Jacques Rivette

[tenia]

There is a Cohen Media rep that posts in the Blu-ray.com Cohen Media thread and the posters have told them that they don't have to use that method to force the subtitles and they just don't care. (It also is completely baffling that no other US label has to force subtitles on releases of French films except for Cohen Media.)

I don't think it's a matter of caring, but of technical savviness. While interestingly, Jeanne la pucelle had a dedicated sub stream, I suspect the relevant people at Cohen just don't know enough to do the difference (or realising there's one) between forced and burnt-in subs. In any case, more suited people should handle this area of responsability instead.

[mhofmann]

There is a Cohen Media rep that posts in the Blu-ray.com Cohen Media thread and the posters have told them that they don't have to use that method to force the subtitles and they just don't care. (It also is completely baffling that no other US label has to force subtitles on releases of French films except for Cohen Media.)

I don't think it's a matter of caring, but of technical savviness. While interestingly, Jeanne la pucelle had a dedicated sub stream, I suspect the relevant people at Cohen just don't know enough to do the difference (or realising there's one) between forced and burnt-in subs. In any case, more suited people should handle this area of responsability instead.

They used to have PGS stream subtitles until about a year ago. Since then, pretty much all of their foreign (or at least French-language) releases have had burned-in subtitles.

Completely agree that this is malpractice and these releases should not be supported.

[therewillbeblus]

It really is "unfortunate" that a better company did not get the rights to these Rivette films.

I disagree, it's very fortunate that a company did and decided to prioritize English-friendly blu-ray releases of some of his best work that've been commercially unavailable in this form stateside. Given some of the 'no-brainer classic' titles Criterion sits on for years and years, I'm glad a company without so many agendas grabbed them instead. Both Gang of Four and Love on the Ground look great, and Criterion hasn't exactly been a model in the special features dept for a while, so the fixed subs feel like a first-world problem (and more sensible a choice for a U.S. release to fix English subs than a U.S./U.K. release of Fucking Amal to offer only one subtitle option for U.K.-specific jargon in its climax). What other U.S. company would've been more ideal?

[senseabove]

Since Cohen is pretty well the only US company burning subtitles in these days... basically any of them? And given that there was six-and-a-half year gap between the announcement that Gang of Four would be the first release and its actual release, I don't know that they're exactly worthy of high praise for timely releases.

As someone who pretty regularly puts on familiar films in languages I don't speak and turns off (or hides—thanks, Panasonic/Oppo!) subs so I can pay attention to the image and camerawork without the textual distraction, burning in subtitles is pretty well an automatic disqualification.

In the meantime, I'll be holding out hope Radiance gets ahold of these for a little while, and if the French releases start to look OoPish, I'll just import them and rip the ones without English subs to play back with an external file. All else being equal, I'll always opt for a disc with no subs than one with burned subs.

[therewillbeblus]

All fair points, and we all have our personal preferences/tics when it comes to these things. I shouldn't have minimized the importance this could have for some when also taking significant issue with the jargon of subtitle text on a movie I feel strongly about just last week

[Michael Kerpan]

Sorry TWBB, Burned-in subtitles on modern releases is just a non-starter. It's inept and unprofessional. The work of a company that doesn't really care about a basic quality issue. Even minor companies wouldn't make this sort of "mistake" in this day and age. It feels like I have fallen into a time warp.

[therewillbeblus]

It feels like I have fallen into a time warp.

To be fair, Rivette's films do have that kind of effect on their own

[Michael Kerpan]

To be fair, Rivette's films do have that kind of effect on their own

Yes -- but one kind is the good kind and the other kind is the bad kind. Having flashbacks to the Facets DVD release of Joan the Maid.... Not a good thing.

[therewillbeblus]

I was just being playful (the good kind). Rivette's films do that too

[dwk]

I don't think it's a matter of caring, but of technical savviness. While interestingly, Jeanne la pucelle had a dedicated sub stream, I suspect the relevant people at Cohen just don't know enough to do the difference (or realising there's one) between forced and burnt-in subs. In any case, more suited people should handle this area of responsability instead.

I suspect you are correct in that the rep that posts on the forum doesn't understand the tech stuff, but I still think Coehn Media just doesn't care. If they did, they easily could have gotten around having to force the subtitles.

[furbicide]

It really is "unfortunate" that a better company did not get the rights to these Rivette films.

I disagree, it's very fortunate that a company did and decided to prioritize English-friendly blu-ray releases of some of his best work that've been commercially unavailable in this form stateside. Given some of the 'no-brainer classic' titles Criterion sits on for years and years, I'm glad a company without so many agendas grabbed them instead. Both Gang of Four and Love on the Ground look great, and Criterion hasn't exactly been a model in the special features dept for a while, so the fixed subs feel like a first-world problem (and more sensible a choice for a U.S. release to fix English subs than a U.S./U.K. release of Fucking Amal to offer only one subtitle option for U.K.-specific jargon in its climax). What other U.S. company would've been more ideal?

I tend towards this view too; I'll happily take a Blu-ray of L'amour fou when or if it appears, burned-in subs or otherwise. Still a little disappointing that this is, presumably, the best we can expect when it does.

If only Potemkine had included optional English subs on all their Rivette releases (as they did for Haut/bas/fragile and Secret défense, curiously), then these Cohen releases would have served little purpose and we could safely ignore them. As it is, I suppose beggars can't be choosers...

[mhofmann]

If only Potemkine had included optional English subs on all their Rivette releases (as they did for Haut/bas/fragile and Secret défense, curiously), then these Cohen releases would have served little purpose and we could safely ignore them. As it is, I suppose beggars can't be choosers...

https://www.opensubtitles.org/en/search

[furbicide]

Mate, speaking as one of the few people who has actually forked out for an Oppo player, it's not quite that simple.

[MichaelB]

(and more sensible a choice for a U.S. release to fix English subs than a U.S./U.K. release of Fucking Amal to offer only one subtitle option for U.K.-specific jargon in its climax).

Christ, you’re not still banging on about this, are you? I hate to use a smarmy phrase like “check your privilege”, but, as someone who's had to endure often jarringly US slang in subtitles on European films on a regular basis for over four decades, you’ll have to forgive me for not immediately empathising with your plight.

Frankly, the fact that you’re overreacting like this to a very minor linguistic quirk really underscores how easy you normally have it. Those of us who aren’t native US English speakers have to make these mental shifts all the time, and while it’s often decidedly irritating seeing French cops apparently talking as though they’re rehearsing for an impending transfer to the NYPD, it’s easy enough to tune out. Not least because for the likes of me this is the norm rather than the exception, so I’ve had plenty of practice.

(And, just to be clear, I’m not talking about imports on US labels. US English, slang and all, is overwhelmingly common practice in the UK across the board, regardless of where the distributor’s based. It’s only because I personally intervened that the subtitles on Arrow’s Closely Observed Trains didn’t refer to “railroads” and “soccer”, the latter standing out like an especially sore thumb because the Czech word is “fotbal”.)

[tenia]

I don't think it's a matter of caring, but of technical savviness. While interestingly, Jeanne la pucelle had a dedicated sub stream, I suspect the relevant people at Cohen just don't know enough to do the difference (or realising there's one) between forced and burnt-in subs. In any case, more suited people should handle this area of responsability instead.

I suspect you are correct in that the rep that posts on the forum doesn't understand the tech stuff, but I still think Coehn Media just doesn't care. If they did, they easily could have gotten around having to force the subtitles.

It might, indeed, be that the rep doesn't understand but that his tech colleagues do but don't care. Still, they could and should simply, well, do like pretty much everyone else.

[therewillbeblus]

(and more sensible a choice for a U.S. release to fix English subs than a U.S./U.K. release of Fucking Amal to offer only one subtitle option for U.K.-specific jargon in its climax).

Christ, you’re not still banging on about this, are you? I hate to use a smarmy phrase like “check your privilege”, but, as someone who's had to endure often jarringly US slang in subtitles on European films on a regular basis for over four decades, you’ll have to forgive me for not immediately empathising with your plight.

Frankly, the fact that you’re overreacting like this to a very minor linguistic quirk really underscores how easy you normally have it. Those of us who aren’t native US English speakers have to make these mental shifts all the time, and while it’s often decidedly irritating seeing French cops apparently talking as though they’re rehearsing for an impending transfer to the NYPD, it’s easy enough to tune out. Not least because for the likes of me this is the norm rather than the exception, so I’ve had plenty of practice.

I think I missed the connective tissue between the problem size and reaction size here, but maybe you’re doing a bit to reflectively demonstrate how privilege gives us the opportunities to overreact about whatever? Sure I forgive you because I didn’t ask you to empathize with any “plight.” To directly answer your question that you went on to answer incorrectly yourself, no, I’m not “banging on about this.” I tapped out of the conversation last week after you and others clarified some things that made sense, even if it didn't change my personal feelings on the matter. I respect and appreciate your expertise in this area and will concede to your professional knowledge and experience when kept objective, but that stops when the act of expressing an alternative opinion of mine is pathologized. In this case, I was simply using a recent forum debate where I had idiosyncratic issues on one side as an example to compare the merits of qualms with this release, and then, if you had read ahead just a few posts in this thread, I walked my comment back by acknowledging that my own issues are no grander than those complaining about burned-in subs and that it was unfair of me to draw such a comparison to begin with. So, if you connect the dots, that means I’m defining my issues as “first world problems” as I did these. Sounds a lot like checking privilege to me.. but I'm curious how I could have better offered contrition to meet your standards.

There’s really no need to be this reactive, especially when pausing to read the context would show you that you’re wasting your breath. And please don’t tell me “how easy I have it” as a reflection of your skewed perspective on what I’m saying and doing here, before then going on about an apparent hardship of yours I didn't solicit. So forgive me for not empathizing with your plights of what you've "endured," but whatever emotional experience that's driving your frustrations here was not invited by my comment and is not my work to help you process. It's ironic that you took a flatly-delivered sentence intended for the unemotional utility of on-topic contrasting purposes as an "overreaction" and then proceeded to overreact like this, seemingly without self-consciousness to the boorish tone of your post or your role and responsibilities for having personal triggers that inflate interpretations of neutral diction. Let's see if you can afford the same humility to take perspective and own your behavior that you're asking for

[lazarus]

If only Potemkine had included optional English subs on all their Rivette releases (as they did for Haut/bas/fragile and Secret défense, curiously), then these Cohen releases would have served little purpose and we could safely ignore them. As it is, I suppose beggars can't be choosers...

Well, I don't think it's fair to say they serve little purpose, unless all you care about is the feature itself. I asked on the previous page if the Potemkine special features were subtitled, and was told no. Even if all these Cohen Media discs have are the Richard Pena commentaries, that's still *something* that has additional value, an academic analysis that I can't get from the French release without speaking that language fluently.

[lazarus]

Also, does anyone know why the pre-order Amazon price for Up, Down, Fragile is so expensive? I was able to get Gang of Four for $19.99, and Love on the Ground for $17.99, but UDF is currently listing at $29.99. Are they all like this when first posted, and drop lower like a month out?

If not, ImportCDs currently has it for $20.66, and some seller I'm unfamiliar with called Bull Moose lists it for $19.97.

[soundchaser]

If not, ImportCDs currently has it for $20.66, and some seller I'm unfamiliar with called Bull Moose lists it for $19.97.

Bull Moose comes highly recommended from me, if you can get to the Free Shipping threshold.

[therewillbeblus]

Also, does anyone know why the pre-order Amazon price for Up, Down, Fragile is so expensive? I was able to get Gang of Four for $19.99, and Love on the Ground for $17.99, but UDF is currently listing at $29.99. Are they all like this when first posted, and drop lower like a month out?

Yeah, basically. Gang of Four was $19.99 right out of the gate, but it took quite a while for Love on the Ground to go down (I ended up preordering it from Target at $17.99 a few weeks before its street date when it was still priced around $30 on amazon). After that happened, I just added Secret Defense in my wish list and checked occasionally until it dropped, then preordered it (a much faster price-drop window than Love on the Ground's), and am doing the same for Up, Down, Fragile

[Michael Kerpan]

Do all these Cohen releases have physically burned in subs?

[JSC]

Do all these Cohen releases have physically burned in subs?

Based on how they play on my Oppo player, Love on the Ground has digital but non-removable
subtitles. Gang of Four has digital and removable subtitles. We'll see about Secret Defense
and Up, Down, Fragile.

[mhofmann]

Do all these Cohen releases have physically burned in subs?

All the recent (~last year) French-language ones seem to have burned in subtitles, yes.

[senseabove]

Do all these Cohen releases have physically burned in subs?

Based on how they play on my Oppo player, Love on the Ground has digital but non-removable
subtitles. Gang of Four has digital and removable subtitles. We'll see about Secret Defense
and Up, Down, Fragile.

Not sure what "digital" means here: out of context, I'd assume "digital but non-removable" to mean forced, not burned in, but several folks here and elsewhere have said they're burned in for Love on the Ground. If Gang of Four does in fact have removable subtitles, it kinda makes the burned in ones an even more egregious offense, since it proves that either the licensor didn't actually stipulate it or doesn't actually care enough to enforce it, or that Cohen doesn't actually care enough about the releases to do it right.

In the meantime, if anyone could report on the English subtitle quality for the Potemkine and Cohen releases, I'd appreciate it. Curious if they're the same translations for the ones that both have English subs, and if there are howlers like the subs on Joan the Maid.

[JSC]

Sorry, I stand corrected. The subtitles on both discs are forced and cannot be switched off. I could shift
the position of the subtitles on Gang of Four so I (wrongly) assumed they could also be switched off.

The term 'burned in' is a bit misleading. When I think of 'burned in' I think of the subtitles actually being
a part of the actual print (as in optically printed onto the film). But then, maybe I'm showing my age a
bit there.