The last emperor(Bertolucci) coming from Image/Criterion!!
#76
DVD Talk Special Edition
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 1,132
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by starecase
It is $27.27 at barnesandnoble.com (before tax) with membership and the current 25% off coupon (R9Y3F8Y).
#77
DVD Talk Special Edition
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 1,482
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by bookcase3
There's a new blog entry up at Criterion explaining the aspect ratio controversy. After reading, I went ahead and placed an order.
http://www.criterion.com/blog/
http://www.criterion.com/blog/
Originally Posted by criterionblog
Emperor 2.0
We’re getting a huge amount of mail about our edition of The Last Emperor, specifically about the aspect ratio, which is 2:1. Some people seem to believe that we’ve lost our minds, forsaken our mission, and taken it upon ourselves to crop the sides off the picture. Others assume we just got careless. Either way, a rising chorus is asking how we could do this to Vittorio Storaro’s Academy Award–winning compositions. And to Bernardo Bertolucci’s framing. The answer is, we couldn’t, and we wouldn’t, and we didn’t do anything to violate the filmmakers’ wishes. This is the way the filmmakers want the film to be seen.
From the start of this project, Bertolucci has insisted that Storaro have ultimate approval of the mastering of the feature. This master was made in Rome under Storaro’s direct supervision, with Bertolucci’s approval. When we asked Storaro about the framing of the film, he unhesitatingly told us that the correct aspect ratio for The Last Emperor was 2:1, even though the film was commonly projected at 2.35:1. He told us that The Last Emperor was the first film he shot specifically for 2.0 framing, and Bertolucci backs him up. Our mission is to present each film as its makers would want it to be seen, and in this case the director and cinematographer asked that we release their film in the format they say they had always envisioned. We had quite a lot of discussion over this, and we certainly knew it would be controversial, but in the end the decision was not made by us. It was made, as it should be, by the filmmakers.
I can understand how people might be upset about this. The general rule of thumb where widescreen films is concerned is that wider is better, but in this case it’s not so obvious. I recently had the pleasure of joining producer Jeremy Thomas at a screening of The Last Emperor, and I asked him about this issue. Was it really true that they had envisioned the film less wide than the 2.35:1 aspect ratio in which it was commonly screened? Thomas said that they had originally hoped that all of the original release prints would be in 70 mm, framed at 2.2:1 or 2:1, but not 2.35:1 or 2.33:1. Thomas said Storaro and Bertolucci filled the wider frame knowing that there would be 2.35:1 prints in circulation as well, but that they always knew they were shooting a format wider than what they hoped to release.
So, in short, while some viewers may prefer the wider framing, the filmmakers must have the final say. This is not a case of our losing track of our mission, but rather one of being true to it.
We’re getting a huge amount of mail about our edition of The Last Emperor, specifically about the aspect ratio, which is 2:1. Some people seem to believe that we’ve lost our minds, forsaken our mission, and taken it upon ourselves to crop the sides off the picture. Others assume we just got careless. Either way, a rising chorus is asking how we could do this to Vittorio Storaro’s Academy Award–winning compositions. And to Bernardo Bertolucci’s framing. The answer is, we couldn’t, and we wouldn’t, and we didn’t do anything to violate the filmmakers’ wishes. This is the way the filmmakers want the film to be seen.
From the start of this project, Bertolucci has insisted that Storaro have ultimate approval of the mastering of the feature. This master was made in Rome under Storaro’s direct supervision, with Bertolucci’s approval. When we asked Storaro about the framing of the film, he unhesitatingly told us that the correct aspect ratio for The Last Emperor was 2:1, even though the film was commonly projected at 2.35:1. He told us that The Last Emperor was the first film he shot specifically for 2.0 framing, and Bertolucci backs him up. Our mission is to present each film as its makers would want it to be seen, and in this case the director and cinematographer asked that we release their film in the format they say they had always envisioned. We had quite a lot of discussion over this, and we certainly knew it would be controversial, but in the end the decision was not made by us. It was made, as it should be, by the filmmakers.
I can understand how people might be upset about this. The general rule of thumb where widescreen films is concerned is that wider is better, but in this case it’s not so obvious. I recently had the pleasure of joining producer Jeremy Thomas at a screening of The Last Emperor, and I asked him about this issue. Was it really true that they had envisioned the film less wide than the 2.35:1 aspect ratio in which it was commonly screened? Thomas said that they had originally hoped that all of the original release prints would be in 70 mm, framed at 2.2:1 or 2:1, but not 2.35:1 or 2.33:1. Thomas said Storaro and Bertolucci filled the wider frame knowing that there would be 2.35:1 prints in circulation as well, but that they always knew they were shooting a format wider than what they hoped to release.
So, in short, while some viewers may prefer the wider framing, the filmmakers must have the final say. This is not a case of our losing track of our mission, but rather one of being true to it.
#78
DVD Talk Legend
Originally Posted by starecase
It is $27.27 at barnesandnoble.com (before tax) with membership and the current 25% off coupon (R9Y3F8Y).
#79
DVD Talk Hero
I think everyone knew this new aspect ratio was intended by the filmmakers. The ire comes from people preferring the 2:35 ratio. When it comes to 2nd guessing their work, filmmakers don't always make the best decisions - for exhibit A, I give you George Lucas. Ultimately, what it comes down to is that I look at the screen-shot comparisons and the wider ones just look better. But whatever, in the grand scheme of things, I'd rather have this than nothing at all, so no big loss.
#80
Originally Posted by slop101
I think everyone knew this new aspect ratio was intended by the filmmakers. The ire comes from people preferring the 2:35 ratio. When it comes to 2nd guessing their work, filmmakers don't always make the best decisions - for exhibit A, I give you George Lucas. Ultimately, what it comes down to is that I look at the screen-shot comparisons and the wider ones just look better. But whatever, in the grand scheme of things, I'd rather have this than nothing at all, so no big loss.
I got this set today and it's beautiful.
#81
DVD Talk Limited Edition
I'm not buying this revisionism. The 2.00:1 aspect ratio was something Storaro thought up in 1998, long after The Last Emperor and other of his films had been released in 2.35:1.
It is his publicly stated vision that all films, past and future be reframed in this AR, regardless of what they were originally.
I think it is an attempt at damage control to say this was his his intent all along. It is his reaction to his films being shown on small screens, plain and simple.
The Original Aspect Ratio of Emperor, Apocalypse, et al is 2.35:1, just the way it was shown in theaters, and just as it should be available to collectors today.
It is his publicly stated vision that all films, past and future be reframed in this AR, regardless of what they were originally.
I think it is an attempt at damage control to say this was his his intent all along. It is his reaction to his films being shown on small screens, plain and simple.
The Original Aspect Ratio of Emperor, Apocalypse, et al is 2.35:1, just the way it was shown in theaters, and just as it should be available to collectors today.
#83
DVD Talk Special Edition
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 1,775
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ooof, this is the first I ever heard of this. What a maniac, trying to start his own "universal" proprietary film ratio... he can do that to his future movies, but to alter the old ones is a crime.
Definitely will not buy this set or the other altered ones. OAR or nothing!
Definitely will not buy this set or the other altered ones. OAR or nothing!
#87
DVD Talk Legend
The composition on the first series of screenshot tells you all you need to know about how much BS Storaro is feeding Criterion.
I will not be buying this DVD.
I will not be buying this DVD.
#88
Moderator
you'd think they Storaro could have just bit his lip and let the release be the 70mm aspect ratio of 2.20:1 and be done with it, but no... oh well - it's water under the bridge at this point.
#90
DVD Talk Gold Edition
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Orange County, CA
Posts: 2,897
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by BuckNaked2k
I'm not buying this revisionism. The 2.00:1 aspect ratio was something Storaro thought up in 1998, long after The Last Emperor and other of his films had been released in 2.35:1.
#93
DVD Talk Limited Edition
Originally Posted by aintnosin
Odd, then, how the producer of the film backs him up on this.
Originally Posted by Giles
and director for that matter.
Doesn't make it right.
#94
DVD Talk Special Edition
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 1,775
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I can understand Criterion's position on this. They're doing what the director and cinematographer want, and that's fine.
What bugs me is Apocalypse Now, where this aspect ratio (that the guy apparently created in 1998) is now slapped onto a classic film from the 70's. This is not cool. He seems to be the only one championing a new, less-wide standard for films.
I'll stick with the artists out there that are composing FILMS for theatrical release, especially anamorphic enthusiasts like P.T. Anderson et all.
Why should all films look alike, and resemble television at that?
What bugs me is Apocalypse Now, where this aspect ratio (that the guy apparently created in 1998) is now slapped onto a classic film from the 70's. This is not cool. He seems to be the only one championing a new, less-wide standard for films.
I'll stick with the artists out there that are composing FILMS for theatrical release, especially anamorphic enthusiasts like P.T. Anderson et all.
Why should all films look alike, and resemble television at that?
#95
DVD Talk Special Edition
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 1,582
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by lamphorn
Ooof, this is the first I ever heard of this. What a maniac, trying to start his own "universal" proprietary film ratio... he can do that to his future movies, but to alter the old ones is a crime.
Definitely will not buy this set or the other altered ones. OAR or nothing!
Definitely will not buy this set or the other altered ones. OAR or nothing!
#97
Originally Posted by Giles
I'm just joshin' but you'd think that Storaro could afford a DLP projector and anamorphic lense that lops off the black areas surrounding 2.35 dvd/HDM discs.
The Storaro HDTV. Coming to a Wal-Mart near you! And for a really really good price.
#98
DVD Talk Legend
TLE won the Oscar for best cinematography. Hmmm, I wonder what AR the members saw? I'm guessing it wasn't 2:1.
I've never seen this film and had been looking forward to this release. Now I don't know if it's worth getting.
I've never seen this film and had been looking forward to this release. Now I don't know if it's worth getting.