criterionforum.org

Also in the new Kino catalog, was brief mention of Raoul Walsh's Regeneration coming to DVD. It was also listed as coming on DVD in last year's catalog. This film is in poor shape, but I would be interested to see what else could be done with it. Though sadly, I doubt Kino will put much effort to this release.

Derek Estes wrote:Also in the new Kino catalog, was brief mention of Raoul Walsh's Regeneration coming to DVD. It was also listed as coming on DVD in last year's catalog. This film is in poor shape, but I would be interested to see what else could be done with it. Though sadly, I doubt Kino will put much effort to this release.

It's already out from Image, paired on a disc with Young Romance.

Rufus T. Firefly wrote:
It's already out from Image, paired on a disc with Young Romance.

I actually have this one already, but I would love to a better representation. I don't know how much better the image could look, surely not much, but the possibility of maybe a commentary would be interesting. I'm a huge Raoul Walsh fan, and I'm always excited about his films getting more attention. We'll see what Kino has in store.

Anyone know the story on the Mother and Son release? I've already got a Fox Lorber DVD that I don't have any serious grievances with.

zedz wrote:
[I don't know about the Crowe story, but the film is brilliant, far more adult and sophisticated than virtually anything else being produced at the time (and Stiller was producing sophisticated comedies for adults as far back as Love and Journalism in the mid-teens), so definitely a key influence for Lubitsch. I find the modernity of these domestic comedies far more impressive than the (admittedly wonderful) spectacle of an epic like Sir Arne's Treasure. Now where are those Sjostroms?

Kino's last catalog had announced a forthcoming DVD of the restored Sjostrom/Gish "SCARLET LETTER" which has now disappeared-- not a trace of this forthcoming release in the new catalog.

And keep bugging Mulvaney for THE PHANTOM COACH/CHARIOT, as Janus presently owns the rights. These are the two most likely candidates for home viewing in the immed future.

Kino's getting on my nerves lately with their snicking the $ from converting their PAL sources to NTSC-- on silents it's particularly crucial for image quality to at max levels. Can you believe these guys are enhancing for 16x9 non-progressive transfers which exhibit combing? .

Once I mined Kino for the sum of their early cinema, my purchasing screeched to a near halt over the past couple of quarters (save for one-shot gems like Avant Garde, Edison, Blue Bird)

Derek Estes wrote:Also in the new Kino catalog, was brief mention of Raoul Walsh's Regeneration coming to DVD. It was also listed as coming on DVD in last year's catalog. This film is in poor shape, but I would be interested to see what else could be done with it. Though sadly, I doubt Kino will put much effort to this release.

The film, aside from areas of nitrate decomposition, is actually quite crisp & clear (especially considering it's age) as it's an otherwise very good 35mm original release print discovered intact aside from a reel or two with a few yards of decomp. The main problem with the VHS (I have it) is they cropped the crap out of the thing in telecine. You can thank Sheperds telecine wizard (uh that would be sarcasm) Bret Hampton for that, no doubt (anyone see the old Kino VHS of WAY DOWN EAST?.. friggin guy turned a beautiful pristine original tinted 35mm print into a goddam widescreen!!). It's about as bad as the MGM VHS of the otherwise beautiful & complete print of Vidor's THE CROWD.

HerrSchreck wrote:Once I mined Kino for the sum of their early cinema, my purchasing screeched to a near halt over the past couple of quarters (save for one-shot gems like Avant Garde, Edison, Blue Bird)

Me too. I cut back my buying from them to almost zero (except in special cases like the Edison box) and no longer blind buy any of their titles. In fact, I find myself waiting for months after the release of a particularly unusual title to see if a superior version will be released in another region. I now check to see if they are working from NTSC or PAL material before buying anything -- even then you can get generally substandard fare (like the Wong Kar-wai box, several of the South Korean releases).

I do feel sort of conflicted about this. On the one hand, I really would like to support them as they, and Milestone (equally guilty of similar quality control issues), are about the only distributors that would even bother to release some of the minor and silent titles out there (Lorna Doone, Man Who Laughs, The Blot, Chess Player, etc.). But my sympathy completely evaporates whenever I read in a newsgroup their complaints of having too small a margin to essentially worry about quality (here I'm referring mainly to the prohibitive expense of making new NTSC masters from PAL sources, however the problems are wider than this). Kino is a business. It trades on an image of being a distributor of quality films for a specialized audience. But more and more I'm reading in places like this that their core audience is growing tired of the disrespect paid to the presentation of the films. It isn't only the money.

I get a sense that they are still looking at the market as if it were the late 1990s when just "getting product out" was good enough. The existence and proliferation of multiregion DVD decks, online bootleg dealers, websites that review and compare multiregion DVD releases, and new distribution companies like Masters of Cinema are indicative of the fact that consumers are not satisfied with product that is just put out there -- they want, and will pay for, a choice.

dmkb wrote: I do feel sort of conflicted about this. On the one hand, I really would like to support them as they, and Milestone (equally guilty of similar quality control issues), are about the only distributors that would even bother to release some of the minor and silent titles out there (Lorna Doone, Man Who Laughs, The Blot, Chess Player, etc.).

I get a sense that they are still looking at the market as if it were the late 1990s when just "getting product out" was good enough. The existence and proliferation of multiregion DVD decks, online bootleg dealers, websites that review and compare multiregion DVD releases, and new distribution companies like Masters of Cinema are indicative of the fact that consumers are not satisfied with product that is just put out there -- they want, and will pay for, a choice.

You took the words right out of my mouth, man. You articulated the problem precisely on this. My way into film, and my primary cinematic love first & foremost will always be the best of silent cinema-- the warped atmosphere of the German, some French & Soviet silents are to me the purest expression of the poetic potential of cinema, a potential later regained by some of the more resonant sound-era masters distributed in the CC. So Kino will always have a special place in my heart (and a gigantic place in my collection). I watched the evolution of the market-- watched VHS collections appear, to DVD's. Saw and enjoyed the sad state of trading of tv-taped VHS's and VHS's of 16mm wall projections(!) to get ones hands on stuff from atrophied Lang & Murnau to Bresson & Tarkovsky. There was a point in the late 90's early 2000's where one WORSHIPPED THE GROUND KINO WALKED ON, was so glad and amazed there were guys like Donald Krim, Shepard, Bret Wood, Brownlow, Douris, etc, tracking down the best & complete elements of silent films (plus bizarro rare early talkies like 1929's ALIBI). Even Criterion's laserdiscs (and first DVD's, some anyhow) were of no better quality (they used Shepard prints/Bret Hampton's telecine for a number of their releases i e Last laugh & Nanook).

What is is that has changed the playing field for ECLECTIC CINEMA, one has to admit, is Criterion's DVD line. This sucker just got so incredibly amazing so fast it made one's head spin. Even the majors can't match their quality with gazillion-dollar budget smash hit releases. Warners beiing the only major who sort've consistently matches. Clearly the Beckers as well as their associates have invested tremendous amounts of money in their own proprietary mastering technology, whereas Kino usually revert down to Atlanta's CinePost when they do their own telecine (rare).

Kino seems a little adrift right now, a little lost on the technology highway trailblazed by the Beckers operation. They're clearly catching on a little late to the fact that they are going to lose an audience just as fanatical as CC's-- that technology is changing, that machines these days are not just put it in and play it, it looks the same from machine to machine. That cinephiles-- especially the younger generation which is admittedly a little hyperfanatical with issues of transfer technology issues which cloud their primary enjoyment of a film (back in the old days if someone had a copy of THE OLD DARK HOUSE or Leopold Jessner's HINTERSTEPPE, even if it was a video of a wall with a 16mm print projected on it, you rejoiced over the idea of simply watching the fucking thing)-- these cinephiles are going to take these issues seriously enough that they will not buy what they consider an insulting effort.

It bugs me that they're falling by the wayside like this. Why in god's name wouldn't they pull a CC and drop their old FAUST, for example, once such a superior restoration became available. Or Last Laugh, for that matter. It makes one feel like there's a lack of comradeship between company and buyer. One gets the sense between Criterion's owners & consumers that the producers want the consumers to view the absolute best print possible under the best possible transfer environment. I think if Kino were to pay more attention to technology they would cultivate a far deeper loyalty way into the future and insure the blind buys. That Kino passed LILIOM off on their loyal consumers was a horrible slap in the face.

They need to wake up and realize this isn't the years prededing the90's: people are not simply AMAZED THE PRODUCT HAS BECOME AVAILABLE. I do sympathize that Kino has to maintain a larger inventory than CC, and that they represent a far more bizzaro/obscure catalog, and that CC almost never delves in silent cinema and (slightly politically incorrect) Wiemar & WW2 German cinema, sticking with known & globally celebrated Cannes-awarded product (even some of their more obscure titles... i e CRanes Are Flying, still a Palm D'Or)...

Ah Kino, I want to sympathize-- help me to! Get back to your roots! Get me a nice 35mm restored DIE STRASSE (1923), BACKSTAIRS (1921), JOYLESS STREET (1924), RASKALNIKOV (23), WARNING SHADOWS (22), OPIUM (1919), SHATTERED (1921), NEW YEARS EVE/SYLVESTER (192S), TORGUS... some Gerhard Larmprecht i e SLUMS OF BERLIN, and o so so so much more.

How is LORNA DOONE, anyhow? I snapped up the amazing BLUEBIRD immed. But silent westerns... not my specialty.

Question to anyone in the know--

What's the score with Flicker Alley's PHANTOM? Touted as "available Fall 05."

ps-- THE CHESS PLAYER-- what a film. Just goes to show that in the right hands, silent cinema can "do" historical melodrama quite well. I'm stunned, actually, that CC hasn't delivered us the "restored" Napoleon yet. That's just the sort of prestige piece I thought would just magically appear on their coming soon list.

What's the score with Flicker Alley's PHANTOM? Touted as "available Fall 05."

Giving in to impatience, I sent them a polite e-mail less than a month ago to ask whether Phantom had been delayed and if they could give a ballpark estimate of when it could be expected. I received no reply whatsoever. Maybe if more people ask about it they'll spill some news.

I'm very wary of Kino's product, Lilliom being the main cause. And, I might not even care so much about the quality of the product they produce, if the price point wasn't so high. The prices on their discs are as high as one might have expected 7 years ago, but now if I'm paying close to $30 for a disc, it had better look like there has been an effort made to the release. I would love to support Kino, but until there is a positive change in quality, I will be forced to spend my money elsewhere.

Derek Estes wrote:I'm very wary of Kino's product, Lilliom being the main cause. And, I might not even care so much about the quality of the product they produce, if the price point wasn't so high. The prices on their discs are as high as one might have expected 7 years ago, but now if I'm paying close to $30 for a disc, it had better look like there has been an effort made to the release. I would love to support Kino, but until there is a positive change in quality, I will be forced to spend my money elsewhere.

Bingo. Some of their low-rent, extras free releases are tiered higher than the low-end Criterions which is just unacceptable. I was just in an FYE here by Radio City and their DVD's were all starting at 29.99. I saw their JEKYLL HYDE which is on their site for aroound 15.99 on the shelves for 30 bucks-- same for SHE, STRANGE IMPERSONATION, BEHIND LOCKED DOORS, etc... all titles I want but would never pay 30 bucks for.

I usually would go up to their offices and buy from them in person capitalizing on sales-- I used to be up there every week years ago. This year I havent even been up there. Mail ordered & retailed the EDISON & a few silents.

Gregory wrote:

What's the score with Flicker Alley's PHANTOM? Touted as "available Fall 05."

Giving in to impatience, I sent them a polite e-mail less than a month ago to ask whether Phantom had been delayed and if they could give a ballpark estimate of when it could be expected. I received no reply whatsoever. Maybe if more people ask about it they'll spill some news.

Yeah, I just sent them another email myself. I used my work email which end with "@NBCUniversal" on the address, so maybe it'll jog out a response. If I hear something I'll let you know here. Please do the same if you hear first. I've been waiting for that Murnau Foundation restoration to come out for years-- the wait is completely fucking agonizing.

Graf Orlok

HerrSchreck wrote:[I'm stunned, actually, that CC hasn't delivered us the "restored" Napoleon yet. That's just the sort of prestige piece I thought would just magically appear on their coming soon list.

As I understand the story, Coppola claims to own the US rights to Napoleon, and only wants to release it in the truncated version with his old man's score. Meanwhile the European rights have reverted to Gance's estate and there is some woman who was involved with Gance who claims ownership of his films. We may have to wait until said parties die before there is a DVD release of the latest restoration with Carl Davis's score.

HerrSchreck wrote:What's the score with Flicker Alley's PHANTOM? Touted as "available Fall 05."

Delayed to Feb 06 due to some new extras which became available, according to Barrie Maxwell's column at The Digital Bits.

Has anyone seen Koki Mitani's "Welcome back MrMacdonald"? Any comments on the film and the disc? (it's hard to find locally for rent, I am wondering whether I should buy "blind")

thanks

kazantzakis wrote:Has anyone seen Koki Mitani's "Welcome back MrMacdonald"? Any comments on the film and the disc? (it's hard to find locally for rent, I am wondering whether I should buy "blind")

I think you should buy it. The disc, as I recall, is serviceable. I am pretty sure it's 1.85 (letterbox) and I think it was a little soft, but definitely watchable. The film is an absolute wonder of a screwball comedy. I'm telling you, if Hawks would have had this script in 1935, it would have been remembered as one of the greats!

Early releases in 2006 will include The Overture from Thailand and 2 sets of Paramount shorts - Cavalcade of Comedy (16 shorts, 1929-1933) and Robert Benchley and the Knights of the Algonquin (14 Shorts, 1928-1941).

Rufus T. Firefly wrote:

HerrSchreck wrote:What's the score with Flicker Alley's PHANTOM? Touted as "available Fall 05."

Delayed to Feb 06 due to some new extras which became available, according to Barrie Maxwell's column at The Digital Bits.

Duly noted-- thanks.

I just pulled this sucker off my shelf today and watched it for the first time in 11 months. Film never ceases to amaze me. My god is APPLAUSE a great film, an astonishing directorial debut. When you think of Mamoulians first run of films it's just about as fine a run of back to back to back melodrama in all it's various guises as one can find. He reminds me of Welles in the nature of his career in that his genius didn't require any time for polish, practice & perfecting-- he just landed into a major studio with a blaze spewing lava in all directions, then the fire tempered a bit downward, rather than increased, as time went on... the decline however due in both cases to very different reasons of course.

But MAN what a run of introductory features, each entirely seperate & distinct in genre than the other. Kubrick is noted for rarely repeating genres-- look at Mamoulian's first few films:

APPLAUSE (29), CITY STREETS (31), JEKYLL & HYDE (32), LOVE ME TONIGHT (33). He'd follow with SONG OF SONGS & QUEEN CHRISTINA (which don't interest me as much)... plus the rest of his long and well-known career. But what an incredible burst of initial cinematic creativity, from the genre-defying sort've musical APPLAUSE (to those who've seen it... I may be wrong but I think the reappearance of the sailor-boy Tony at the end of the film was a last minute studio add-on to try and slightly brighten what has to be up there ranking among the very grimmest endings to any mass-market film), the gritty & gangly (and with touches of near-avant garde montage) CITY STREETS (Ah, young Sylvia Sidney)... The definitive JEKYLL HYDE... LOVE ME TONIGHT... Here you have a guy just starting out in film, dipping his toes in major, wildly diverent genres... hardboiled gangster dramas, expressionist-burlesque-with-some-songs (for want of a better APPLAUSE genre), horror, and full-blown musical comedy-- and dropping the kind of landmark masterpieces striven for (mostly unsuccessfully) by longtime practitioners, every time.

Here's to the jaw-dropping early career of Mr. Rouben Mamoulian *>clink<* =D>

In Kino's email they highlight a "Christmas gift" for their patrons.

This holiday season we're offering you something special -- and it's
absolutely free. As a recipient of our newsletter we're telling you first.

For the first time, we have put up a high-resolution film of "A
Christmas Carol" one of the earliest versions of the Dickens classic.
The movie can be easily played and is available in a variety of
formats (including iPod!).

http://www.kino.com/video/giftreg.php" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I haven't watched it yet (will tonight) but I'd guess it would be:

"A Christmas Carol (10 mins. 1910. Edison Film Manufacturing Corp. From the novel by Charles Dickens)"

that is collected on Kino's "A Christmas Past," films from 1901-1925.
http://www.kino.com/video/item.php?film_id=632" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Actually, I just found this while downloading it:

A Christmas Carol
Directed by J. Searle Dawley Adapted from the story by Charles Dickens. Cast: Marc MacDermott (Scrooge). © 23 December 1910; released 23 December 1910. From Kino's DVD, "A Christmas Past"
American producers were already making Christmas films in the late nineteenth century. As the motion picture industry gained in size and stability, many companies made their release an annual ritual. The Edison Manufacturing Company offered The Night Before Christmas in December 1905, The Little Girl Who Did Not Believe in Santa Claus in December 1907 , A Street Waif's Christmas (released 18 December 1908), A Gift from Santa Claus (released 17 December 1909), and A Christmas Carol (released 23 December 1910). ). In fact, the Essanay Motion Picture Company had already turned Dickens' story into a film back in 1908. This Edison picture was the second film adaptation of the Christmas classic (though the earliest version to be extant).
Back in 1910, critics already held strong and divergent opinions about many of these films. Even within a single newspaper or trade journal, there could be sharp disagreement. A regular reviewer for Moving Picture World praised A Christmas Carol to the limit:It is Dickens' story put into motion pictures and so cleverly reproduced that the characters actually live before one. There is Scrooge at his office, lacking the spirit of Christmas, abusing those around him and refusing to contribute for the benefit of those who are in need. Then comes the vision and the change and the working out of the principle features of the story so plainly that whether one has read the original or not there will be no difficulty in understanding the picture. It is one of the best releases of this company for a long time. The actors have caught the spirit of the selection and have interpreted the characters with rare fidelity. The visions and the ghost of Marley are produced in a more visionary way than usual, making them appear much more ethereal. In truth, it would be difficult to suggest any improvement for this excellent film. And released before Christmas, it may exert an influence upon someone besides Scrooge, who has failed to imbibe the spirit of the season. (MPW, 7 January 1911, 32.)All well and good. This rather modest costume drama was shot entirely inside the Edison Bronx studio. It was chiefly up to the talented Marc MacDermott as Scrooge to keep moviegoers attentive.
Part of this critic's enthusiasm, however, may have been due to the fact that two weeks earlier, Thomas Bedding, a columnist for Moving Picture World, had taken a rather Scrooge-like attitude toward the film, noting:
Chiefest credit for something seasonable rests, it must be conceded, with the Edison Company, who propose releasing a film dealing with the subject of Dickens' "Christmas Carol." "The Christmas Carol," as every student of Dickens knows, is a pretty and human story, and though written for English people, will probably appeal to American sentiment. Pathe's have a subject called "Sunshine in Poverty Row," which explains itself. It is another picture of the Christmas Carol type.
...Are not "Christmas Carols," "Poverty Rows," and other sentimental themes dealt with sufficiently in the magazines and in everyday life without presenting them as entertainment? We think they are. That is why, in expressing disappointment with the Christmas efforts of the film manufacturers, we venture to offer them a suggestion. It is this: that next year an attempt be made to adopt different themes, more of the merry-making order. ("Christmas on the Screen," Moving Picture World, 24 December 1910, 1459.)Too much criticism and Edison might have finally pulled its advertising. In truth Edison films from the period from mid-1908 to 1910 were generally received unfavorably, though the company made an impressive rebound in 1911.
Well if your family Christmas dinner is like mine- a dangerous place to discuss the Iraq War, the Federal deficit, or President Bush's latest Supreme Court nominee- watch Edison's A Christmas Carol. Then, if you're still awake, debate its pros and cons. Is this a Red State or a Blue State kind of movie? Even in 1910, they weren't quite sure.Charles Musser, Yale University.

Does this indicate a potential move towards "video on demand" or whatever legally downloaded films are called? And are the video and audio quality as good as potential hd/blu-ray/holographic technology?

Is Kino the first "boutique" label to offer something like this?

davidhare wrote:Have to agree with Gary it's a disgrace these weren't done progressively. Scarlet Street's cover even states "remastered in High Definition." And the print is excellent. I have foudnn for the handful of us with upscaling players, the judderiness in the transfer disappears if you upscale to 720p (but NOT 1080i).

The UK print source of House however is much more ragged and really cries out for a video restoration.

And they keep charging premium dollars for these!

I know this subject is sorta old news, but David-- speaking of Kino Langs-- did you happen to have your trust in this once company-of-comrades blown to pieces with the DVD release of LILIOM? I used to go up there and buy directly from them in person at least once a week until I exhausted the best of their silents & wierd shit like FACE IN THE WINDOW, ALIBI, Lupino's NOT WANTED, etc... then LILIOM came out and floored me with insult.

I've lately made a psychological distinction between Kino & CC:

CC go to great lengths to put together spare-no-expense best possible editions that THEY THEMSELVES CONSIDER DREAM EDITIONS FOR THEIR OWN SHELVES. Each release has a great psychological sense of buildup-tension discharge, owing to the knowledge we all have about how much work, love, obsession, global scouring for elements/extras, and lots of blood sweat & tears (not to mention funds) went into each release.

Kino do not. They give us what they themselves would not settle for in their own libraries. You cannot tell me that Bret Wood & Donald Krim (& Sheperd too, though he's working more & more with Image nowadays) slap on these non-pre-converted PAL-ghosted versions of SPIONE, FRAU IM MOND, METROPOLIS, NOSFERATU on in their own DVD player's? Never in a million years. You just know they throw the original, progressive Murnau-Stiftung versions. Do you in a million years think Kino or Sheperd would actually sit down & watch-- let along pay thirty dollars for-- their release(s) of VAMPYR (Kino did the VHS release of the Image disc)? They would never dream of it-- so why should we? Why leave it out there to continue driving new enthusiasts nuts? It's a flat out lack of respect & comradeship. Kino to this day still sells LILIOM for a full $30 (currently on "sale" for $22 with not even a disclaimer about the image quality, nary a "as the last known element surviving for this title comes from a TV videotape, a vhs-to-disc low res transfer, far below usual standards, was used. We ask you to bear with us and make allowance for the poor image quality on this presentation of an otherwise most interesting film from a master filmmaker".

But nope-- presented along with the rest of their restored Langs without comment, as though of equal image clarity, at full price with no extras.

That is a lack of comradeship-- and respect-- with their customer-base.

Well, they are certainly out of touch with current video standards. Or, they have the attitude that the MAJORITY of their customers aren't aware of, or can't see what is wrong technically, and chalk it up to these "old" films. The other independant companies dealing in this niche of the market are no better... one can only hope that if and when HD becomes reality, that someone smells the coffee.

Having said that.... sometimes when I think of the super-crap VHS that I suffered with on most of the titles coming out now (even as a Laserdisc consumer, the pickings were slim and prices high), I think something of a reality check is in order. There's NO excuse for a piece of crap like "Liliom", and some of Kino's earlier discs are from some very ratty video masters (although connecting the IMAGE "Vampyr" disc to Kino NOW seems a real stretch), but I'll certainly rent many Kino discs, and be grateful that they issue what they do, because Criterion does not, and will not issue the vast majority of these titles. I've waited for a long time to see Fritz Lang's "House by the River", and I find the disc perfectly decent for what it is. To imagine that such a niche title is going to get the budget for digital restoration as a Criterion release is simply wishful thinking. Do you want it released? I do, and the disc is good enough for me to get from it what I need. It looks fine on my Sony "32 XBR CRT set... just keep it away from the larger digital sets. I was rather surprised to see Gary's "no thanks" conclusion to his review.... I would have emphasized the fact that we have a first release of a film that has been nearly impossible to see. In any case, it's probably from the best source material out there, and it's not poor in my opinion.

As to the high prices, I don't know. Yes, we have a right to expect more technical savvy for their prices. $25 would seem to me a better price point to be in step with the market. Certainly we're not going to get Warner or lower prices for such stuff, unless we're descending to Alpha/Madacy level thievery. Seeing this kind of thing virtually kill independent reissued in the CD market (European rip-off reissues that steal some one else's transfer work and sell it in "bargain" priced issues to kill sales on the original higher priced issue), I'm wary of it.

unclehulot wrote: I've waited for a long time to see Fritz Lang's "House by the River", and I find the disc perfectly decent for what it is. To imagine that such a niche title is going to get the budget for digital restoration as a Criterion release is simply wishful thinking. Do you want it released? I do, and the disc is good enough for me to get from it what I need. It looks fine on my Sony "32 XBR CRT set... just keep it away from the larger digital sets. I was rather surprised to see Gary's "no thanks" conclusion to his review.... I would have emphasized the fact that we have a first release of a film that has been nearly impossible to see. In any case, it's probably from the best source material out there, and it's not poor in my opinion.

It may look fine on your CRT, but that's because interlaced discs look okay on interlaced sets.

Many, many folk have progressive sets these days -- and all laptops/computers are progressive. Kino dropped the ball by not mastering progressively, and I think it's perfectly acceptable to bitch about a new HD transfer of a film not being progressive.

What we're talking about here is incompetence. It's literally the flick of a switch in the encoding process, to ensure that an HD master gets converted progressively. Sometimes there are other issues, but the *cost* of doing this properly is negligible.

peerpee wrote:

unclehulot wrote: I've waited for a long time to see Fritz Lang's "House by the River", and I find the disc perfectly decent for what it is. To imagine that such a niche title is going to get the budget for digital restoration as a Criterion release is simply wishful thinking. Do you want it released? I do, and the disc is good enough for me to get from it what I need. It looks fine on my Sony "32 XBR CRT set... just keep it away from the larger digital sets. I was rather surprised to see Gary's "no thanks" conclusion to his review.... I would have emphasized the fact that we have a first release of a film that has been nearly impossible to see. In any case, it's probably from the best source material out there, and it's not poor in my opinion.

It may look fine on your CRT, but that's because interlaced discs look okay on interlaced sets.

I didn't say it was interlaced, but I should have clarified that point. I do run it in progressive mode with the appropriate player. I recognize all the combing we're all annoyed about on numerous discs, I'm just saying it's a BIT more forgiving on CRT, and I didn't find this disc that bad. Of course, we all have the right to complain when the current state of the technology, to say nothing of the future, is not dealt with correctly. I think what I'm saying is, Kino fumbles on the 1 yard line regarding progressive flagging and PAL to NTSC conversion, but I don't find the lack of the nth degree of digital picture scrubbing for debris that big of a deal, IF the source material is good enough in the first place.

Forgive me if this is the wrong place to ask the question, but does it follow from Nick's comment (that interlaced discs look okay on interlaced sets but not on progressiove sets) that I should be cautious about upgrading lest I render much of my existing DVD collection unwatchable? I have a B&O CRT which must be interlaced and a player built into it that I'm sure is not progressive. I watched Scarlet Street and it looked fine. I had been quite worried after seeing Gary's screen caps, but I couldn't see the combing. I too would like to see House by the River, but have been put off by the review. Perhaps it would look fine on my set-up.

HerrSchreck wrote:You cannot tell me that Bret Wood & Donald Krim (& Sheperd too, though he's working more & more with Image nowadays) slap on these non-pre-converted PAL-ghosted versions of SPIONE, FRAU IM MOND, METROPOLIS, NOSFERATU on in their own DVD player's? Never in a million years. You just know they throw the original, progressive Murnau-Stiftung versions. Do you in a million years think Kino or Sheperd would actually sit down & watch-- let along pay thirty dollars for-- their release(s) of VAMPYR (Kino did the VHS release of the Image disc)?

HerrSchreck, I sympathize with your frustration and agree with your condemnation of indie labels that drop the ball when it comes to fully exploiting new technology. But based on his work during the past three years, I think we need to dissociate David Shepard from the rest of these people. Since early 2002, I've been mostly pleased with his releases through Image. He must have finally come to his senses that he was dealing with a new set of parameters where DVD was concerned. His releases of Bed and Sofa and The Parson's Widow, for example, rank among my favorite disks of 2004.

That's not to excuse Shepard's truly awful releases of Vampyr and Berlin: Symphony of a Great City (with its horrid non-progressive transfer) or his half-assed work on Dr. Mabuse and Nosferatu (and his continued unwillingness to revisit either title to correct what he got wrong). Nor is it to excuse the self-righteous attitude and willful blindness to the shortcomings of his work, which were so much in evidence in 2000-01. (So much so that they've always left a slightly sour taste in my mouth that I don't think I'll ever quite get over.)

But Shepard has been shaping up in ways that Kino (and New Yorker, while we're at it) has not. (I'm hoping that Dennis Doros over at Milestone will follow suit. Some of Milestone's titles are still hit-and-miss when it comes to the whole PAL-->NTSC thing. But they seem willing to admit mistakes/shortcomings and revisit older titles, as I hope they will for I Am Cuba soon.) Thus why Kino can't alter its mindset is beyond me.

unclehulot wrote:Do you want it released? I do, and the disc is good enough for me to get from it what I need. It looks fine on my Sony "32 XBR CRT set... just keep it away from the larger digital sets. I was rather surprised to see Gary's "no thanks" conclusion to his review.... I would have emphasized the fact that we have a first release of a film that has been nearly impossible to see. In any case, it's probably from the best source material out there, and it's not poor in my opinion.

I couldn't, respectuflly and amicabaly disagree more with the basic thrust of your argument. Why is Kino not viewed by us as down in the dumps with Madacy & Alpha? Because they put in the money and effort to make 'a project' out of titles that are FAR MORE OBSCURE than House By The River, for god's sakes. The other houses run an at-hand home-collector 16mm thru telecine & slap it out there and expect a sale, because the average consumer will say "old film, naturally will look bad." Kino has conditioned us to not expect such a thing and developed long term loyalty. I'd always marvel over the past few years at how well the silent market seemed to be doing-- every month was another restored obscure title.

These non-preconverted titles we're debated here are simple cost-cutting detours from Kino's normal route, which is to do their normal, USA NTSC telecine. All their Griffiths, new tranfers for Fairbanks, Waxworks, and so so so many more are done the right way. These non-preconverted German (Murnau, Lang, Golem) titles are situations where previous European PAL masters, already restored by a (FWMS) third party, were viewed as opportunities to bring an expected great seller to market with very low overhead.

Let me say something about "obscure titles" that we should be 'glad to see out to begin with.' We can divide this bboard into sections. I would say a very goodly sized chunk of the souls here are of a younger generation who are encountering the titles in the Criterion Collection for the first time they see them in the "coming soon" zone of the site... though I know we'd get old & die before most fessed up & admitted that. Where is an 18 yr old from a midwest suburb going to encounter Mizoguchi, Bresson, or even Melville? I'm born & raised in NYC and even here there are very few retailers who sell the CC. People are following along with the collection as it advances, and sinking a fortune into a totally blind buy because they expect a "great" film, lovingly done.

These kids pick up ONIBABA on a blind-buy and the next day they're talking "hole metaphors" with mom & pop. That's a wonderful trust and loyalty that the boys at Janus have fostered. It takes a lot of balls to sink a fortune into some of the films they have. They struck a few hundred RUBLEV discs to start. They unwavered in their belief that there would be a payoff in these titles-- and it worked.

Kino were/are the same thing for all of us silent film maniacs (me, me!). As I, um, was not alive in the 20's I explore and learn by HAVING THEM DO IT FOR ME, aside from exchanging ideas via literature and freinds in biz, and seeing the rare retrospective. They are slipping, by trying to cheat on some very key titles. Look at Tooze's METROPOLIS screen caps. Differences like that knock the wind out of me. Get a fucking print of the thing and run it through the gate normally yourself like you always do. Or collaborate with a third party restorer archive-- in Kino's case Eastman, Sheperd, Douris, MoMa-- and share the overhead, and profits.

I love Kino's collection more than the CC's, by the way-- but I'm a lunatic for silents.

PS-- I think they're suffering from a bloated inventory for films like LOVE THE HARD WAY, certain docs, and VHS's that they don't know what to do with. Their inventory is gigantic, and they rarely take titles oop.

tryavna wrote: But based on his work during the past three years, I think we need to dissociate David Shepard from the rest of these people. Since early 2002, I've been mostly pleased with his releases through Image. He must have finally come to his senses that he was dealing with a new set of parameters where DVD was concerned. His releases of Bed and Sofa and The Parson's Widow, for example, rank among my favorite disks of 2004.

That's not to excuse Shepard's truly awful releases of Vampyr and Berlin: Symphony of a Great City (with its horrid non-progressive transfer) or his half-assed work on Dr. Mabuse and Nosferatu (and his continued unwillingness to revisit either title to correct what he got wrong).

Parson's Widow was lovely, but he fiddled with (as he does quite often-- see him turn WAY DOWN EAST into nearly widescreen?) the AR a bit. (My problem with VAMPYR by the way was not the black subtitle overlays but his butchering the image in telecine by hemming the gate over about 20% of the frame all round... I get mad quite often because I still am forced to put the damn thing ON often, there being no release of Korber's VAMPrestoration uh, yet). On BERLIN, 2 out of 3 images are ghosted so it's literally impossible to focus on anything that moves-- jitter hell.

Note-- the current NOSFERATU dvd from Kino is NOT the Film Preservation Assoc version which sported the same purplish-black title on Kino previously. It is a fully restored print from the FWMStiftung.