Meridian Unplugged - Powered by MrTechGuy.co.uk Forums Discussion Meridian - Systems The one of MANY HD-DVD threads (No bashing Blu-Ray)

Well, here I go again, but Kubrick's Lolita was rubbish, and particularly Peter Sellers was very annoying in this film. Perhaps it was controversial and interesting at it's release, but now it looks pap. Adrian Lynne's 1997 version was much more satisfying. I also think that 2001 is, after the incredible opening sequence - apes to the obelisk - interminably dull. I *will* watch it again on HD, but that will probably be the last time ever.

Mark

I'm immensely fond of his version of Lolita. I've a bias when it comes to Sellers so I won't say much more in arguing other than I always find him compelling to watch even when he's not at his best. In the case of Lolita though I think it's Shelly Winters who puts in one of the film's best performances, and Mason too when Humbert's at his most obsessive I think is very good. The tone of it is certainly a little dated and a little forced in the way many films of the early 60s were, but in remains an important film for its time in my opinion. The framing in the photography is wonderful too. Some iconic shots in that film. I love it more each time I watch it (which is something I can say for all Kubrick film come to think of it).

I'd need every Kubrick film in HD; MGM being as unenthusiastic about Bluray as they seem to be doesn't leave me anticipating The Killing, Killers Kiss and Paths of Glory from them any time in the next three years (I may finally have put my money where my mouth is and bought into one of the formats by then:) ), though I'd hope Sony get Dr Strangelove out there soon enough as it had a recent restoration which was excellent.

I love 2001 on so many levels I could write an essay about it, but I do completely understand how it is an acquired taste. Have you ever seen it in 70mm? It's one of the most overwhelming cinematic experiences I've ever encountered. Warner`s previous HD master had some edge enhancement here and there so I hope they strike a new clean one for the next DVD and HD release. The knowledge this is coming to HD this year, and that Sony is prepping Lawrence of Arabia are factors that will ensure I`ve a new TV and some means of playing these formats by Christmas. This is the sort of stuff I`ve been waiting for the most and once it`s out there on the shelves I know I will be able to resist no longer. Hard enough already with some of the stuff out and coming out. I`m surprised by my patience, but it`s waning, only held back by low funds now rather than fears over which format might win out in the long term. I miss buying and watching films..

I have just succumbed to the dark side and bought a US PS3. Thanks for all of your help in the other thread!

Now I do love Dr Strangelove. It was one of the final DVDs that my partner and I watched before switching to the new cinema. She fell asleep, bored... :|

I haven't. Perhaps it was my first experience of it which soured me towards it. I was about 9 or 10 and the local cinema was screening it. My best friend and I decided to go watch the big sci-fi movie and saved our pocket money for a week or two. Having recently seen Star Wars we were expecting much of the same, but alas it was not to be. Two very sad little boys left the cinema feeling rather ripped off - no Wookies - no lightsabers - just lots of white spaceship interiors and ballet music - blech. As an adult I can certainly appreciate the film making and the content more than the child, but what I see now is the brief stunning opening sequence, perhaps one of the greatest in film history, which gets you all excited about the coming film, only to be left with lots of white spaceship interiors and ballet music. I enjoy film from many extremes and will happily choose obscure foreign subtitled art-house movies over the latest popcorn blockbusters, but that film is just *so* dull...

Now, I have seen Lawrence of Arabia in 70mm at the AMPAS theatre in Los Angeles. During the first IMDb team get together we all travelled to Hollywood (where else!) and rented out the theatre for Lawrence and Singing in the Rain, both in 70mm. Possibly the best cinema experience of my life.

Don't have a baby! Buying isn't a problem, but watching is - I'm down to one film a week at the moment :| He *better* start liking films soon or I'll be looking at adoption!

Mark

For me, 2001 only works well on a huge screen.
I watched it in 70MM @ Oslo's best cinema Colosseum kino (now a 22m X 9m flat screen, then a similar size curved screen, more info here ) years ago, and it blew me away. Watching it at a smaller theatre or at home I find parts of it dull, I feel you really need to be visually overwhelmed by the movie.

Glad I could be of some help. I just think given the current circumstances the PS3 remains the most affordable and functional route into Bluray at the moment whether one is a gamer or not. I expect that's the road I will go down in the winter even when 2nd/3rd gen that conform to the new spec additions appear as I do want a PS3 for its games too, although it's continuing to struggle in this department and hardware sales continue to do badly month after month in the US (only 82,000 in April).

I'm taking very serious time to explore my choices in re-designing my entire home cinema set up at the moment, after which I can finally join you all in enjoying all these releases. I've been unwell off and on for some time now and movies have always been a great excuse to help me relax, so I truly mean it when I say how much I miss buying and watching a lot of new releases. First up my display needs changing, then amps/speakers and then I'll probably look to retire the 568.2 with a replacement. With Mark and others always on about the Squezebox I'm not sure if I should sell on my 500mk3 transport too.

I think Njål summed it up well in saying that it only truly works on a big screen (in a darkened room with no distractions). That`s a key reason I`m excited to one day finally be able to own it in HD as, although not a patch on 70mm obviously, it`s just going to be so much more revealing of the film`s visual splendour. I think with your screening room you`ve created the ideal environment to sit and watch 2001, so hopefully when you can watch it in 1080p on that vast screen it might turn out to be a fresh experience.

Oh and I assume everyone knows about this:

http://i207.photobucket.com/albums/bb284/KAZAMA_photos/IMG_0010_edited.jpg



Branagh's version of Hamlet is also coming from Warner later this year from a new master made from the 65mm source. There was another 70mm sight to behold.... That should look gorgeous.

If not, at least the seats recline and I can have a nap to the nice music.

Mark

You just had to start me off again :p Am I the only person that thinks the narrated version is vastly more enjoyable than the director's cut without the narration?

Mark

Yes: Live at Montreaux is now available to pre-order at Amazon.

http://www.amazon.com/Yes-Live-Mont...&s=dvd&qid=1179591208&sr=8-2

Mark

To be brutally honest, Mark, I rate the film on a technical level more than anything else. I've never had much love for Ridley Scott beyond Alien (which I absolutely love to bits). Whether this forthcoming 'final cut' of Blade Runner ends up being a version that isn't deeply flawed I'm intrigued to see. Important film to have in one's collection though, and besides, if the HD release mimics the DVD version (also due in October) it will include every cut of the movie ever made.

No, though it's been so long since I've seen the original. IMO, both versions have their merits.

I know that Ford (allegedly) tried to do the voiceover as badly as possible to ensure it got cut, but I never had a problem with it - voiceovers can add atmosphere. Likewise the stock footage ending doesn't bother me even though the studio forced it - I never found it unrealistic to suggest that there was life and hope outside of the dreary cities because the same is true today. My recollection of the first time I saw the Director's Cut is that the extended scenes generally made sense.

However, I have a strong feeling that the "Director's Cut" was never what Scott originally intended when filming, but contained his response to all of the speculation and mythology that had grown since the original cinematic release. In that sense, it was disappointing. I think this is why the unicorn sequence doesn't work for me - it's just too obvious and clumsily done, though clearly required to suggest Dekkard is a replicant*. It's worth noting though that the origame unicorn works *very* well - in the original cut - as the plot device to show that Olmos' character had been to the apartment...

Every time I watch either version I always think the "tears in the rain" scene is cliche'd, but then I remember that it's completely original. Roll on the HD DVD!

* Personally, I prefer the ambiguity in the Dekkard human or replicant question and concentration on the idea that we are *all* made from the sum of our memories, replicant and human, so what's the difference. I think Scott *made* Dekkard a replicant in the second cut.