criterionforum.org

So the drive through Tokyo (AKA the future city) is supposed to be blue? Now so used to it in B&W... Still a nice one to see upgraded to BD

I guess. I was wondering if the blue tint for the black and white scenes was just going to be for those sequences on the space station, but it sounds as if it is throughout the film, which means it not only affects those parts of the City of the Future sequence that are not in colour but also presumably the lengthy debriefing scene and the most beautiful shot in the film:





I'm sure I'll get used to it though, and of course it is great to see the film on Blu (if more blue than I was used to!)

(The blue shot above comes from the Nostalghia.com site, apparently from the Ruscico edition of the film)

I'm curious as to what changed their minds on the blue tinting. The Nostaghia.com interview linked above (and their subsequent correspondence with Issa Clubb) indicate that Criterion did due diligence the first time, consulting Vadim Yusov and viewing the original film elements. At the time, they made the decision that the blue tinting was probably due to print degradation or printing black and white on color stock. Just curious as to what new information came to light or what might have convinced them that they were wrong the first time.

EDIT: Looking back through the previous pages here, I see that Yusov later said that the Criterion transfer was wrong and should have the blue tints, and that there was some reasonable speculation here this discrepancy could possibly be attributed to Criterion not understanding Yusov's original instructions. Criterion claimed to have looked at a "print from the original version" which confirmed their decision to go with straight black and white.

I didn't have a problem with Criterion's decision eight years ago, and I don't have a problem with their reversal of it now, as it seems in both cases, they did thorough research and genuinely made an effort to replicate the filmmakers' intended look. I'm just wondering what actually caused the blue tinting, whether it was really intentional from the start or just a pleasant surprise on the release prints, and if they believe they have found a definitive answer to this puzzle. I hope that upon release of the Blu-ray, they have the disc producers blog about this on the Criterion site.

Now we just need the Soderbergh remake on Blu

I'd been holding out for the Blu to see this. Now if we can only get Nostalghia too so I can rewatch that (and it's in desperate need of a release that corresponds to at least three quarters of the films' quality) - Criterion, I know you can do it!

James wrote:I'd been holding out for the Blu to see this. Now if we can only get Nostalghia too so I can rewatch that (and it's in desperate need of a release that corresponds to at least three quarters of the films' quality) - Criterion, I know you can do it!

..and release "The Mirror" (1976)....

atcolomb wrote:

James wrote:Now if we can only get Nostalghia too so I can rewatch that (and it's in desperate need of a release that corresponds to at least three quarters of the films' quality) - Criterion, I know you can do it!

..and release "The Mirror" (1976)....

That's not in desperate need of a release.

You, sir, are insane.

The blue tinting makes sense if it was used to signify the footage being seen on a video screen (the cosmonaut's interrogation, for example). Of course, not all of the black-and-white footage is supposed to be coming from a video screen; some of it is used to represent a memory. Should all of the black-and-white footage be tinted or just some of it? Is it true that Tarkovsky was forced to use black-and-white stock because of the limited budget and attempted to use it in a practical/artistic way when able? I believe this has been used as a reason for the rather arbitrary change in film stock throughout.

This is a curious situation, but all the same, I'm happy to have this one on Blu.

swo17 wrote:You, sir, are insane.

Well, Mirror is out on DVD. So compared to Nostalghia which hasn't seen the light of day on an even halfway reasonable transfer, no, it's not in desperate need of a release.

Both Nostalghia and Mirror have been released on DVD. Both desperately need upgrades. The Kino release of Mirror gets the colors wrong and doesn't even bother to translate any of the poetry recited throughout the film. The AE release in the UK is an improvement, but is still nowhere near what I would call definitive.

swo17 wrote:Both Nostalghia and Mirror have been released on DVD. Both desperately need upgrades. The Kino release of Mirror gets the colors wrong and doesn't even bother to translate any of the poetry recited throughout the film. The AE release in the UK is an improvement, but is still nowhere near what I would call definitive.

I couldn't agree more. I've tried twice to watch Mirror, and both times I've stopped about a half-hour in b/c the dvd is so poor. Kino's certainly not Facets, but their release of Mirror comes awfully close to Facets' territory.

Roger Ryan wrote:Is it true that Tarkovsky was forced to use black-and-white stock because of the limited budget and attempted to use it in a practical/artistic way when able? I believe this has been used as a reason for the rather arbitrary change in film stock throughout.

I do remember reading the B/W scene of the mother running back to her work to correct a printing error in Mirror was suppose to be in colour but the budget couldn't afford it.

...and of course, there's Stalker & The Sacrifice

Nils, from that same interview with Criterion linked above:

How did you find out about the outtakes? I.e., did the Russians know already ("Yes, yes, we have 9 outtakes. Here. Take them!") or did someone start looking at their request and only then came up with 9 bits? Or were the 9 outtakes taken straight from the longer First Cut of the movie which still exists?

Originally we found that Naum Kleiman, who is usually considered the premier Eisenstein scholar, had the outtakes in his archives. Then he did some digging at Gosfilmofond and found that they had a better quality print of the entire original version. Ultimately we decided that the differences were not great enough to merit including the entire original version on a third disc, which would have added ten or twenty dollars to the cost of the set. Especially considering that it's not a "director's cut" but rather the opposite.

which would seem to indicate they view the earlier cut as more of a work in progress (?), and the Cannes cut/Criterion release as Tarkovsky's intended version. Of course, as mentioned above, it's stated in the interview that they came to the conclusion the tinted scenes should be in pure B&W. opinions can, and do, change... be curious to see what changed theirs

Adam Grikepelis wrote:...and of course, there's Stalker & The Sacrifice

Assuming you're referring to the change in film stock in these films, certainly STALKER's change from black-and-white to color and back again is meant to suggest a WIZARD OF OZ-style transition from the over-industrialized, government-controlled city to the magical qualities of the Zone.

If you're referring to the availability of these films on Blu-ray, well...Kino is reportedly working on a Blu of THE SACRIFICE.

If possible, I think adding the workprint cut of SOLARIS as a branching option on the Blu-ray version would be wonderful!

Roger Ryan wrote:well...Kino is reportedly working on a Blu of THE SACRIFICE.

Yeah, but hasn't this been the rumor for 3-4 years? I am becoming very doubtful.

As of November of last year, it was supposedly on schedule for a Spring 2011 release.

swo17 wrote:As of November of last year, it was supposedly on schedule for a Spring 2011 release.

And I'm sure there's some other delay by now pushing it back another season or two.

Adam Grikepelis wrote:Nils, from that same interview with Criterion linked above

This is a big mistake. The original version is more coherent and complete. The last hope is lost. We never see the original masterpiece, it will rot in the Gosfilmofond without seeing the light.

"Thanx" Criterion for your cheapest blu-ray :(

All that we have (terrible TV-rip of original version? without English translation): first part - second part

For some reason I can not locate this title on the CC web site: I serched by title, director, DVD, Blu Ray, coming soon,etc., etc. Nothing returned. Any idea why? Thanks

They accidentally deleted it. Probably come back soon.

edit: http://www.criterion.com/films/553-sola ... tocomplete" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

http://www.criterion.com/films/553-solaris" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

It not showing up in certain sections of the site might have to do with the older version going out of print.

videozor wrote:For some reason I can not locate this title on the CC web site: I serched by title, director, DVD, Blu Ray, coming soon,etc., etc. Nothing returned. Any idea why? Thanks

Yes, there seems to be a glitch with Criterion's filtering. You have to check the "OOP" box at the top to get "Solaris" to show up.

Roger Ryan wrote:Assuming you're referring to the change in film stock in these films,

weirdly, that'd seem to be a forum glitch as I was responding to swo17's post (the two in between weren't there at the time). yes, it was just about wanting them on Blu-Ray. while hardly the worst off of Tarkovsky's films, the releases of The Sacrifice always seemed to not quite work out (such as SFI's sadly non-anamorphic release). Plus, Stalker and Nostalghia, not to mention all of Tarkovsky's other films, really need the extra resolution Blu-Ray can provide to bring out the detail in all the subtle textures and colours.