criterionforum.org

I read on his wiki page that he was rumored to have had a hand in the Dirty Harry script. Can anyone expand on this?

zedz wrote:

Nothing wrote:George Washington [is] little more than [a] poor Malick imitation.

You really need to see Killer of Sheep.

Exactly. And George Washington is not a poor anything. I also remember reading someone's observation somewhere that DGG's film took from both Malick and Harmony Korine. I think that's fair. It certainly evidences a unique fusion of sensibilities.

Killer of Sheep is incredible, and yeah - one more piece of the David Gordon Green puzzle falls into place. It's embarrassing. It's embarrassing when Scorsese steals, when Kubrick steals, etc. I don't understand it. But then Malick himself owes a lot to Klimov's Come and See for The Thin Red Line.

What's interesting to me is how similar Badlands, Spirit of the Beehive and Killer of Sheep are in terms of style or at least approach, yet they were being made by three different first-time directors at entirely different locations around the world. And all are masterpieces. And all three filmmakers have very short resumes.

Wow. Considering Spirit of the Beehive is one of my all-time favorite films and that Killer of Sheep is the best movie I've seen this year, I'll be bumping Badlands to the top of my "to purchase" list.

pauling wrote:Wow. Considering Spirit of the Beehive is one of my all-time favorite films and that Killer of Sheep is the best movie I've seen this year, I'll be bumping Badlands to the top of my "to purchase" list.

It's pretty great. Keep it away from water, though. It's in a snapper.

Very interesting comments about the transfer - I've seen the film in the theater and the colors were markedly more subdued and subtle than the previous DVDs, I wonder if that's what the new disc will look like? Or maybe I just saw a bad, faded print. At any rate, I think it looks better with less vivid colors.

Oh my. I didn't think it was possible, but that blog has made me even more excited for this release.

mogwai wrote:Oh my. I didn't think it was possible, but that blog has made me even more excited for this release.

For sure. Lucky guy to be on nickname terms with Terrence Malick.

Also, confirmation for Mishima! At least I assume that if he mentions that he was working on it, then it's to be released by Criterion.

Wow, I really can't wait to see this. With stories like that, it's much easier to swallow dropping $26 on the dvd.

I hope that we don't see too much bitching about the transfer being "wrong" if it really is "radically" different from the previous Paramount transfer. I wasn't going to but this one (I have never owned the film on home video, in fact) but now I'm thinking about it.

Also, it's great to hear that the Mishima transfer was also supervised by Bailey.

Lee Kline wrote:I told Terry that people were really going to be pretty surprised by this new transfer, since it was such a radical departure from before, but he said it was perfect...

...I had to see it again for myself to make sure we really did everything right, since I was still a bit nervous about how different it was from the old transfer (especially with DVD Beaver around!).

I can hear you people sharpening your knives already.

Matt wrote:I can hear you people sharpening your knives already.

I own no knives.

Person wrote:I hope that we don't see too much bitching about the transfer being "wrong" if it really is "radically" different from the previous Paramount transfer.

Well, hearing any bitching whatsoever about the transfer being "wrong" would be totally absurd. "Terry" was in the room supervising it for three days. End of story.

Now if people want to claim they prefer the old Paramount transfer, that is obviously their right.

jaredsap wrote:"Terry" was in the room supervising it for three days.

Yes, but neither Nestor Almendros nor Haskell Wexler were. I'm not saying anyone will be right to complain, just predicting that they will.

Matt wrote:

jaredsap wrote:"Terry" was in the room supervising it for three days.

Yes, but neither Nestor Almendros nor Haskell Wexler were. I'm not saying anyone will be right to complain, just predicting that they will.

That's what I meant to say, but mangled the statement. It has not been a good week. This film doesn't mean that much to me and I have only seen it once (on TV about seven or eight years ago) and I don't have a frame of reference, so I myself will not have much to say on the new color-"corrected" transfer. But we've been through such arguments before. I can't even remember what my first 'transfer war' was. Been fightin' 'em forever, it seems. The Anchor Bay Divimax of Halloween still keep coming back to haunt me - only last week, someone starting moaning about it, as Anchor weirdly decided to use the 1999 Dean Cundey/Adam Adams color-corrected transfer for their re-re-re-release. Goodness knows why. That one caused too many scars. Look at how hysterical I almost got over the new Taxi Driver transfer! Seeing it for myself on my own hypnobox calmed me down, thankfully; it's a great transfer. With each passing year, the scrutiny that transfers are subjected to gets greater and greater and what was once thought of as a definitive transfer often gets supplanted by an clearly superior transfer. Days of Heaven is clearly a film that is dear to hearts of many due to its breathtaking visual beauty and I would imagine that there are those who have its images embedded in their visual memory, so it is possible that they may be perturbed by the new transfer, though still find it stunning.

So will this transfer be radically different from the new 35mm print that was touring around in the last year or so? I was blown away by the quality of the 35mm compared to the DVD, more than I have been for any film with the exception of Stalker.

I've had a tepid response towards the film but that post is exciting-- easing up on the gold tones will bring new life to these images.

Person wrote:

Matt wrote:I can hear you people sharpening your knives already.

I own no knives.

well then, I suppose dinner at your place is out of the question...

I wasn't originally going to double dip on this release, but after reading that last blog post I definitely get it.

I hope the new transfer was not an act of sabotage...however, it may make a good collector's item if it is! Remember "error" baseball cards?

Not good news, for me. The existing DVD looks great and is very close to the last print I saw. Don't know why anybody would even contemplate fooling with it, including Malick.

When did you last see it projected, and where? Just curious.

Repertory house here in L.A. In the last couple of years, I think.

Why mess with it? The movie's a touchstone of modern cinematography for a reason.

TedW wrote:Don't know why anybody would even contemplate fooling with it, including Malick.

Well, I think if it's been wrong these last few years, then that would be a good enough reason. Sure, Almendros and Wexler weren't there, but surely Malick can be trusted as far as the way his films should look.

TedW wrote:Repertory house here in L.A. In the last couple of years, I think.

Why mess with it? The movie's a touchstone of modern cinematography for a reason.

Dude, Malick didn't "mess" with DAYS OF HEAVEN. The team at Paramount responsible for the original transfer "messed" with DAYS OF HEAVEN.

Think about this: the brand new IP print that Criterion and Paramount struck (thereby creating the only pristine one in existence) is not where the color tweaking happened. It occurred when Malick sat in a room for three days and tried to get the Criterion transfer to look as close as possible to that print.

I've seen DAYS OF HEAVEN twice in repertory theaters, but comparing the prints that were circulating the last decade to the forthcoming Criterion transfer is simply not a worthwhile comparison. You heard it straight from Criterion's mouth: the IP from the 90s looked like crap and the original IP had chemical stains. These are what the circulating repertory prints were struck from.