rub it in, would you :D

Look at that cover. If someone did that in the U.S., they'd be crucified. Of all the films to come to BR, this is not one that I would expect. It has, shall we say, a.....limited audience.

I got an email from Amazon.co.uk that states the release date has been changed to the 13th of October ... :mad:

If I ever had to see Salo again (first off, it wouldn't be by choice) I would rather watch it on youtube-quality video in a little window on a little monitor - the less resolution, the better...

I do hope moderators (or any reader, for that matter) realize that, even though you say "this film is full of crap", you're not threadcrapping.

Yeah, I hope so, too. That's why I added the "heheh". I contributed to the thread with my other post on the disc specs, so I think I'm in the clear. But, it would be funny if the cover art just featured a silver tray with a pile of shit on it.

Watched my Criterion DVD of this last night and the transfer looked damn good. I'm having high hopes for this BD.

My amazon UK preorder and the site still lists it for a 9/29 release, so I'm keeping my fingers crossed.

From the Criterion Forum BFI thread:

There have been some very interesting developments lately.

Pro-B

If the Region 1 DVD is of such good quality, why does anyone really need the Blu Ray of this particular film? I mean, really? why? It's Salo, not Transformers.

I think that your assumption that only new films benefit from HD is pretty flawed. Some of the best looking BDs I have in my collection are older B/W productions.

Pro-B

yeah, but the DVD of Salo is supposed to be of fantastic quality. Why do you need even more fantastic quality from the blu ray?

Your question doesn't make the remotest form of sense.

Josh Z,
If a DVD video quality gets graded 10 out of 10 points, then what do you need the Blu Ray for? What are you looking for in the Blu Ray video quality when a DVD gets a perfect video grade score? That's what I mean.

The scale used to determine a DVD's video quality is by definition narrower than that used to determine a Blu-ray's video quality. I would imagine a Blu-Ray with a 8 out of 10 image rating would be roughly the same as a DVD with a 10 out of 10 image rating.

having just finished watching the CRITERION-its hard to say if BR would improve the picture or not. There is a slight ....hazyness to the picture due to age or film stock-that might get magnified by BR-thus a draw.
The picture is great, but they took it to the limit.

Speaking of the BFI cover-I didnt see that particular view when they climbed the stairs.
Publicity shot maybe (!) or or blow up and crop of a film frame?

And certainly BFI knows better than to do a port...
And then the stunner-an MGM film!

but wouldn't the BFI transfer differ from the Criterion transfer or are they one and the same?

going slightly off topic, has there been any rumours if the Trilogy of Life films might get Criterion editions? Satellite channel MGM-HD apparently aired 'Arabian Nights' in hidef.

That would be nice. The ancient Water Bearer/Image discs of Arabian Nights and Canterbury Tales are out of print, and the current MGM edition of The Decameron is bare bones. I'll fire off an email to Criterion about it, and post any vague response I get here.

could you, I'm like a broken record to them about the three Pasolini films and they never seem to reply to my requests [I also bug them regarding more Peter Greenaway films, and the extended tv cut of 'The Best Intentions']

1. 10 out of 10 on a SDVD transfer has absolutely nothing to do with 10 out of 10 on Blu-ray. I don't understand what logic is being used here to even attempt to produce some sort of a comparative analysis...or, whatever you wish to call it.

2. The new print Criterion struck for their SDVD release is being sourced from the same master in Rome BFI used for their BD version (and 2DVD set). So, unless someone wants to come forward and claim that there isn't noticeable difference between standard-def and HD the answer is yes, the BD will look better.

There are some very surprising comments in this thread.

Ciao,
Pro-B

Pro-Bass, when watching the BD of Salo, will it make the movie-watching experience better for you though? And if yes, does that mean you will not have a good movie-watching experience if you watch the DVD of Salo?

I find it interesting that 'everyone' seems so concerned and forthright about the quality and presentation, which I should think is soooooo secondary to the impact of the movie and subject matter itself.

It's like commentating on the construction of the holocaust ovens or what the guards are wearing or "gee, look at all that mud at the camp!"

I don't mean to imply that I disaprove of Salo but that I find the discussion here a little too distant from the controversy.

A perfect 10 on the DVD scale equates to about a 3 on the Blu-ray scale.

I don't own top quality equipment, but a minimum, Panasonic S99 (S97 based) for DVDs, PS3 for BDs,
Optoma HD70 projector (will be replaced by a Sanyo Z2000 soon) and a little 70" screen.

I think you can't appreciate the difference between HD and SD unless you experienced it.
See this example, on the left of the vertical line the BD capture, on the right the DVD.

Toddly, I must echo what has been said already (Tutut's remark is fantastic): you are asking some very strange questions. So, instead of looking for my opinion which I believe my previous post addressed already why not question yourself: why would you not see a difference between 480p and 1080p?. You have been on this forum for a very long time and to even assume that since the DVD and BR are sourced from the same excellent master there won't be a difference, or let's use your analogy, the movie watching experience would be identical, is flat-out disturbing. Let me go one step further - even the listening experience will be better.

Pro-B