Ron G

I was looking into buying this at Amazon.co.uk, but it appears to be OOP and I missed out on the few used copies that were still in the affordable range.

I didn't realize there was a Region 1 release of the film, which I just now discovered.

However, the Region 2 release is 2.35:1 whereas the Region 1 is 1.85:1.

Anybody know which is the correct OAR?

Looks like Amazon.fr has a new version that's 1.85:1 anamorphic, but no English subtitles.

Ron G

Never mind, I think.

IMDB lists the OAR as 1.85:1. Is IMDB reliable when it comes to reporting the OAR?

pro-bassoonist

Hello Ron:

Your info in post 1 above is incorrect--2.35:1 is not the OAR. The French disc is also in its original aspect ratio of 1.85:1 (as is the US disc by Paramount). The transfer is quite good, progressive, and without any major issues one needs to be concerned about. Overall, given the low price tag for the US disc it is indeed a disc I can recommend.

Hope this helps,

Pro-B

Ron G

Thanks for the info, Pro-B. Despite the non-anamorphic transfer, I think I'll go with the R1 release. I'm not going to hold my breath for a re-release of this on DVD, despite a spate of showings on cable/satellite several months back.

So what's the point of transferring it at 2.35:1?

I thought this was an interesting little film, and goes well with any piece of literature on doomed love. Always trying to get the students to watch non-Hollywood films. Sometimes it even takes . . .

pro-bassoonist

Hello again Ron. Actually, I think that you misunderstood what I have written. The R1 is anamorphic hence why I noted progressive. And it boasts a solid video quality.


Actually, I think that this is just a typo. The film was shot in 1.85:1. So, whatever reviewer you are referring to, and whatever R2 release he/she might have reviewed, the info is off. Either the reviewer did not know what he/she was writing about or it was simply a typo.

I enjoyed it quite a bit. The box could be seen as an Amelie-replica but nevertheless this film has its moments. And I like Magimel as well.

Pro-B

Ron G

The 2.35:1 info I got off the specs on Amazon.co.uk.

And Amazon.com didn't note that the R1 was anamorphic, so I thought perhaps it wasn't. Glad to hear it is. I didn't realize that progressive also meant anamorphic--I thought it was just the difference between progressive and interlinear, i.e. many of Kino's transfers.