|
|
Posted by Nick on 10/20/05 23:37
Veering off the thread a little bit...I'd like to point out (although there
is no point as anyone reading this thread this far will know this already!)
to UK people that you really really should get the r1 of The Shining - its a
good bit longer than the r2 - check any of the usual comparison sites for
more information.
"Matthew Kirkcaldie" <m.kirkcaldie@removethis.unsw.edu.au> wrote in message
news:m.kirkcaldie-E24334.13324311102005@tomahawk.comms.unsw.edu.au...
> In article <xNC2f.2502$MN6.1007@fed1read04>,
> Bill Binder <whbinder@whbinder.com> wrote:
>
>> Kubrick had final say on all video releases of his films. In the early
>> eighties he signed off on some open matte transfers, which he preffered
>> to P&S. That doesn't necesarrily mean he preffered open matte to the
>> OAR.
>
> Open matte WAS the original aspect ratio - have made this point
> elsewhere but the stills in the Kubrick Archives book pretty much wrap
> up that argument.
>
>> Especially since many of his open matte films have horrible gaffes
>> in the opened mattes.
>
> There's ONE helicopter shadow and the ghost of some blades in the
> opening of the Shining. I can't think of a single "gaffe" evident in
> the open mattes - can you be specific?
>
>> I would think he would have been more careful with
>> his mattes if that was his intent. His family is the ones that claims
>> the early VHS transfers were definative (which is why the current DVD
>> releases are not only fullscreen, but twenty year old dirty transfers
>> that can't be cleaned up by the family's request)
>
> This is completely false. The first round of DVDs were done from the
> video masters made in the 80s and look inferior. Because of this, his
> family ordered a second, entirely new set of transfers from clean prints
> for the "current DVD releases" in 2001, which are of superb quality.
>
> What a load of rubbish.
>
> MK.
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|