Forthcoming Lists Discussion and Random Speculation Vol. 4

[knives]

For some reason I thought they had previously struck a deal.

[Askew]

I believe they also said Guillermo del Toro's The Devil's Backbone is coming.

[captveg]

Olive likely.

But Sony has never licensed to Olive before. I didn't hear the comment about In a Lonely Place.

I agree - Olive would be strange to have releases from Sony out of no where.

If not Criterion or Twilight Time, it could be Image or Mill Creek, who have also licensed Sony titles.

[Professor Wagstaff]

God help us when Jeffrey Wells hears about this.

Jeff Wells has heard and links to the forum on his site.

[Cinephrenic]

Where can we listen to this again?

[Roger Ryan]

What specifically did they say about Andrei Rublev? I missed that part.

It seemed pretty noncommital to me. Like "There's a restoration that's being done in Russia and we're aware of it." More like taking a wait and see approach to what comes of the Russian work. Not like they've begun serious planning, consulting or had a look at the materials or the work that's being done. Feels like two or three years out at least.

As I mentioned in the RUBLEV thread, the existing print of the 205 minute edit is not in that great of shape and would probably not be released by Criterion as a stand-alone on Blu-ray. Releasing it as part of a set which included a restored 185 minute version would probably be the way to go.

[ianungstad]

When the host asked Kim about Darling, didn't she say that there would be something next year but not Darling? I don't remember the exact wording. I got the impression that she was indicating that another Schlesinger film was in the works but it wasn't Darling.

She did not say that the Jungle Book was getting a mainline release. The question was about why the Jungle Book is available in HD on itunes. It was a stupid question to begin with and there was some confusion on how to answer it. I think the person who sent in the question was under the impression that the transfer being sold on itunes is different/superior to what was used on the Eclipse release and wanted to know why. (which probably isn't even true)

There may be a pre-code Warner title coming out but it seemed to me that Kim didn't know what the host was talking about for a second and then said "no, we won't talk about that." I kind of got the impression that the host may have possibly got the wrong studio. Dunno, It could very well be a Warner pre-code. I'm sure Criterion has received countless requests for Browning's Freaks over the years.

[criterion10]

The one thing that has me optimistic about the WB deal is that when Kim was asked if a deal had finally occurred, she shouted a very enthusiastic "Yes!". It seemed as there's a good chance there may be much more than Badlands.

Hopefully they can get The Devils. That would be a miracle.

[Drucker]

Nothing would please me more than the MGM silents. Though Big Parade coming from Warners themselves is also awesome.

[MichaelB]

As I mentioned in the RUBLEV thread, the existing print of the 205 minute edit is not in that great of shape and would probably not be released by Criterion as a stand-alone on Blu-ray. Releasing it as part of a set which included a restored 185 minute version would probably be the way to go.

Yes, absolutely - the 185-minute version is not some kind of butchered travesty (that came later, when it was hacked to 140 minutes for international distribution), it's the last version that Tarkovsky personally signed off on - and while he was compelled to make certain changes to appease the authorities, he also made some noticeable improvements elsewhere. So a definitive edition should definitely include both cuts - possibly titled Andrei Rublev and The Passion of Andrei.

Hopefully they can get The Devils. That would be a miracle.

A Blu-ray of the 2004 semi-restoration of The Devils would indeed be a miracle. Given that they've never even allowed the longer UK theatrical cut to be released in the US in any form, I suspect Warner is some way off licensing that!

But then again, exactly a year ago we all assumed that there was no chance of a halfway decent version of the film appearing even on DVD...

[Calvin]

Would it be possible to construct a better quality version of the 205 min cut by using footage from the 185 min cut?

[swo17]

They supposedly did that to some extent with the two versions of The Gold Rush.

[Jeff]

They didn't get to my question during the interview, but Wexner Center tweeted at me:

We checked w/ Kim & the word is that Foreign Correspondent is likely for 2013 & hoping for I Married a Witch as well.

[ianungstad]

Great news! I know Criterion likes to drag things out but it's very strange to me that they haven't put out another Caidin title since Stagecoach.

[matrixschmatrix]

Wow, Criterion's really going after the Hitches- particularly since they're going to do the Hitchcock-esque Ministry of Fear next year, too.

[swo17]

Is it too much to hope that this "maybe for 2013" extends to To Be or Not to Be as well?

[triodelover]

Is it too much to hope that this "maybe for 2013" extends to To Be or Not to Be as well?

The French SC Blu is very good, both transfer and audio.

[Jeff]

It's good but it needs qualification. It's the same master as the old Studio Canal SD and is from a dupe postivie element. There may be better elements in the US if anyone can identify the rights owners.

Criterion are the current rights holders of To Be or Not To Be and all of the other films owned by The Stanley Caidin Trust. Those films are managed by Julian Schlossberg's Westchester Films, who should have whatever original film elements are extant in the U.S.

I don't think there's necessarily anything better than the elements StudioCanal used. If there were, Warner probably would have accessed them. I do think Criterion would probably want to do their own scan of that dupe positive though with their usual digital cleanup.

[AfterTheRain]

I certainly hope that The Uninvited will also get a Criterion release for next year as well.

[nickoberg]

anyone able to capture this wexner conversation or know if it got archived?

[Roger Ryan]

Would it be possible to construct a better quality version of the 205 min cut by using footage from the 185 min cut?

This would be more complicated than something like THE GOLD RUSH since the 185 min. version of RUBLEV has different shot lengths, different shot order and some different takes than what appeared in the 205 min. edit. When asked to censor his own film, Tarkovsky ended up making improvements at the same time. Instead of attempting to create a higher quality version of the 205 min. edit, it might be a better idea to insert the censored material found in the first cut to the 185 min. edit. But even that would be going against the director's wishes since he went on record stating his approval of his final cut. The best solution is to present both versions in a set.

[triodelover]

I don't think there's necessarily anything better than the elements StudioCanal used. If there were, Warner probably would have accessed them. I do think Criterion would probably want to do their own scan of that dupe positive though with their usual digital cleanup.

And contrast boosting, no?

[Peacock]

I don't think there's necessarily anything better than the elements StudioCanal used. If there were, Warner probably would have accessed them. I do think Criterion would probably want to do their own scan of that dupe positive though with their usual digital cleanup.

And contrast boosting, no?

Name the last new transfer that they contrast boosted.

[Tommaso]

Name the last new transfer that they contrast boosted.

"Island of Lost Souls"?

[John Doe]

What Kim and Curtis have said about In a Lonely Place?