Don't Look Now (Blu-ray SteelBook) (Zavvi Exclusive) [UK]

[snooloui]

Release date: May 30th, 2015
Purchase link: Don't Look Now (live)
Price: £15.99
Notes: Limited to 2,000 copies.

Spoiler

 

[paulboland]

I wonder when is this going to be live to order

 

[JackRegan]

Unfortunately the cover art bears no resemblance to the film.

Spoiler

The little girl in the red mac is drowned at the beginning of the film - and never appears on the bridge in Venice - it is the deformed dwarf in the red duffle coat that is seen in Venice which Donald Sutherland chases etc.

As regards the transfer/restoration.

Having looked again at the graphs of both the Criterion and the Optimum, and if I've read them correctly, it should be the Optimum which presents the superior picture - which is the way some reviews lean.

I honestly think, as CC has indicated, that unless you watch this at home, with all your gear properly calibrated, it's one of those you'll never know for sure. Even then, it's likely to be down to your eyes in the end.

 

[chunk]

Unfortunately the cover art bears no resemblance to the film.

Spoiler

The little girl in the red mac is drowned at the beginning of the film - and never appears on the bridge in Venice - it is the deformed dwarf in the red duffle coat that is seen in Venice which Donald Sutherland chases etc.

As regards the transfer/restoration.

Having looked again at the graphs of both the Criterion and the Optimum, and if I've read them correctly, it should be the Optimum which presents the superior picture - which is the way some reviews lean.

I honestly think, as CC has indicated, that unless you watch this at home, with all your gear properly calibrated, it's one of those you'll never know for sure. Even then, it's likely to be down to your eyes in the end.

spoiler alert

 

[JackRegan]

spoiler alert

Crikey Chunk, if there's someone here who hasn't seen it I'd be very surprised

 

[HalloweenNightJW]

Too bad the back isn't the front.

 

[hayemaker]

Crikey Chunk, if there's someone here who hasn't seen it I'd be very surprised

I think you're giving the forum way too much credit. 90% haven't seen a film without Iron Man in it.

 

[chunk]

I think you're giving the forum way too much credit. 90% haven't seen a film without Iron Man in it.

I haven't seen this in years.

I like the artwork but I don't think I'm gonna buy it.. too many mavel steelbooks coming up

 

[JackRegan]

I think you're giving the forum way too much credit. 90% haven't seen a film without Iron Man in it.

Well mate, I've had a particularly horrible day - and you just made me laugh out loud. Thank YOU!!!!!

 

[C.C. 95]

To this day I still don't know why this film has such a huge following. I watched it years ago after hearing all the positive reviews and it did nothing for me. Actually, I hated it (and I'm a huge Horror fan!) Not to mention all the random interludes of terrible 70's music!

I urge you to watch the opening montage of that film again. It was a masterclass (that is studied in film schools) in editing and cinematography- not to mention emotional and psychological foreshadowing in visual narrative.
And disliking the 70's music is like going to China and saying you dislike all the Chinese food.
It was made in the 70's! I hate 70's clothing- damn! Now I can't watch any movies from the '70's! What were they thinking!

Unfortunately the cover art bears no resemblance to the film.

I have mixed feelings about the cover art. But I have no problem with "representative cover art" vs. "literal cover art"
Example: we never saw this scene in JAWS- it is "representative" of a scene in JAWS, not a "literal" scene.

As I said, that opening montage of DON'T LOOK NOW is historic and studied. Do you think Steven Spielberg might have 'borrowed' the girl in the red coat for SCHINDLER'S LIST?
Influential and historic film. On every level.

 

[BluSteel2012]

I urge you to watch the opening montage of that film again. It was a masterclass (that is studied in film schools) in editing and cinematography- not to mention emotional and psychological foreshadowing in visual narrative.

It still doesn't make the film any good IMO. It's 90 mins of my life I wasted looking at two people shagging constantly (if I remember correctly) waiting for something to happen! That's like saying 'give Godzilla (1998) another chance. It had groundbreaking CGI for it's day'!!!

And disliking the 70's music is like going to China and saying you dislike all the Chinese food.
It was made in the 70's! I hate 70's clothing- damn! Now I can't watch any movies from the '70's! What were they thinking!

Come on.....you know what I meant. I love music. Even 70's music. But endless (bad) elevator music from the 70's doesn't float my boat when I'm supposed to be watching a highly rated horror film!

 

[BluSteel2012]

And Steven Spielberg using a girl in a red coat is downright plagiarism of this film!!!

 

[C.C. 95]

It still doesn't make the film any good IMO. It's 90 mins of my life I wasted looking at two people shagging constantly (if I remember correctly) waiting for something to happen! That's like saying 'give Godzilla (1998) another chance. It had groundbreaking CGI for it's day'!!!

Come on.....you know what I meant. I love music. Even 70's music. But endless (bad) elevator music from the 70's doesn't float my boat when I'm supposed to be watching a highly rated horror film!

Actually, Godzilla '98 had ass special effects even back then!
I revere the opening montage the same way as the opening of Touch of Evil, or the funhouse scene in Lady From Shanghai, or the steadicam shot from Halloween. Touchstones of genius that people have borrowed from ever since. I think it's fine if this film isn't your cup of tea. It is a psychological kind of horror. It reminds me of other films like The Sailor Who Fell From Grace with The Sea, or The Other (1976), or The Little Girl Who Lives Down The Lane(1976)- maybe not 'straight-up' horror...but the kind of films that leave you unsettled for weeks.

I get your point about 70's music! But it is cross we all have to bear, that music and fashion from other eras are part of a movie and it's flavor.
Hell, it annoys me NOW to hear the music in Cameron Crowe's Singles (grunge fad)!!!
My least favorite: classic movies (a lot of comedies) from the 60's into the 70's that use a chorus of of people scat singing. (Think The Muppets song "Mahna Mahna").
There's a difference between not digging a movie, and understanding why people do, and what effect it had historically on cinema. This was as 'talked about' a movie back in the 70s as Rosemarys Baby was or The Exorcist.
As far as I know, no one ever talked about the special-effects and how great they were in Godzilla 1998. Even in 1998!
But you don't dig Don't Look Now.. And that's cool. I get it. I love westerns and Clint Eastwood. But I hate Unforgiven. So there you go.

 

[C.C. 95]

And Steven Spielberg using a girl in a red coat is downright plagiarism of this film!!!

 

[goufcustom]

now can we go back to steelbook topic ? when would this go live anyway?

 

[C.C. 95]

now can we go back to steelbook topic ? when would this go live anyway?

I'd say 9AM GMT tomorrow or Sunday. Educated guess...
This is actually kind of nice. I already have the Criterion Collection disc (which I'm very happy with), but now I can have the Optimum version as well in the steelbook (I can now see whose transfer is better!).

 

[paulboland]

Unfortunately the cover art bears no resemblance to the film.

Spoiler

The little girl in the red mac is drowned at the beginning of the film - and never appears on the bridge in Venice - it is the deformed dwarf in the red duffle coat that is seen in Venice which Donald Sutherland chases etc.

As regards the transfer/restoration.

Having looked again at the graphs of both the Criterion and the Optimum, and if I've read them correctly, it should be the Optimum which presents the superior picture - which is the way some reviews lean.

I honestly think, as CC has indicated, that unless you watch this at home, with all your gear properly calibrated, it's one of those you'll never know for sure. Even then, it's likely to be down to your eyes in the end.

That is correct the cover in regards to Venice its what Donald Sutherland thinks he sees on the bridge
Its the same cover as the DVD special edition


The Film on first viewing with most viewers leave them a bit confused as a lot of the film is the psycho elements of what Donald Sutherland character in the film thinks hes seeing and its why this film takes a few viewings to get the film overall

On one note make sure you don't have any kids around when watching the film as there is one scene in the film that is very graphic and caused a lot of controversy at the time



The Venice scene influenced another film in a big way
Director Martin McDonagh said that the "Venice of Don't Look Now" was the template for the depiction of Bruges in his film

 

[JackRegan]

Actually, Godzilla '98 had ass special effects even back then!
I revere the opening montage the same way as the opening of Touch of Evil, or the funhouse scene in Lady From Shanghai, or the steadicam shot from Halloween. Touchstones of genius that people have borrowed from ever since. I think it's fine if this film isn't your cup of tea. It is a psychological kind of horror. It reminds me of other films like The Sailor Who Fell From Grace with The Sea, or The Other (1976), or The Little Girl Who Lives Down The Lane(1976)- maybe not 'straight-up' horror...but the kind of films that leave you unsettled for weeks.

I get your point about 70's music! But it is cross we all have to bear, that music and fashion from other eras are part of a movie and it's flavor.
Hell, it annoys me NOW to hear the music in Cameron Crowe's Singles (grunge fad)!!!
My least favorite: classic movies (a lot of comedies) from the 60's into the 70's that use a chorus of of people scat singing. (Think The Muppets song "Mahna Mahna").
There's a difference between not digging a movie, and understanding why people do, and what effect it had historically on cinema. This was as talked about a movie back in the 70s as Rosemarys Baby was or The Exorcist.
As far as I know, no one ever talked about the special-effects and how great they were in Godzilla 1998. Even in 1998!
But you don't dig Don't Look Now.. And that's cool. I get it. I love westerns and Clint Eastwood. But I hate Unforgiven. So there you go.
View attachment 154421

Touch of Evil - that film lay unloved for so many years it's criminal - and the slow reverse tracking opening is loosely copied much later by Hitchcock in Frenzy - to great effect as it reverses out of the flat and down the narrow staircase into the busy market street.

I really feel that so many older films are now unloved - and often misunderstood - by a younger audience quite simply because they have been brought up on crash, bang wallop action movies and accordingly they have the attention span of a gnat!

As the great Rober Towne said some time ago in reference to Chinatown - "It would never get made today - in the first place the script is way too long (Polanski said himself it ran to something over 180 pages) - it's in the wrong format (Towne wrote his scripts in British format - not the narrow starcase 'Hollywood' format), and it shoots way over the head of its target audience."

Seventies music - okay, forget the dross and remember instead the cream: Pink Floyd, Led Zep, Yes, The Who, The Stones, Neil Young, John Martyn, David Bowie, Mike Oldfield, Kate Bush, Supertramp, Genesis, Lone Star (2 brilliant albums by any standard and then disappeared), Tangerine Dream, Neu! (much championed by Bowie himself - and ME!!) Kraftwerk (where Neu! were born), Can, Faust, Focus, Golden Earring - the list goes on and on

Artwork:
Yes, I accept your argument - Jaws was a very apt example.

Surprised you hate Unforgiven - certainly it's no Anthony Mann western (but then again few reached that standard), but I've never hated it

Now, back on topic. Let's hope Nic Roeg's version holds up, and that some of the guys reviewing are wrong - certainly it HAS had soem champions s well as detractors.
But as we've discussed before, there are so many variables that the proof hs to be in the personal viewing.

BTW, and probably illustrating the point, had a quick gander at the MGM Special Ed of A Bridge Too Far on the 19 inch LED/LCD (the only one we've got) in the kitchen: It yielded some horrible aliasing, and various other problems that I've never seen before on a CRT, or Plasma (both of which have always produced an excellent picture) - so there you go - different TV system, same film, different result.

 

[C.C. 95]

Touch of Evil - that film lay unloved for so many years it's criminal - and the slow reverse tracking opening is loosely copied much later by Hitchcock in Frenzy - to great effect as it reverses out of the flat and down the narrow staircase into the busy market street.

I really feel that so many older films are now unloved - and often misunderstood - by a younger audience quite simply because they have been brought up on crash, bang wallop action movies and accordingly they have the attention span of a gnat!

As the great Rober Towne said some time ago in reference to Chinatown - "It would never get made today - in the first place the script is way too long (Polanski said himself it ran to something over 180 pages) - it's in the wrong format (Towne wrote his scripts in British format - not the narrow starcase 'Hollywood' format), and it shoots way over the head of its target audience."

Seventies music - okay, forget the dross and remember instead the cream: Pink Floyd, Led Zep, Yes, The Who, The Stones, Neil Young, John Martyn, David Bowie, Mike Oldfield, Kate Bush, Supertramp, Genesis, Lone Star (2 brilliant albums by any standard and then disappeared), Tangerine Dream, Neu! (much championed by Bowie himself - and ME!!) Kraftwerk (where Neu! were born), Can, Faust, Focus, Golden Earring - the list goes on and on

Artwork:
Yes, I accept your argument - Jaws was a very apt example.

Surprised you hate Unforgiven - certainly it's no Anthony Mann western (but then again few reached that standard), but I've never hated it

Now, back on topic. Let's hope Nic Roeg's version holds up, and that some of the guys reviewing are wrong - certainly it HAS had soem champions s well as detractors.
But as we've discussed before, there are so many variables that the proof hs to be in the personal viewing.

BTW, and probably illustrating the point, had a quick gander at the MGM Special Ed of A Bridge Too Far on the 19 inch LED/LCD (the only one we've got) in the kitchen: It yielded some horrible aliasing, and various other problems that I've never seen before on a CRT, or Plasma (both of which have always produced an excellent picture) - so there you go - different TV system, same film, different result.

Dig all your points! And I had to laugh out loud because of coincidence: I haven't listened to this stuff in ages, but just last night I listened to 4 Mike Oldfield albums in a row!! (QE2, Five Miles Out, Crises, & Discovery).
-Hate is a strong word about Unforgiven...I'll amend that. It's a good film I don't dig. I thought it was a rather long film about a rather small, maudlin point. That's all.
-I wish people could just audit film courses to get a history. All these techniques we have today came from other films. I will be crushed when Scorsese passes one day, because he is such a proponent of film history- and since many filmgoers look up to him, he makes the love of classic film 'cool'. You just have to know your history.
Example:If you love the train station sequence from Untouchables, and think that DePalma is a genius for coming up with that, you are gonna look like a fool saying that to people who know it is an homage to Eisenstein. Or that most of John Carpenter's movies are Westerns in disguise (mostly High Noon). Even Scorsese will tell you outright what shots he is stealing in his movies!
-Right now I'm working my way through the Criterion Pressburger & Powell films. Black Narcissus is Stunning! Maybe the greatest Technicolor film ever. I can't wait for Tales Of Hoffman (which Scorsese & Thelma Schoomacher have restored) to be released- hopefully I can see it on the big screen!
-On a lesser, but no less cool, note- I'm going to a screening of Big Trouble in Little China in May! Sweet!
-Back on Roeg and Don't Look Now- the opening montage is so interesting in that, so many elements of it only become clearer on a second viewing! The film actually demands to be seen more than once to get all the nuances!
We actually are getting flash- forwarding! Such a cool movie...
-As For your CRT- I still miss the warmth of tubes. I do. But what I don't miss is the inability to control overscanning of the image. I remember when CRTs got older the overscan got so bad that you saw part of the TimeCode on top!
OK- no more hijacking the thread!
Sorry!

 

[goufcustom]

Are you guys writing novel or something [emoji16]?

 

[JackRegan]

Dig all your points! And I had to laugh out loud because of coincidence: I haven't listened to this stuff in ages, but just last night I listened to 4 Mike Oldfield albums in a row!! (QE2, Five Miles Out, Crises, & Discovery).
-Hate is a strong word about Unforgiven...I'll amend that. It's a good film I don't dig. I thought it was a rather long film about a rather small, maudlin point. That's all.
-I wish people could just audit film courses to get a history. All these techniques we have today came from other films. I will be crushed when Scorsese passes one day, because he is such a proponent of film history- and since many filmgoers look up to him, he makes the love of classic film 'cool'. You just have to know your history.
Example:If you love the train station sequence from Untouchables, and think that DePalma is a genius for coming up with that, you are gonna look like a fool saying that to people who know it is an homage to Eisenstein. Or that most of John Carpenter's movies are Westerns in disguise (mostly High Noon). Even Scorsese will tell you outright what shots he is stealing in his movies!
-Right now I'm working my way through the Criterion Pressburger & Powell films. Black Narcissus is Stunning! Maybe the greatest Technicolor film ever. I can't wait for Tales Of Hoffman (which Scorsese & Thelma Schoomacher have restored) to be released- hopefully I can see it on the big screen!
-On a lesser, but no less cool, note- I'm going to a screening of Big Trouble in Little China in May! Sweet!
-Back on Roeg and Don't Look Now- the opening montage is so interesting in that, so many elements of it only become clearer on a second viewing! The film actually demands to be seen more than once to get all the nuances!
We actually are getting flash- forwarding! Such a cool movie...
-As For your CRT- I still miss the warmth of tubes. I do. But what I don't miss is the inability to control overscanning of the image. I remember when CRTs got older the overscan got so bad that you saw part of the TimeCode on top!
OK- no more hijacking the thread!
Sorry!

What is so great about Scorsese is that unlike a lot of American film producers/directors/writers, he doesn't believe film revolves aroudn Hollywood. He has such a breadth of appreciation and understanding - and such a lovely bloke to boot

I admit to being a great fan of Brian DePalma - Not sure if it is because or despite much of his catalogue being a homage to one film creator or another - the dreaminess of Obsession that mirrors Vertigo, Blow Up that, if you break it down, works as a montage of various great Hitchcock films.
John Carpenter is so much overlooked and underrated it is verging on the criminal - even down to poeple nitpicking about how amateurish his music is,especially for Haloween - but in point of fact, I've yet to hear any critic come up wth a constructive and realistic alternative that would actually work! I have a very soft spot for Prince of Darkness actually .
Would be nice to see Big Trouble on the big screen again - Not Powell and Pressburger but easily worth a watch

Speaking of The Archers - what we need now is a full restoration of a Matter of Life and Death.
Hopefully it will be up the standard of the rest of the flms so far undertaken.

Nic Roeg - many of his films seem to work in the same manner; and none the worse for it - Bad Timing for instance which I could watch till the cows come home - so real, gritty and downright dirty you can almost smell it . . .

Now CRT - sadly in the States you never got to see the crowning glories of CRT development. My last CRT which sadly lost its tube in 2012, was a Philips 32 PW9763/25d Bought new in 1998 for £1350 if memory serves full retail was £2250 - a lot of money for the time, but a bargain compared to the B&O which shared all the guts but was £6000.

A 32inch 100Hz, Pixel Plus, Natural Motion, 3 line comb filter, twin tuner, zoom, on-screen messaging service (yes really,, you could write your own message and hav eit play the next time the set was turned on - and in lots of different formats too), alarm, etc. 92 watts RMS full dolby digital surround 13 speaker, infa red cordless rears. (and no overscanning problems ever, even righht before the tube went pop)

The difference between that tv and full hd was negligible if discernable at all. In fact many engineers I know would still prefer to watch a top line CRT like that as opposed to anything else. I still miss it.

Not a total hijack - I did mention Nic Roeg - sorry, and won't do it again