criterionforum.org

Nothing wrote:One small question: Overall the look of the film appears to be very accurate, and I may be off on this, but I seem to recall that the sequence where Depardieu encounters the devil was much darker theatrically; to the point where one can barely see what is going on for a good 10 minutes or so.

That's certainly my recollection, and one of the things that made it one of the most enthralling, pin-drop sequences in Pialat's cinema, but I'll have to take a look at this disc to confirm. I did consult the Gaumont disc, whose transfer MoC inherited, a while back, but I don't think I looked at this sequence (or noticed anything untoward if I did).

Deeply cinematic imagery like this does present a certain how-much-is-too-much quandary for DVD or BluRay transfer: really, really dark in 35mm is different from really, really dark on your TV. In the theatre, you had to peer into the image to extract the detail; at home, the detail may have been wiped out all together.

This is an interesting subject to me as well, especially since the issue of black levels was supposedly one of the sticking point problems for the distribution of Everett Lewis' great "lost" film An Ambush of Ghosts, for which I have lobbied hard for years. I was told by Robert Shulevitz, the producer of that one, that Ambush's dark palette was outside the legal limits of color contrasts allowed for most US TV sets.

The current corollary would seem to be Philippe Grandrieux's stuff, especially Un Lac.

zedz wrote:Deeply cinematic imagery like this does present a certain how-much-is-too-much quandary for DVD or BluRay transfer: really, really dark in 35mm is different from really, really dark on your TV. In the theatre, you had to peer into the image to extract the detail; at home, the detail may have been wiped out all together.

A case in point: the first part of Lost Highway, specifically the scene where Bill Pullman walks down and emerges from the corridor. I've yet to see a digital transfer that came even a fraction close to what I saw in 35mm, and I'm not convinced it's even technically possible.

I checked out the scene in question last night and I agree with Nothing (mark this day down on your calendars, folks!): it's way too bright compared with what I saw in 35mm a few years back. Trying to think back and clarify exactly what it looked like, it wasn't Lynch-dark (or Duras-dark - thanks Jacques), but more dim, murky, almost like the bulb was failing in the projector. Colours shrunk back and merged, but maintained some distinction, and your eyes had to work harder to decipher the shapes and action. It was a very striking effect, strong enough to mentally mark down as a rare movie-going experience and starkly distinct from any other scene in the film.

The following 'blue' scene at dawn (which may be slightly lighter than theatrical in this transfer as well) came as something of a relief, a slow return to a more recognisable, tangible world after the uncertainties of the preceding one. The rest of the film, from what I quickly glimpsed, looks fine on this disc in terms of colour and brightness.

This issue should not in any way dissuade people from purchasing this magnificent edition of a magnificent film, especially as I don't see anybody else rushing to issue it in a English-friendly version, but you may want to mentally enshroud that particular scene when you view it.

This also seems to be the right time to commend Masters of Cinema for completing their absolutely essential Pialat project. These are among their finest releases and any serious cinephile ought to own them. (Now, how about La Maison des bois. . . ?)

Following on from zedz on that scene, it's also considerably lighter than the Gaumont DVD. Was is a new TK or was it ported and diddled with?

NABOB OF NOWHERE wrote:Following on from zedz on that scene, it's also considerably lighter than the Gaumont DVD. Was is a new TK or was it ported and diddled with?

Very interesting. Any chance you could manage a screenshot from the Gaumont?

zedz wrote:

NABOB OF NOWHERE wrote:Following on from zedz on that scene, it's also considerably lighter than the Gaumont DVD. Was is a new TK or was it ported and diddled with?

Very interesting. Any chance you could manage a screenshot from the Gaumont?

Much as I'd like to oblige I'm a thousand miles away from my copy but I watched it a couple of months back before coming back to Scotland. Maybe some french lads could oblige like tenia or maybe Knappen if he's down south.

I'd be very interested to see a grab of this different Gaumont version! -- I'm pretty certain it will be identical to the MoC.

peerpee wrote:I'd be very interested to see a grab of this different Gaumont version! -- I'm pretty certain it will be identical to the MoC.

Well if memory serves and given I've watched each on different set ups, ( Yours having being up-scaled on my blu player) it does seem lighter than the Gaumont to me.
If it's a direct port without any knob twiddling then it'll have to be put down to this or my addled brain cells but it did occur to me before it was brought up in this thread.

Does your TV have different settings for different inputs? - My Sony Bravia has completely different settings for each input, and each one has to be set independently. My previous Bravia didn't do that.

peerpee wrote:Does your TV have different settings for different inputs? - My Sony Bravia has completely different settings for each input, and each one has to be set independently. My previous Bravia didn't do that.

Yes,coincidentally my new 40 inch Bravia here is full HD played from a Limit whilst my set up in France is the previous HD ready Bravia played from a Linn deck.
I'll play the disc on different settings to see if it makes much difference. Do you have a recommendation?

Every set/model/manufacturer is different and they really need calibrating. There are some good websites though, if you know your model number.

peerpee wrote:Every set/model/manufacturer is different and they really need calibrating. There are some good websites though, if you know your model number.

OK I'll have a root around. Despite this minor controversy, hearty congrats on a sterling performance on all the Pialats. The only occasion I've ever allowed myself the extravagance of a 'double dip' having Criterion and Gaumonts already. If AE'S Van Gogh or Loulou is OOP do you have these in your sights too? As well as what zedz noted re Maison des bois.

Further to the problematic night scene:

There's an alternative ending to the scene in amongst the generous collection of deleted and alternative scenes on the second disc of the set, and the brightness level / colour palette is completely different to the scene as it appears on the first disc and a lot closer to the theatrical presentation. Much, much darker. It's still not 100% accurate - the blacks should be inkier, for example - but that's more down to the limitations of the format than a botched transfer. It will give you a much better idea of how the scene is supposed to look, at least.

This feature also provides a helpful explanation for the striking look of the scene, as Sylvie Pialat explains that it was a day-for-night shoot that ran so late they ran out of day, and so the footage turned out "pitch black". Even allowing for hyperbole, only a blind man could describe the scene as it appears in this transfer of the film in those terms.

That scene didn't seem really "powerful" to me. I thought it would be less cheesy. But it might have been better had the black levels been down a notch on my monitor.

zedz wrote:Further to the problematic night scene:

There's an alternative ending to the scene in amongst the generous collection of deleted and alternative scenes on the second disc of the set, and the brightness level / colour palette is completely different to the scene as it appears on the first disc and a lot closer to the theatrical presentation. Much, much darker. It's still not 100% accurate - the blacks should be inkier, for example - but that's more down to the limitations of the format than a botched transfer. It will give you a much better idea of how the scene is supposed to look, at least.

This feature also provides a helpful explanation for the striking look of the scene, as Sylvie Pialat explains that it was a day-for-night shoot that ran so late they ran out of day, and so the footage turned out "pitch black". Even allowing for hyperbole, only a blind man could describe the scene as it appears in this transfer of the film in those terms.

My inference from this, for what it's worth, was that what appears on the DVD transfer, on both our MoC and the Gaumont editions, is a correction-after-the-fact, digitally bringing the levels to the palette that was initially envisioned.

evillights wrote:My inference from this, for what it's worth, was that what appears on the DVD transfer, on both our MoC and the Gaumont editions, is a correction-after-the-fact, digitally bringing the levels to the palette that was initially envisioned.

Well that's a very slippery slope, since this would be a post-Pialat revision and one completely at odds with the film as it was theatrically presented and with the content of the scene, which is supposed to take place in the middle of a very dark night and indeed commences with the characters remarking on what a very dark night it is. In the transfer it looks like an overcast afternoon (and not even like conventional day-for-night, which, if you really push that inference, is apparently what was intended, if not what was shot). Also, if Sylvie et al. were responding to the same outtakes we're looking at, which seems to be the case, surely they would have remarked on the outtake version being so drastically 'wrong' rather than going "Oh right - the 'pitch black' scene."

I'm afraid the explanation that seems more likely to me is that whoever supervised Gaumont's transfer tried to 'correct' what was an unusually dark scene without checking with anybody who worked on the film and without even noting the first lines of dialogue, which would explain what they were looking at. It almost seems as if they didn't even realise that this was supposed to be a night scene. Basically, I think this is a Do the Right Thing-level botch, but at least it's one that only affects a single scene of the movie.

Beaver

Hmmm, is there something up with the Beaver caps? I don't remember the image looking that average when I watched it on my 52" screen.

evillights wrote:My inference from this, for what it's worth, was that what appears on the DVD transfer, on both our MoC and the Gaumont editions, is a correction-after-the-fact, digitally bringing the levels to the palette that was initially envisioned.

Curious. If you guys have no first-hand knowledge of the theatrical version (Pialat --> film approved; at Cannes, say), you must know people who do, right? Surely there are second opinions about this, e.g. (non-Gaumont) Pialat-philes who were/can be consulted...

Exceptional set again, regardless of what might've happened to the telecine.

The telecine was done by Gaumont and overseen by Serge Toubiana and Sylvie Pialat. It's the identical same telecine that was used for the French release which has been out for a number of years.

peerpee wrote:The telecine was done by Gaumont and overseen by Serge Toubiana and Sylvie Pialat. It's the identical same telecine that was used for the French release which has been out for a number of years.

That's the one we're talking about, no? As in, whatever corrections were made to the scene were made then. (I have no idea, or investment, really, just intrigued by zedz's memory + the contradictory comments made about the scene.)

General note: Don't let the problems with the transfer of this scene prevent you from getting this disc. It's a fantastic package of a fantastic film and you're not likely to find it subbed anywhere else in the foreseeable future (and if you do, they're sure to use Gaumont's transfer as well). But if you ever get the chance to see it on 35mm, don't miss it.

Actually, the same goes for all the Pialats. Many of them might seem like intimist character pieces, but the difference of the experience on the big screen is huge.

zedz wrote:General note: Don't let the problems with the transfer of this scene prevent you from getting this disc. It's a fantastic package of a fantastic film

Just in case I sound like I'm merely nitpicking too: absolutely, ditto.

peerpee wrote:The telecine was done by Gaumont and overseen by Serge Toubiana and Sylvie Pialat.

So neither the director nor the cinematographer (with an over-cautious telecine op thrown in to the bargain, most likely)... The chemical grading, on the other hand, would have been supervised by both Pialiat and Kurant. I don't think there's any ambiguity here, although the fault lies with Gaumont, not MoC, and, as others have said, the scene only lasts a few minutes and people shouldn't be discouraged from seeing one of Pialat's greatest films.

Telecine ops can be very over-cautious in my experience - I can absolutely understand where they're coming from, but in cases where filmmakers are actually present I've noticed the requested changes from initial telecine settings can be quite significant.

It'll be interesting to see if anyone complains that Institute Benjamenta looks greyer and much less contrasty on the forthcoming Blu-ray than it's done on previous releases and some 35mm prints (especially those struck after they'd run out of the obsolete East German Orwo stock that they initially used), but this was very much at the request of the directors and cinematographer, who were present throughout the process and were very clear about this right at the start.