News|Movies|BD & DVD|Writings|Other

Films I saw for the first time in July 2011

11:59 PM / Cinema / No Comments

• Sunday, July 3, 2011: TRUE GRIT (USA, 2010) 6/10
• Monday, July 4, 2011: DRIVE ANGRY (USA, 2011) 3/10
• Thursday, July 7, 2011: THE LOVED ONES (Australia, 2009) 6/10
• Wednesday, July 13, 2011: ICE COLD IN ALEX (UK, 1958) 7/10
• Friday, July 15, 2011: THE NEXT THREE DAYS (USA/France, 2010) 6/10
• Monday, July 18, 2011: THE KIDS ARE ALL RIGHT (USA, 2010) 4/10
• Thursday, July 21, 2011: TRON (USA, 1982) 5/10
• Friday, July 22, 2011: TRON: LEGACY (USA, 2010) 7/10
• Sunday, July 24, 2011: A SINGLE MAN (USA, 2009) 7/10

BDs and DVDs I bought or received in July 2011

11:59 PM / Blu-ray / No Comments

• Monday, July 4, 2011: SPIRITS OF THE DEAD (BD, Region B, UK) (birthday present)
• Monday, July 4, 2011: CROSS OF IRON (BD, Region B, UK) (birthday present)
• Monday, July 4, 2011: ICE COLD IN ALEX (BD, Region B, UK) (birthday present)
• Monday, July 4, 2011: THE HORSEMAN (BD, Region ABC, UK) (birthday present)
• Monday, July 4, 2011: ONCE UPON A TIME IN THE WEST (BD, Region ABC, USA) (birthday present)
• Monday, July 4, 2011: DRIVE ANGRY (BD, Region A, USA) (birthday present)
• Tuesday, July 5, 2011: THE LOVED ONES (BD, Region B, UK) (birthday present)
• Friday, July 15, 2011: UNKNOWN (BD, Region B, UK)
• Monday, July 18, 2011: NO COUNTRY FOR OLD MEN (BD, Region ABC, UK)
• Monday, July 18, 2011: THE KIDS ARE ALL RIGHT (BD, Region ABC, UK)
• Monday, July 18, 2011: THE AMERICAN (BD, Region ABC, UK)
• Monday, July 18, 2011: A SINGLE MAN (BD, Region B, UK)
• Thursday, July 21, 2011: TRON: LECACY/TRON (BD, Region ABC, UK)
• Wednesday, July 27, 2011: BLOW OUT (BD, Region A, USA)

Request for comments

2:13 PM / Podcast / 5 Comments

Tomorrow, Lee and I will be recording the next episode of the Movie Matters podcast: a look at Peter Jackson's THE LORD OF THE RINGS trilogy. I know this is very short notice, but we'd like to read out as many people's thoughts on THE LORD OF THE RINGS as possible - be it about the books, the Jackson trilogy, the Bakshi film, or indeed anything else to do with Middle-Earth.

So comments, thoughts, observations: they're all welcome and we'll do our best to include them in the podcast. Either reply to this post or send an email to moviematterspodcast[at]gmail[dot]com.

Thanks, folks!

Movie Matters #9

10:39 PM / Podcast / 1 Comment

In the latest episode of the Movie Matters podcast, co-hosts Lee Howard and Michael Mackenzie take the Left Hand Path as they delve into the world of the supernatural, examining two adaptations by the renowned Hammer studio of the black magic novels of the prolific Dennis Wheatley, 1968's THE DEVIL RIDES OUT and 1976's TO THE DEVIL A DAUGHTER. The hosts also discuss significant movies that have so far eluded them in a "Never Seen But Should Have" feature, cast their eyes over recent Blu-ray and DVD releases, and induct another Blu-ray transfer into the Movie Matters Hall of Fame.

• https://rapidshare.com/files/3333605622/moviematters-episode9-28-07-11.mp3
• iTunes

The music sampled in this episode is from THE DEVIL RIDES OUT (James Bernard), THE CURSE OF FRANKENSTEIN (James Bernard), HORROR OF DRACULA (James Bernard) and THE MUMMY (Franz Reizenstein).

http://moviematterspodcast.blogspot.com

BD impressions: The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King (Extended Edition)

3:12 PM / BD Impressions / 6 Comments

The film: THE RETURN OF THE KING is a somewhat frustrating film for me, arguably more so than either of the previous instalments in Peter Jackson's trilogy. It remains the only instalment for which the extended material is really a "make or break" situation: the theatrical version is missing two scenes so crucial to the entire trilogy that I honestly consider it a woefully inferior version in that form. Even with these vital scenes restored, however, the film leaves something to be desired as an adaptation of Tolkien's novel, skipping or glossing over important elements while expanding or inventing others which slow things down and distract from the main narrative.

As I mentioned in my review of THE TWO TOWERS, that film only covered just over half of the book, meaning that come ROTK Jackson and his writers have a great deal of ground still left to cover: the confrontation with Saruman and Pippin's escapade with the palantír, Gandalf and Pippin's flight to Minas Tirith, Frodo and Sam's passage through Cirith Ungol and encounter with Shelob, and of course Frodo's capture by orcs after Sam, leaving him for dead, makes off with the Ring. It's somewhat surprising, then, that ROTK immediately throws a whole lot of invented and/or redundant material at us, including a flashback showing the corruption of Gollum (originally intended for TTT at the point when Gollum's Sméagol personality re-emerged - a far better fit for the material, in my opinion), lengthy scenes of celebration at Edoras and an ill-judged sequence in which Frodo, contrary to the novel, sends Sam packing and Sam, contrary to everything we know about his character, acquiesces. These additions are problematic enough before you even consider that, in the theatrical version, they come at the expense of one of the most important scenes in the entire trilogy: the confrontation at Orthanc at which Gandalf breaks Saruman's staff and casts him from their Order. I've harped on about this before but it bears mentioning again: to remove the demise of the second film's main villain (and the true on-screen "Big Bad" given that in the novel Sauron is never seen in physical form and in the film is rendered only as a giant floating eye), putting the matter to bed with some cursory line about him no longer being a threat, strikes me as madness incarnate, and I would argue that the reinstating of this scene near the beginning of the extended edition goes a long way towards making up for the flaws of the theatrical cut. I'd go as far as to say that it, plus the restoration of the confrontation with the Mouth of Sauron at the Black Gate (which completely alters the tone and purpose of the final desperate battle against the forces of Mordor), turn what was merely a good film into a great one.

There are plenty of other flaws, to be sure. Poor old Gimli is there as little more than comic relief; the nonsense involving Arwen's life inexplicably becoming tied to the fate of the Ring is nigh on incomprehensible and drags the pacing down; the loss of the Scouring of the Shire, while understandable, does leave the hobbits' character journeys feeling unfinished (given that it's the point at which they truly rise to the occasion and settle their own affairs without the need of elves, rangers or wizards to aid them). As for the PIRATES OF THE CARIBBEAN-style depiction of the Oathbreakers, not to mention the decision to have them show up at Minas Tirith and save the day in a flood of what I once saw described as "green mouthwash" - the less said the better. And in terms of the additions in the extended version, I'm not a fan of the cheesetastic "You and what army?" "This one!" exchange between Aragorn and the corsairs or Frodo and Sam's encounter with a band of orcs in Mordor, which descends into a mood-breaking slapstick farce. Nor am I particularly fond of Gandalf's encounter with the Lord of the Nazgûl, an iconic moment in the book (and, for what it's worth, Tolkien's favourite scene) that loses much of its grandeur when it turns into a scene in which Gandalf falls off his horse and Pippin does a lot of screaming...

...but there's so much else going on that's so good that the positives do outweigh the negatives. I remain unconvinced by Elijah Wood's portrayal of Frodo (his idea of showing Frodo's inner pain seems to be to speak... really... slowly), but the character's physical and mental decline is handled very well here, and Sean Astin's Sam is, as throughout the rest of the trilogy, excellent. Merry and Pippin finally get to rise above their goofy comic relief roles (the juxtaposition of Pippin's singing and Denethor's less than civilised table manners with Faramir and his men riding to certain death is, while heavy-handed, quietly chilling), and Éowyn's defeat of the Lord of the Nazgûl provides one of the trilogy's few "fist in the air" triumph moments. I'm not sure I'd agree with the general consensus that it's the best of the trilogy: compared with THE FELLOWSHIP OF THE RING, it does feel a little bloated and lackadaisically plotted, with a handful of plot holes that continue to niggle. (How on earth does Elrond reach Dunharrow from Rivendell so quickly? Why are we given so many hints as to Denethor's apparent "second sight" but then never shown that he too possesses a palantír? Why is the notion that Sauron believes Pippin has the Ring brought up and then never followed through?) Ultimately, though, there are very few movies of this length (more than four hours in its extended form) that I can sit through without becoming bored. It's ambitious, gripping, somewhat flawed and in places a bit shambolic, but taken as a whole Jackson's THE LORD OF THE RINGS trilogy is probably as good a rendition of a supposedly "unfilmable" book as could have been hoped for. I doubt I'll ever be able to watch it without thinking "I wish X had been included" or "I wish Y had been left out" or "I wish Z was more like it was in the book", but such is always the fate of adaptations when you have a particularly strong attachment to the source material. I'll probably always prefer the 1981 BBC radio adaptation, but for all its myriad flaws, this is really, really good. 8/10

Image quality: ROTK is, by a comfortable margin, the best-looking instalment of the trilogy on BD, lacking both the green tint of FOTR and much of the noticeable processing that afflicted TTT. Detail, edge enhancement (or lack thereof) and overall film-like texture continue to vary from shot to shot (and even between different elements within the same shot), but a greater degree of consistency is achieved than in the two previous films and, when it's at its best, the film looks as good as the best-looking DI-sourced titles I've seen from the early/mid 2000s. Detail, particularly in facial close-ups, is often striking (see Example 28 and Example 65), and wide shots generally fare well too - almost too well, as the computer generated nature of the crowd scenes is at times noticeable (see Example 42). Certain scenes to take on a somewhat harsh, processed look, with the Minas Tirith exteriors seeming to be especially affected (see Example 33), but generally speaking this is the most natural-looking of the bunch. Certain shots do look a little underwhelming (this one of Théoden is reminiscent of a Universal catalogue release!), but they are few and far between and, as with the BDs of the other two films, are probably the result of issues with the DI itself rather than meddling at the BD stage.

As with the previous two films, this release marks a significant improvement over the theatrical BD in terms of the comparative lack of digital processing artefacts (again I direct you to BluBrew's comparison). Grain reduction is apparent in certain shots (it's not apparent in the capture, but the close-up shots of Sam on the slopes of Orodruin when he asks Frodo if he remembers the Shire show clear "sluggishness" and freezing in the grain), but again I'm inclined to believe that this is simply an accurate representation of what the master looks like. In the final assessment, while it falls short of "reference" quality, ROTK has received a satisfying presentation - one with minor niggles rather than major flaws. Recommended.

The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King (Extended Edition)
label: Warner/New Line; disc country: USA; region code: ABC;
codec: AVC; aspect ratio: 2.39:1

Note: In an attempt to save disk space and also provide readers with a greater number of shots, I'm currently trialling uploading captures to free image hosting sites rather than my own web space. Images should take longer to load, but in my opinion the benefits should outweigh the negatives. Any thoughts? Let me know.

Updated Monday, July 9, 2012 at 02:12 PM: Transferred images from imgPlace to ImageShack. Full resolution captures should now be loading properly again.

#1083: Blow Out

11:18 PM / Blu-ray / 3 Comments

(BD, Criterion, Region A, USA)

Only $20.49 plus shipping from Amazon.com - a most generous price given how expensive Criterion's BD releases tend to be.

As I mention in the upcoming ninth episode of the Movie Matters podcast, I've seen very little of Brian De Palma's work, and this one is entirely new to me.

#1082: TRON: Legacy/TRON

5:22 PM / Blu-ray / 18 Comments

(BD, Disney, Region B, UK)

Have never seen either of these... well, I think I might have seen the end of TRON years ago on TV.

#1081: A Single Man

9:27 PM / Blu-ray / No Comments

(BD, Icon, Region B, UK)

A last minute shopping spree in the HMV sales as my summer holiday comes to an end. Picking up a few of the last year's major releases that I still haven't seen.

#1080: The American

9:26 PM / Blu-ray / 3 Comments

(BD, Universal, Region ABC, UK)

#1079: The Kids Are All Right

9:25 PM / Blu-ray / No Comments

(BD, Universal, Region ABC, UK)

#1078: No Country for Old Men

9:17 PM / Blu-ray / 1 Comment

(BD, Paramount, Region ABC, UK)

Am I the only one who's noticed that this UK BD is labelled as Region A on the back cover?

BD impressions: The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers (Extended Edition)

5:47 PM / BD Impressions / 9 Comments

The film: It's probably safe to say that THE TWO TOWERS is a much harder book to adapt than its predecessor. Not only does it have to contend with being the middle child of the trilogy and thus lacking a true beginning or end, it's a structural nightmare, focusing on three different groups of characters and told non-linearly. For their adaptation, Peter Jackson and co have made the wise decision to rearrange events into chronological order, but it's with this instalment that some of Jackson's more questionable narrative changes come to the fore and the structure becomes a little too unwieldy for its own good.

First of all, while the film bears the title THE TWO TOWERS, I'd estimate that it only covers around 60% of the book of the same name. A considerable amount of material is held back for the third instalment, on top of the material from Chapter 1 of TTT reappropriated to the end of Jackson's FOTR. The restructuring is a little odd, because it means the film doesn't actually cover anything like as much ground as either the novel or the other two films in the trilogy, despite Jackson and his team inventing a number of what might politely be described as deviations... or, if I'm feeling less generous, distractions. More so than the other two films, this instalment contains considerable amounts of material not originating from Tolkien. Some of these inventions are admittedly good ideas - for instance, despite my initial reservations, I've come round to the idea that the less flattering portrayal of Faramir works well in the grand scheme of things, while by the same token Théoden's despair and refusal to confront Saruman head-on make him a somewhat more complex character than he was in the novel.

Other changes, however, just feel like padding. The warg attack and Aragorn's false death serve no narrative purpose whatsoever beyond giving him an opportunity to catch sight of the army making its way towards Helm's Deep (the point of which I fail to see, given that everyone already knew Saruman was preparing to crush Rohan). The arrival of Haldir and his elves at Helm's Deep is nonsensical, not least because it begs the question of how they could possibly have reached Rohan within hours, when the same journey took Aragorn and company several days... to say nothing of the utterly daft alteration to the Merry/Pippin strand, which sees the Ents refusing to become involved in the war until Pippin conveniently arranges for Treebeard to take them past Isengard and witness the extent of Saruman's destruction of the forest. I'm also less than thrilled with the sheer amount of time devoted to the battle at Helm's Deep. While for some reason I remembered it being longer than it actually is, it still takes up far too much screen time that could have been better served advancing the narrative. In the book, Tolkien devotes all of ten pages to the fighting; in the film, Jackson makes it the focal point of the entire film and, seeming to forget he's telling a multi-stranded epic, for a while settles into action movie mode. To be fair, Ralph Bakshi too devoted far too much time to Helm's Deep... although at least he never had Legolas skateboarding on an upturned shield. Going to be a long time before I forgive you for THAT, Pete. ;)

For all these complaints, though, I do feel the need to commend the casting of the characters appearing for the first time in this film, particularly Bernard Hill as Théoden, Miranda Otto as Éowyn and Brad Dourif as Wormtongue. Otto in particular is a wonderful presence - the real thing in contrast to the rather unconvincing "warrior Arwen" of FOTR - partly thanks to the Éowyn of the book already being something of an unintentional equal rights champion (at least until her wholly unconvincing eleventh-hour "I will be a shieldmaiden no longer" speech) and partly because Otto is, frankly, a much better actress than Liv Tyler. Her finest hour comes in the next film, but already here she's a vastly more interesting screen presence than either Arwen or Cate Blanchett's trippy Galadriel. Karl Urban's Éomer, by contrast, has so little screen time in the films as to effectively become a non-entity. Jackson's decision to combine his role with that of Erkenbrand is, however, a wise one... though once again I feel compelled to point out that he's following in the footsteps of Bakshi, who did precisely the same thing with his version.

The other major new presence is of course Gollum, and I have mixed feelings about him. While the CGI effects used to bring him to life - in conjunction with the motion capture and voice, both provided by Andy Serkis - are unquestionable extremely impressive, I would dispute the claim made by some that he looks truly real. The character design is far enough removed from reality to avoid the "uncanny valley" effect, but I'm always aware that I'm watching visual effects whenever he's on screen, and they have certainly dated in the nine years since the film's release. I'm also not bowled over by Serkis' vocal performance: to me it seems too high-pitched and whiny, in stark contrast to the late Peter Woodthorpe's lower, more menacing rasp in both the Bakshi film and the BBC radio play. It doesn't help that Serkis' Gollum sounds almost identical to Gurgi in Disney's THE BLACK CAULDRON - hardly a flattering comparison.

As far as the differences between the theatrical and extended cuts are concerned, I can take or leave many of the additions, and in some cases feel that they may be overegging the pudding a bit (the inclusion of extra material involving Merry and Pippin redresses their overly brief screen time in the theatrical cut, but it doesn't help that most of their additional scenes involve the Ents, whose lack of haste is captured a little too effectively). Many are good, though, particularly Théodred's funeral, while the flashback showing Boromir in the aftermath of having retaken Osgiliath is worth the price of admission alone. This brief scene explains so much about both Boromir and Faramir's motivation and behaviour that to this day I think Jackson made a big mistake in cutting it from the theatrical version (couldn't he have cut down Helm's Deep a bit instead if running time was an issue). In some way, it also gives justification to the decision to have Faramir drag Frodo and Sam all the way to Osgiliath.

As an adaptation of Tolkien's novel, I find THE TWO TOWERS a bit of a mixed bag. While FOTR was a largely straightforward adaptation, TTT ends up taking more liberties with the source material. On the whole I like the film, but there's a lot wrong with it and, on balance, I feel that it's the weakest of the trilogy. 7/10

Image quality: In contrast to the complex situation regarding the extended BD of FOTR, this review of TTT will be a bit more straightforward. Having already been a 100% digital intermediate title to begin with (barring, oddly enough, the closing credits, which like those of FOTR exhibit gate weave), TTT has not received a completely new master, and as a result looks more or less the same as it has done for the last nine years. BluBrew's comparison shows that there are some slight differences in colour balance between this and the theatrical BD, but they are largely minor (see the shot of Elrond for a rare example of a more pronounced change). There is certainly no green tint to be found here, providing further evidence that FOTR's tint was unintentional.

Where major differences are to be found, they come in the form of the removal of much of the destructive DNR that plagued the theatrical BD. Again, BluBrew's comparison is most illuminating, showing that on the theatrical BD the grain reduction wreaked havoc on hair and skin texture - just look at the close-ups of Gandalf (not an exact frame match, but still sufficient to show the level of difference) and Théoden! This sort of DNR appears to have been standard practice at New Line for their BD releases (see also the likes of PAN'S LABYRINTH, A HISTORY OF VIOLENCE and, perhaps worst of all, DARK CITY) and the fact that the extended BD shows such an improvement is a cause for celebration. Hopefully, with Warner now handling New Line's BD releases themselves, these follies can be consigned to the past.

That said, before anyone breaks out the champagne, it needs to be stressed that, while much of the DNR is now gone, some is still present, making this the weakest-looking of the three films on BD from a filmic standpoint. Generally speaking, detail is not as impressive as in the other two films, and smearing artefacts crop up on a number of occasions, some more severe than others (this frame of Théoden is a particularly odious example, while this frame shows some pretty severe artefacting on the tree to the right of the frame), but my suspicion is that a grain reduction pass was applied to the entire film. Particularly during wide shots where the pans over New Zealand's impressive landscapes, there is an overall lack of texture, with camera movement resulting in noticeable smearing in quite a few shots. The question that remains, I suppose, is at what stage in the chain this process was applied. It's impossible to say with any certainty, but I suspect the fact that FOTR and ROTK are unaffected points to it having been done at the level of the master itself rather than something that was specifically done for the BD. It is, on the whole, a good presentation, but far from a reference one. Recommended, but with issues.

The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers (Extended Edition)
label: Warner/New Line; disc country: USA; region code: ABC;
codec: AVC; aspect ratio: 2.39:1

#1077: Unknown

10:28 PM / Blu-ray / 8 Comments

(BD/DVD combo, Optimum, Region B/2, UK)

BD impressions: The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring (Extended Edition)

8:54 PM / BD Impressions / 19 Comments

The film: I first read J.R.R. Tolkien's THE LORD OF THE RINGS when I was in primary school. If you asked me a decade ago, I would probably have described it as my favourite book, and although I've become more aware of its flaws as the years have passed, I still maintain considerable affection for it. I saw the Ralph Bakshi 1978 animation/live action hybrid film while I was still making my way through the book, and even at the time was aware that it was a deeply flawed (if unique) take on the material. Conversely, the 1981 BBC radioplay, which I encountered some years later, always struck me as a superb piece of adaptation, neatly condensing all three instalments into 13 hour-long episodes. To this day I still consider the radio version to be the definitive adaptation of Tolkien's work, to the extent that when I read Gandalf's dialogue, I always hear Michael Hordern in my head, and ditto Ian Holm for Frodo.

I mention all this because, when THE FELLOWSHIP OF THE RING (FOTR), the first instalment of Peter Jackson's trilogy of films, was released back in 2001, I had a fairly lukewarm reaction to it. I liked certain elements and was impressed that Jackson had managed to turn what many had considered an unfilmable book into something so coherent, but I still found it to be heavily flawed and believe I even suggested at the time that the Bakshi version was the better of the two. (It's certainly the more idiosyncratic, but that's an article for another time.) Rewatching FOTR in its extended form for the first time since that cut was first released in 2002, I like it more than I did before and suspect that I'll end up considering it the most coherent and best paced of the trilogy once I've made my way through all three films, but there remain for me certain decisions on Jackson's part that I just can't get my head round, and I think it does suffer in comparison to the radio version, which proved that you can condense and streamline the material without altering it beyond recognition.

To Jackson's credit, his alterations are not of the "beyond recognition" variety, and although once you look past quirks like his bizarre decision to depict Aragorn as a Native American and Boromir as a Viking, Bakshi's version is actually closer to the original writing in a textual sense, the 2001 film ends up "feeling" more like Tolkien. This is in part due to the decision to hire John Howe and Alan Lee, Tolkien illustrators par excellence, as conceptual designers: having illustrated countless book covers, calendars and the like over the years, their art has become synonymous with Middle-earth (though personally I was always rather partial to Ted Nasmith's paintings). Jackson's attention for detail and accuracy is at times awe-inspiring. Not content to merely get the pronunciation of the likes of "Minas Tirith", "Balin" and "Sauron" right (something Bakshi failed to do), he inserts any number of minor details that dedicated fans will appreciate but will pass most casual viewers by: for instance, Legolas walking ABOVE the snow while everyone else wades through it during the Caradhras sequence is right out of the book, and on numerous occasions characters drop into authentic (subtitled) Elvish.

Where Jackson departs noticeably from the source material, the results are a mixed bag. I like the hobbits' exploits in the Old Forest and their meeting with Tom Bombadil in the books, but I don't mourn their absence here (there's a reason all three adaptations jetison that particular diversion), and I'd even go as far as to say that the alterations made to the Aragorn character, crucially giving him an actual arc, improves on the original. Until Weathertop, Jackson does an impressive job of condensing what is often meandering and leisurely on the page, turning it into something pacy and exciting, while maintaining the guts of the source material (it's worth noting, however, that he lifts two scenes directly from Bakshi - the hobbits hiding under the roots of a tree from a Black Rider, and the Riders' attack on the inn at Bree - something that few reviewers seem to have acknowledged). Considerably less successful is the decision to shoehorn Arwen into the role held by Glorfindel in the book, which reeks of a cynical attempt to fulfil the "girl power" quota (Éowyn doesn't show up until Film 2) and is completely out of kilter with the portrayal of the character in the rest of the series (Bakshi's decision to use Legolas is a much more effective substitution). Having her confront the Riders at the Ford of Bruinen also robs Frodo of one of his few genuinely heroic moments, and although I'm not much of a fan of Elijah Wood's wet, weepy interpretation of the character in general, I do think letting him make his stand at the Ford - one of the most iconic moments in the book - would have gone some way towards mitigating this. Likewise I strongly dislike Cate Blanchett's portrayal of Galadriel as if she's just ingested a considerable amount of some mind-altering substance or other... and I like Blanchett in pretty much everything I've seen her in.

In terms of the differences between the theatrical and extended cuts, I do feel that, with each subsequent instalment, the added material becomes more essential. While I think THE RETURN OF THE KING is severely crippled without Saruman's demise and the confrontation at the Black Gate with the Mouth of Sauron, the additions to FOTR don't really change anything significantly. As with all three films, some of the added scenes work better than others (Frodo's "Gandalf, which way is Mordor?" always makes me cringe, as does the fart joke involving the lembas bread), but on balance I have a slight preference for the extended cut. 8/10

Image quality: I'm pretty late to the table with this review, and it feels as if just about everyone has already had their say about this most controversial of discs. Still, the dust doesn't look like settling any time soon. As regards the rights and wrongs of this release, I'm inclined to take something of a middle of the road approach. Yes, there IS unquestionably a uniform green tint across the entire movie. No, it DOESN'T ruin the film beyond recognition, and it certainly doesn't deserve to be mentioned in the same breath as travesties like the original BD releases of GANGS OF NEW YORK and GLADIATOR, or the recent DON'T LOOK NOW disaster.

My own suspicion is that there are in fact two separate issues to consider: (1) the new colour timing created under the guidance of Peter Jackson and cinematographer Andrew Lesnie, and (2) the aforementioned green tint. Only around 70% of FOTR received the digital intermediate (DI) treatment, with the remaining 30% being colour timed photochemically. For this extended edition BD release, Warner have gone back to the digital files and created the film's first complete DI, and as a result there are some pretty significant changes to the film's look. I'd hazard a guess that most of the captures you've seen highlighting "problems" with the new release are primarily instances in which Jackson and Lesnie have deliberately altered the colour balance - the now-sickly, undersaturated scenes after the hobbits and Aragorn leave Bree, for instance (see Example 16), or the now heavily blue-tinted Caradhras sequence (Example 26). As a result, this is not the same FOTR we saw in cinemas or on DVD, but if you value directorial intent, it's still a valid representation of the film.

On top of that, though, is the green tint. Not to beat about the bush, but I'm convinced something went wrong here and have a hard time viewing any of the various excuses I've heard as in any way credible. It simply doesn't make sense to me that Jackson (or indeed any director) would choose to apply a green push to an entire film from beginning to end - not given the attention to detail he has shown in every other respect with regard to the trilogy. (And it's worth emphasising that EVERYTHING is affected: even the title card and burned-in subtitles are now green rather than white.) So, either Jackson made a sloppy, unprofessional and decidedly uncharacteristic decision... or someone screwed up at some other point in the chain. I know which of the two explanations I find more plausible.

So, how detrimental is the tint on the presentation? It varies from scene to scene, from unnoticeable to pretty damn annoying. The worst affected material is the early Shire scenes, where the green tint, on top of a palette that already leaned heavily towards green, is close to overpowering (see Example 4), and scenes lit with fire- or torchlight, where the warm yellow and red hues now look decidedly sickly (see Example 8). The opening prologue and Moria sequences also look far darker than they did before, to the extent that visibility is at times an issue, but I'm hard pressed to say whether this is the result of the tinting or the deliberate alterations Jackson and Lesnie have made to the colour timing.

Otherwise, this is a very good presentation, although the clarity improvements (compared with both the mediocre DVDs and less than impressive theatrical BD release) do show up certain inconsistencies in the source material. Some shots look razor sharp, as detailed as anything I've seen on a BD (see Example 35), whereas others look considerably less impressive (see Example 7). Sometimes clarity varies wildly between different shots in the same scene - there's a conversation between Frodo and Aragorn in Bree where the shots of Frodo are wonderfully crisp (see Example 14) while those of Aragorn look almost like a multi-generational dupe (see Example 15). We also get to see some ropey compositing (see Example 6) and a small number of instances where overbearing DNR appears to be baked into the master (see Example 30). None of these are black marks against the disc per se, but it does mean that the presentation is somewhat inconsistent in a way not previously seen (because earlier releases had a "ceiling" that essentially homogenised the whole film to the same level of mediocrity). Certainly, the ugly smearing artefacts that plagued the theatrical cut BD are gone.

In the final assessment, the positives outweigh the negatives. In terms of overal detail and filmlike appearance, this is unquestionably the best release of FOTR to date. The colour tinting, while noticeable and objectionable, is not as bad as you've probably been led to believe - it certainly doesn't make me want to go back to my old DVD. Were it not for the tint, I suspect this would have ended up being the best-looking of the entire trilogy... but I'll discuss this in more detail in my reviews of the subsequent two films. Recommended, but with significant issues.

The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring (Extended Edition)
label: Warner/New Line; disc country: USA; region code: ABC;
codec: AVC; aspect ratio: 2.39:1

#1076: The Loved Ones

5:56 PM / Blu-ray / 11 Comments

(BD, Optimum, Region B, UK) - birthday present

#1075: Drive Angry

5:49 PM / Blu-ray / 1 Comment

(BD, Summit, Region A, USA) - birthday present

#1074: Once Upon a Time in the West

5:47 PM / Blu-ray / 3 Comments

(BD, Paramount, Region ABC, USA) - birthday present

#1073: The Horseman

5:46 PM / Blu-ray / No Comments

(BD, Kaleidoscope, Region ABC, UK) - birthday present

#1072: Ice Cold in Alex

5:44 PM / Blu-ray / No Comments

(BD, Optimum, Region B, UK) - birthday present

#1071: Cross of Iron

5:43 PM / Blu-ray / 2 Comments

(BD, Optimum, Region B, UK) - birthday present

#1070: Spirits of the Dead

5:40 PM / Blu-ray / 1 Comment

(BD, Arrow Films, Region ABC, UK) - birthday present

Birthday swag

9:47 AM / General / 23 Comments

A train, some movies, a game... and a bag of Jelly Bellies.

#1070: Don't Look Now

7:30 PM / Blu-ray / 35 Comments

(BD, Optimum, Region B, UK)

Sorry to report that this appears to be a CAT O' NINE TAILS style degraining job (albeit without the harsh noise overlaid on top of it). I'm really disappointed and considering just returning the disc. I actually think I prefer the look of the Paramount DVD, and I don't often find myself saying something like that. I hold Optimum, who have a very good track record, to a far higher standard than this:

Serious question, but does anyone know if the Italians somehow got their hands on this? Going by past experiences, this looks like "their" sort of mess.

Updated Saturday, July 2, 2011 at 08:56 PM: Sod it, I'm returning it. The old DVD looks considerably better:

BD impressions: The Taking of Pelham One Two Three

7:33 PM / BD Impressions / 2 Comments

"Why don't you go grab a goddamn aeroplane like everybody else?"

The film: THE TAKING OF PELHAM ONE TWO THREE is one of my favourite films of the 70s - a brilliantly efficient, genuinely tense and incisively witty thriller about a group of armed men, led by the brilliant Robert Shaw, who hijack a subway carriage and demand $1 million for the release of its passengers. Pitted against them is Walter Matthau at his hangdog best, embarking on an understated battle of words with Shaw as he attempts to secure the safety of the hostages.

The phrase "they don't make 'em like this any more" is overused, but it's completely accurate here, not just in terms of its measured, understated approach (you only need to watch the loud, MTV editing-infused Tony Scott remake starring Denzel Washington and John Travolta to see what a 21st century take on the same material would look like) but also how distinctly 70s it feels - the costumes, the attitudes, David Shire's wonderful score... it all adds up to evoke something that doesn't exist any more. The New York of the film is very much a character in its own right - this was, of course, long before the city's Film Production Tax Credit Program was set up to effectively offer incentives in exchange for showing the city in a positive light. In PELHAM, we're shown a grungy, grubby, dangerous, jaded New York in which Matthau's character seems to be the only person around who gives a shit about the hostages. It's tempting to describe the film as a commentary on an increasingly depersonalised and profit-focused society, but I don't think that's the film's intention - at least not its PRIMARY intention. It's simply an excellent, well-made thriller and a perfect example of how films like this should be done. 9/10

Image quality: Taking into account this disc's status as a budget release (and a Best Buy exclusive, though I managed to source a copy from Blu-rays For Everyone), THE TAKING OF PELHAM ONE TWO THREE actually looks pretty damn good. It's abundantly clear that Fox didn't push the boat out for this release, but the image looks film-like and unmolested. Detail isn't brilliant, but I feel disinclined to suspect any foul-play in that regard. It's a lot darker than my old non-anamorphic PAL DVD, to the extent that once the lights are cut in the subway carriage it actually becomes pretty difficult to see anything... but then again, that's hardly unrealistic, and in every respect director Joseph Sargent and cinematographer Owen Roizman (of THE FRENCH CONNECTION and THE EXORCIST fame) seem to have been going for grungy realism. Shadow detail is hardly stellar, but again I get the impression that that's to be expected. I have no complaints about the compression, and while there is some visible print damage in the form of specs and scratches, they aren't too distracting and stand as compelling evidence that the film has been left alone. Recommended, but with issues.

The Taking of Pelham One Two Three
label: 20th Century Fox/MGM; disc country: USA; region code: ABC;
codec: AVC; aspect ratio: 2.35:1

Thoughts on The Taking of Pelham One Two Three BD

10:53 AM / Web / 5 Comments

Microphone is still crap and boosting the volume just makes it sound worse. Might have to look into a standalone mike...

More posts