criterionforum.org

Why the weird aspect ration of 1.75, and not the normal 1.78, 1.66, or 1.85?

1.75 actually was a thing, back in those days. For instance, see A Hard Day's Night.

Remember in the fifties, you had a variety of options for the soft widescreen (matting top and bottom portions of a projected 35mm film) due to theatre sizes. I also remember seeing that 1.75:1 was common for British theatres (which I know doesn't quite explain why it was chosen for this title).

(Speaking of aspect ratios, my theory for why Europeans tended to go for 1.66:1 ... if it was the supposedly the widest you can project in a pre-existing theatre, then it was a reason to go wide and still keep the old theatre houses and therefore not renovate them.)

Just about every ratio under the sun was tried out between 1953 and 1955, so 1.75:1 isn't unusual, but for this film there is historical documentation suggesting 1.85:1 as the intended AR. When asked why Criterion had gone 1.75:1 instead I believe they said they felt it was best following "an examination of the materials".

EddieLarkin wrote:Just about every ratio under the sun was tried out between 1953 and 1955, so 1.75:1 isn't unusual, but for this film there is historical documentation suggesting 1.85:1 as the intended AR. When asked why Criterion had gone 1.75:1 instead I believe they said they felt it was best following "an examination of the materials".

If it was a "shoot and protect" situation, I could imagine the 1.75:1 is a nice in between among the widescreen aspect ratios (1.33:1 was never an option for this one).

Probably because it was a compromise between 1.66 and 1.85, 1.75 was popular in Hollywood for a while -- notably at Disney and MGM (MGM called it Metroscope). Not sure if Universal used it as a rule. I thought they were more inclined to go with 1.85 or 2:1.

If this is indeed getting announced, I would have to imagine that they will add new supplements. It definitely deserves more than what's on the DVD edition

They sat on the Blu for years to only produce one new special feature? Classic Criterion

I was gonna say, if this is the same transfer that was released in France (which I assume it is), don’t expect anything revelatory. Baffling it’s taken this long.

Random thing I just noticed: The new Acting for Douglas Sirk feature is an excerpt from a 1980 documentary by Eckhart Schmidt, whose follow-up was this madness:

Well color me intrigued, Der Fan rules

I'm sure this will be very similar

Hey, maybe it's an obsessive avant-garde doc forecasting the themes of his fictitious work

Will this also replay the same song over and over for 100 minutes?

soundchaser wrote: Mon Nov 15, 2021 6:51 pm I was gonna say, if this is the same transfer that was released in France (which I assume it is), don’t expect anything revelatory. Baffling it’s taken this long.

I don't think it will be. The French master was in a 2.00 aspect ratio and the video clip on Criterion's site is in a 1.85 aspect ratio; plus, the caps don't really show the harsh digital look that was present on the French disc.

swo17 wrote: Tue Nov 16, 2021 5:34 am I'm sure this will be very similar

The doc was on Eureka's "The Tarnished Angels" and it's pretty straightforward. It is sad seeing an obviously ill Rock Hudson during his interview bits.

ChunkyLover wrote: Tue Nov 16, 2021 2:34 pm The doc was on Eureka's "The Tarnished Angels" and it's pretty straightforward.

Ah, but it takes on a whole new feel when you realize that the interview subjects were being held against their will!

soundchaser wrote:I was gonna say, if this is the same transfer that was released in France (which I assume it is), don’t expect anything revelatory. Baffling it’s taken this long.

I suspect that the master used in France is an old High def one that wouldn't be stated as a 2K restoration per Criterion's usual wording.

We'll have to agree We'll have to disagree then.

Are the clips and stills on the Criterion website usually taken from the new edition? The one for Wind looks pretty good, to my eye, great grain. Maybe not "revelatory", but a massive step up from the DVD.

Just announced as part of the Wexner Center Cinema Revival Festival For feb 2022:
https://wexarts.org/film-video/written-wind

The site listing says the Lee Klien will introduce the film before it's showing (does not specify if this is pre-recorded, or zoom or in-person). The technical spces is that what will be shown is 4k Newly restored from the original 35mm Technicolor camera negative by The Criterion Collection. Special thanks to Universal Pictures.

The 4K listing must be an error as the blu is being sourced from a 2K restoration.

James Luckard took caps for Blu-Ray.com and they're not watermarked like the official ones are. The Criterion disc looks marvelous.

What is Luckard referring to when he says people dislike VLC player (as opposed to Media Player Classic)?

Maltic wrote: Thu Feb 03, 2022 3:37 pm What is Luckard referring to when he says people dislike VLC player (as opposed to Media Player Classic)?

I just wish I could get the hack working that allows Blu-rays to be played on VLC. (But I guess that’s a question to the “Technical Issues” topic.)