L.A.
Joined: Thu May 28, 2009 11:33 am
Location: Helsinki, Finland

Re: Imprint

#436 Post by L.A. »

^ My first purchase from the label, need to watch asap.
User avatar
L.A.
Joined: Thu May 28, 2009 11:33 am
Location: Helsinki, Finland

Re: Imprint

#437 Post by L.A. »

Barabbas (1961) @ Beaver

I have some hope that the Swedish 1953 version also gets a release someday, saw it in 2019 during Easter at a cinema theater and loved it. Nice black and white film.
User avatar
Walter Kurtz
Joined: Sat Jul 25, 2020 7:03 pm

Re: Imprint

#438 Post by Walter Kurtz »

actually what i wanted to say was GONG LI is in this little flick and there's a few GONG LI fanboys around here but there she goes again

more STINK EYE from Liv. No matter what I say these days I always get her goddamn stink eye!
User avatar
Walter Kurtz
Joined: Sat Jul 25, 2020 7:03 pm

Re: Imprint

#439 Post by Walter Kurtz »

PS: That got all balled up because Liv's constant disapproval is very disconcerting. But deepdiscount had Imprint's Chinese Box for $10.86 and we know how many Jeremy Irons fans there are around here!
M Sanderson
Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2016 7:43 am

Re: Imprint

#440 Post by M Sanderson »

L.A. wrote: Mon Jul 11, 2022 6:55 pm Barabbas (1961) @ Beaver

I have some hope that the Swedish 1953 version also gets a release someday, saw it in 2019 during Easter at a cinema theater and loved it. Nice black and white film.
This doesn’t look promising. With Imprint’s penchant for releasing in demand / hard to get films, from older remasters, I wonder if it’s the same as the French release, which was greeted with terrible reviews.
User avatar
L.A.
Joined: Thu May 28, 2009 11:33 am
Location: Helsinki, Finland

Re: Imprint

#441 Post by L.A. »

Dragonslayer (Matthew Robbins, 1981)

Now when can we expect this?
User avatar
swo17
Bloodthirsty Butcher
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:25 pm
Location: SLC, UT

Re: Imprint

#442 Post by swo17 »

October announcements are coming within the day. I'm also being told that as one of their VIP supporters, I'm entitled to a free "James Caan in The Gambler" mug if I order the new bundle. Living my best life over here \:D/
User avatar
ryannichols7
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2012 6:26 pm

Re: Imprint

#443 Post by ryannichols7 »

Save the Tiger (1973) will likely be one
User avatar
swo17
Bloodthirsty Butcher
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:25 pm
Location: SLC, UT

Re: Imprint

#444 Post by swo17 »

Oh, I'm just now seeing this Facebook hint:
Eight brand-new limited editions, including six worldwide firsts to Blu-ray. Mind-blowing performances from Hollywood legends including Sean Connery, Richard Harris, Brooke Shields, Susan Sarandon, Jack Lemmon, and Nick Nolte.
A nuclear apocalypse, insurance fraud, revolting workers, football dissension, red-light photography, precarious sobriety, a Tennessee adaptation and a Fugitive charged.
User avatar
agnamaracs
Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2006 7:13 am

Re: Imprint

#445 Post by agnamaracs »

The China Syndrome?
User avatar
willoneill
Joined: Wed Mar 18, 2009 2:10 pm
Location: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada

Re: Imprint

#446 Post by willoneill »

I assume the Nolte is North Dallas Forty, which would also be a worldwide blu-ray exclusive (I think)
User avatar
therewillbeblus
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2015 7:40 pm

Re: Imprint

#447 Post by therewillbeblus »

Could "a fugitive charged" be The Yards? It'd be a new Caan movie tied to the mug
User avatar
dwk
Joined: Sat Jun 12, 2010 10:10 pm

Re: Imprint

#448 Post by dwk »

Brooke Shields, Susan Sarandon, and "red-light photography" sounds like Pretty Baby.
User avatar
therewillbeblus
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2015 7:40 pm

Re: Imprint

#449 Post by therewillbeblus »

Maybe the Tennessee adaptation is Summer and Smoke, and Sean Connery could be The Rock (apocalypse?) or The Hunt for Red October (red-light photography?)
User avatar
swo17
Bloodthirsty Butcher
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:25 pm
Location: SLC, UT

Re: Imprint

#450 Post by swo17 »

therewillbeblus wrote: Thu Jul 21, 2022 4:13 pm Could "a fugitive charged" be The Yards? It'd be a new Caan movie tied to the mug
I wouldn't take a new Caan release as a given. This is all they said:
The mug features the poster for one of our favourite past releases – The Gambler, starring Hollywood titan James Caan, who we were sad to hear passed away earlier this month.
Post Reply