criterionforum.org

I hate to tell you, jwomaha, but you're blind. I know an optical effect when I see one. If it's real, then please explain how the falling snow pans WITH the camera.

The snow is both real and an optical overlay. Once shooting began Altman was committed to finishing with snowfall. About halfway through shooting the snowfront stalled and became increasingly intermittent. Optical work was necessary for completion of the sequence in continuity. As per Matt it's most evident in panning shots especially up to or down from the skyline. An anal rententive friend (like I need such friends!) once determined that the optical work amounted to about one in every six to eight shots on average. While I was dimly aware that something was "off" I was not consciously aware of it as an optical until my second or third viewing. It's never bothered me that much but then I see all kinds of cheats, gaffs and shortcuts in virtually everything. If you're not completely absorbed by the film by this point then the magic ain't gonna happen.

I admit that had I been sitting farther back (say, at the rear of the theater) and the picture quality had been better (no color separation), then it's quite likely I'd have been much more engaged in the film and the effect might not have made much more than a minor footnote in my consciousness (as with the rain overlays in Riso amaro, which I recently saw, and so many other films).

Jun-Dai wrote:I admit that had I been sitting farther back (say, at the rear of the theater) and the picture quality had been better (no color separation), then it's quite likely I'd have been much more engaged in the film and the effect might not have made much more than a minor footnote in my consciousness (as with the rain overlays in Riso amaro, which I recently saw, and so many other films).

I think its generally agreed that no-one can agree on the pictorial quality of McCabe and Mrs Miller. Its certain that it was intentional, as Matt has stated, but I don't think anyone should feel bad for being put off by its look.

If you're put off by its look, then you're put off by the vision of the director, simple as that.

tojoed wrote:If you're put off by its look, then you're put off by the vision of the director, simple as that.

Yes, and as that vision happens to be quite controversial in this particular case, like a faded photo is one metaphor, I just wouldn't judge anyone for not taking to it immediately, or finding it hard to hear or unpleasant to look at. I'm not saying don't give it a second chance, I'm saying don't be surprised if people don't like it.

Some recent Facebook responses I found interesting:

The Piano: "Never give up"

Lilja 4-Ever: "Looking into it"

Grave of the Fireflies/Only Yesterday: "We'll look into them"

Monkey Shines: "We'll poke around" (OK, that was one I asked about, and I totally expected a flat "no" so this was a surprising response)

Nothing concrete, obviously, but they at least seem to have interest in those titles.

CSM126 wrote:Monkey Shines: "We'll poke around" (OK, that was one I asked about, and I totally expected a flat "no" so this was a surprising response) Nothing concrete, obviously

Come on, Monkey Shines has to be the worst movie ever made. They're just being nice now.

Oh please. Monkey Shines is plenty of fun. And if you think that's the worst movie you've ever seen, you've obviously never gone very deep into the cinematic well. I'd like you to meet my friends Uwe Boll, Ulli Lommell, Hal Needham, John Derek, Jess Franco, Bruno Mattei...

CSM126 wrote:Oh please. Monkey Shines is plenty of fun. And if you think that's the worst movie you've ever seen, you've obviously never gone very deep into the cinematic well. I'd like you to meet my friends Uwe Boll, Ulli Lommell, Hal Needham, John Derek, Jess Franco, Bruno Mattei...

All worthy nominees, but just listing some other bad directors won't save Monkey Shines from being incredibly poor. Fun was all I expected, all I got was annoyed.

Well, I tried to change the pace of the Facebook page by asking about their Blu-ray experience, but they didn't commit to a longer conversation. Can't blame me for trying to shake up the monotony of "will you release x" posts.

A Lilja 4-Ever Criterion would be amazing. It's insane that it's not out in the states. Actually, it'd be nice if they could finagle Fucking Åmål away from Strand, get the OOP Tillsammans from MGM and the Memfis films for a R1 Moodysson box

domino harvey wrote:A Lilja 4-Ever Criterion would be amazing. It's insane that it's not out in the states.

It is, sort of, as a Netflix exclusive. Which probably still counts as "insane," I guess.

Matt wrote:I hate to tell you, jwomaha, but you're blind. I know an optical effect when I see one. If it's real, then please explain how the falling snow pans WITH the camera.

There are a couple of scenes with bad fake snow, but I do recall from the making of piece on the Warner DVD that the mountain spot they chose was inundated with 12 feet of snow or some incredible amount in a few days after they started filming...and it rarely stopped so they were forced to film in the blizzard. The overlay was probably to add consistency to the other shots that WERE real snow. i'll have to dig out the warner dvd and check the features to double check though.

Regardless, it was Zsigmond's vision - what he said was he wanted it to look like you were watching a film of old photographs from the 19th century....hence the hazy filter he used along with flashing the film in spots. It will never look "new" and pristinely crisp...but it was never supposed to.

Criterion wrote:The latest is that we're going to try to get [Out 1] done, and about seventy-five people on Facebook all agreed to buy 100 copies each. But really, we will get it done, even though it probably won't be our first Rivette...

=D> unless of course that last part is in reference to the fact that Out 1 is going to take 20+ years to release.

WOW. I never thought it'd happen, to be honest

This is the best news announced on the Criterion Facebook page, right? I'm so excited for these releases.

Ever since I woke up at 4AM and set out on another shitty Monday, all I thought about was coming home in the evening, pouring a glass of red wine, crawling into bed, and reading the Criterion Forum. This is why.

Somebody get the smelling salts for justeleblanc.

Criterion wrote:The latest is that we're going to try to get [Out 1] done, and about seventy-five people on Facebook all agreed to buy 100 copies each. But really, we will get it done, even though it probably won't be our first Rivette...

Miracles do come true =D>

Criterion wrote:The latest is that we're going to try to get [Out 1] done, and about seventy-five people on Facebook all agreed to buy 100 copies each. But really, we will get it done, even though it probably won't be our first Rivette...

So the cloud for that silver lining is that the "first Rivette" is probably not on the horizon (if they can't say for sure whether or not an undertaking as major as Out 1 that they're starting from scratch will beat it out the gates).

Nevertheless elated.

zedz wrote:

Criterion wrote:The latest is that we're going to try to get [Out 1] done, and about seventy-five people on Facebook all agreed to buy 100 copies each. But really, we will get it done, even though it probably won't be our first Rivette...

So the cloud for that silver lining is that the "first Rivette" is probably not on the horizon (if they can't say for sure whether or not an undertaking as major as Out 1 that they're starting from scratch will beat it out the gates).

Nevertheless elated.

Well you could also read it as the silver lining to the cloud in that we can expect some films of Rivette, but of course the downer is its going to be some time before we see Rivette if Out 1 actually has a chance of being the first of his film released (given that it would require a massive amount of effort that would take time, but hey least its the best confirmation out there about this film). Now if only Criterion would also consider another holy grail film, IMO, *cough*The Mother and the Whore*cough*

hangman wrote:Now if only Criterion would also consider another holy grail film, IMO, *cough*The Mother and the Whore*cough*

They've said repeatedly on Facebook they would love to release it and have tried to get the rights to no avail.

I asked about a Robert Siodmak series - like the Dassin Noirs, and mentioned '"The File on Thelma Jordan", "Cry of the City" and some other gems from the vaults of Universal...'

Criterion said:

"This would be difficult to put together -- at least three studios! -- but we'll look into it"

A couple of weeks ago Eddie Muller wrote at the "Back Alley Noir" forum:

The best Fox noir currently not on U.S. DVD -- Cry of the City -- was licensed several years ago to Criterion. Paramount also licensed The File on Thelma Jordon to Criterion, leading me to believe that a Robert Siodmak series (like the Dassin series it did) was forthcoming from Criterion. No hint of that yet, however...

Regarding The Mother and the Whore, for what it's worth I recently saw a screening of the film and during the introduction beforehand, a Professor from Glasgow University I believe said yes, that the film has been caught up in rights issues for a long time, but that finally some progress is being made and we could expect it to be sorted and dvds (or Blu by then i guess?) to come in 2011