It is currently Mon May 20, 2013 11:35 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Forum rules


Please do not clutter up the threads for MoC titles with information on pre-orders. You can announce the availability of pre-orders in the MoC: Cheapest Prices / Best Places to Buy / Pre-Orders thread. Any posts on pre-orders in any other thread will be deleted.



Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 36 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: BD 42 Rumble Fish
PostPosted: Mon Jul 30, 2012 3:22 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 1:20 pm
Location: New England
Query -- how much of this was actually shot in Tulsa? (Never saw this -- as I recall finding the book pretty annoying).


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: BD 42 Rumble Fish
PostPosted: Mon Jul 30, 2012 3:45 pm 
Dot Com Dom
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:42 pm
pro-bassoonist wrote:
But I do not intend to turn this into a discussion.

Then why post at all (Feel free to apply this query to every post you've made here)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: BD 42 Rumble Fish
PostPosted: Mon Jul 30, 2012 4:06 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 10, 2008 3:29 pm
Location: London
Pro-bassoonist, I haven't seen Rumble Fish in motion but the screengrabs look better than the ones for Two-Lane Blacktop.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: BD 42 Rumble Fish
PostPosted: Mon Jul 30, 2012 4:10 pm 

Joined: Mon Nov 15, 2004 2:47 pm
Location: U.S.
pro-bassoonist wrote:
evillights wrote:
Just a quick word on this —

When we first reviewed the master back in November, we thought it looked acceptable: mostly very clean, and overall quite nice — and we stand by this. DVDBeaver's assessment seems in line with our own, and the frame-grabs they've posted give a pretty accurate representation of the disc.

We're surprised at the take on the video quality of the film over at Blu-ray.com, by this Dr. Svet Atanasov — especially given the high marks he's rated the image quality on a specific few other past titles of ours which comparatively might pose greater challenges to the, shall we say, 'most discerning' assessor. — i.e., Rumble Fish ain't a bad-lookin' disc.

I was sent a link to the above post. I would like to leave a quick comment as well.

1. First, I find the tone of your post extremely disappointing and disrespectful. Especially because I've done so much to promote the MOC label and its output. And not just by writing reviews for its releases. [...] In any event, I am very surprised by the sarcastic reaction the review received here. But I do not intend to turn this into a discussion.

There was absolutely no sarcasm in my post, nor was it "disrespectful" beyond differing from your own take on the master. To reiterate: we simply disagree with your assessment, and have noted that more problematic masters, or at least those we have considered in-house more problematic perhaps on a technical/preservational basis, have received higher marks — which is fine, and shows that we simply have different evaluational criteria between us, and must agree to disagree, and leave it at that.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: BD 42 Rumble Fish
PostPosted: Mon Jul 30, 2012 4:26 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2007 2:11 pm
Location: The hills of East Tennessee
If I may make an independent observation.
evillights wrote:
... by this Dr. Svet Atanasov

This comes across as dismissive and demeaning and seems intentionally so.

evillights wrote:
— especially given the high marks he's rated the image quality on a specific few other past titles of ours which comparatively might pose greater challenges to the, shall we say, 'most discerning' assessor

And this strongly implies that Svet is unworthy of the sobriquet "most discerning".

evillights wrote:
There was absolutely no sarcasm in my post, nor was it "disrespectful" beyond differing from your own take on the master.

Finally, this is just disingenuous.

Disclaimer: I have zero interest in this particular film or any review of it. I don't know Svet personally, so I'm not responding from that perspective. And I own the vast majority of MoC's DVD and BD catalogues and consider myself a supporter of their efforts.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: BD 42 Rumble Fish
PostPosted: Mon Jul 30, 2012 6:20 pm 

Joined: Thu Aug 26, 2010 11:47 pm
For fuck's sake.

DRAMA QUEENS!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: BD 42 Rumble Fish
PostPosted: Tue Jul 31, 2012 5:42 am 
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2008 5:09 pm
Location: Edinburgh, UK
How does Svet arrive at the overall score of 2.5 for the entire disc? The film itself, sound & extras get high marks so I'd have thought that the final score would have been higher than 2.5 even if he thinks that the image is compromised.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: BD 42 Rumble Fish
PostPosted: Tue Jul 31, 2012 6:36 am 
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2005 12:30 pm
Location: Athens of the North
imhotep wrote:
For fuck's sake.
DRAMA QUEENS!

Some useful info
http://www.zedge.net/ringtone/1210369/


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: BD 42 Rumble Fish
PostPosted: Tue Aug 07, 2012 5:56 am 
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 2:24 pm
Location: Teegeeack
more like Grumble Fish


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: BD 42 Rumble Fish
PostPosted: Tue Aug 07, 2012 3:14 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Fri Aug 11, 2006 6:20 pm
Location: Worthing
It's not MoC's best Blu-ray by a long shot, but the transfer was better than I'd been led to believe by the Blu-ray.com review - I think the Beev slightly exaggerates its virtues, but what I saw is certainly closer to their description.

It's certainly the best I've seen it look since I last saw it in 35mm - and it improves on the 35mm prints in one important respect, as the shots of the red and blue fish are no longer quite so jarring because to achieve the effect in 35mm, colour film had to be spliced in at the appropriate point, changing the entire quality of the image, including the black-and-white portions. (Schindler's List suffered from a similar problem, and I suspect that too will look better on Blu-ray).

Also, though I'm normally a 5.1-remix sceptic, I have to say that I rather liked the surround track here: the strong separation of the various elements of Stewart Copeland's percussive score makes the film seem even more stylised, which is a definite plus*. (But the original cinema track is also included for purists).

(*It's even more of a plus if you last saw the film at London's long-defunct Scala Cinema, which could only manage lo-fi mono!)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: BD 42 Rumble Fish
PostPosted: Fri Aug 31, 2012 4:18 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 7:33 pm
Just received two of these today. Whoops, looks like I pre-ordered the steelbook twice. Can't wait to screen it tonight.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 36 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: med


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group




This site is not affiliated with The Criterion Collection