Some news from a friend of mine who works for Turner:
“…The only reason BARRY LYNDON hasn’t yet made it to Warner Home Video dvd
& Blu-ray is that the elements need re-mastering for the format; because
of the way the film was shot, w/its ultra-sensitive lenses & low light
levels, the film poses a real challenge to master for hi-def. Trust me,
it’ll eventually come out; it’s just a matter of time. Warner Bros.
doesn’t license disc rights to the films they own to outside companies
like Criterion; they feel they can do the job fine themselves, so sit
tight. I met some of the Criterion folks when I went to the Bologna
Film Festival in Italy last month, & they’re terrific; I work with their
television licensing rep in negotiating for their films to be shown on
TCM. & I pick up virtually every single thing they put out, under both
the Criterion & Eclipse labels!”
They should take all the time they need to make it immaculate. I’ll wait.
Wow thanks Nick. You are really on a mission.
I find it a bit annoying that they aren’t working on it yet since it is such a large task but then feel they can do it and won’t give it to an outside company. Or have they started?
Wasn’t this released a few years ago as part of the Stanely Kubrick collection in one of those annoying warner snapper box’s?
I don’t understand this thread. I have Barry Lyndon on dvd. Bought it years ago.
It would be nice to have a new edition of DVD. The one currently available is adequate, but it would nice to see a package comparable to thee the re-releases they’ve done for 2001. Clockwork Orange, and The Shining.
It would be great to see Barry Lyndon in Blu-ray. Kubrick’s films are the kind of films Blu-ray was meant for.
I would absolutely love this. My first generation DVD of Barry Lyndon is a piece of crap.
Kubrick is one of my favourite directors and Barry Lyndon one my favourite Kubrick films. I feel like I’ve been spoiled by the number of his films that Warner has put out so far on blu-ray. More than any other director, but I want them all. It would be nice if Criterion could put them out, but I have no problem with the job that Warner has done so far. As KJ says: they can take their time. Just do it right the first time, unlike the 4:3 bastardized versions that came out on the first dvd release. Thanks for the tidbit Nick. Any news on Kubrick is worthwhile.
Give WB some credit for being way ahead of other studios on the quality of their special editions and the depth of titles they’ve re;eased, especially in their star & genre box sets and WB Archive dvd series; I imagine they’ll be quite ahead of other studios when the download distribution model kicks in.
Speaking of the WB Archive titles, has anyone ordered any yet?
I’m looking forward to this Lyndon Blu-Ray; this wait will give me time to actually, you know, get a player and worthy tv.
There`s a core irony in the film. While it insists on temporal & spatial truth (extended camera shots, extended pace, ect), Lyndon`s adventure (odyssey?) is based on his misperception of an Act 1 staged falsity. The truth wasn`t as it appeared. He ttusted too much in what he thought he saw.
I hope they scan it in at 4K and clean it up so as the film masters deteriorate the scan will still be good for the eventual rerelease for the higher-than-HD formats to come.
I wish there was something I could do to help make Barry Lyndon on Blu-ray a reality. Its so hard to just sit back and wait months…years to be able to enjoy a film that I love so much. I would give up half of my movie collection! The DVD is absulutely worthless. I feel like I’m watching some schlocky bootleg. Please WB, do it!!!!
Dave, i was going to be really snarky but after re-reading your post I was somewhat moved by the fact that you love a film that much. However, you do realize that, and I am basically paraphrasing the snarkiness that was in my head before, more than likely by the time they release BL on blu-ray you will begin to hear about some vastly improved new format that will someday make you look at your perfectly fine blu-ray as “absolutely worthless.” This technology game is what’s worthless, enjoy the fact that you can own the movie in whatever format.
Mike, the fact is, Blu-ray is qualitatively, unequivocally the better format than DVD. And Blu-rays will never be worthless because of how close they come to replicating the film in its original, highest quality. DVD can’t come close to doing that.
Now, a technology might come along that does this better than Blu-ray, but — at least when we’re talking about home viewing on screens from 26" – 120" — the difference will be impossible to see. Thus, the Blu-ray 1080p version of Barry Lyndon is all anyone could need, unless he or she owns a theater sized screen — in which case, sure, they might want some 4K disc 10 years down the line. Otherwise, Blu-ray comes close enough to the original.
The DVD of Barry Lyndon is a joke. Murky, letterboxed. The storage capacity of a DVD can’t handle the resolution necessary to approximate the detail of the original film. Blu-ray can.
“the dvd of barry lyndon is a joke” – “my first generation dvd is a piece of crap”
sounds like a good problem to have. the wait sucks but at least it inevidable. who knows if something like “Legend” will ever come out on dvd
LEGEND? Which LEGEND are you talking about?
This one … ????
the shortlived richard dean anderson tv show of course
Of course …
Tim, the RidleyScott LEGEND is on that perfectly good DVD that Harry provided a link to.
LEGEND (US cut w/Tangerine Dream) pwnz BARRY LYNDON
“The DVD of Barry Lyndon is a joke. Murky, letterboxed. The storage capacity of a DVD can’t handle the resolution necessary to approximate the detail of the original film. Blu-ray can.”
I’ve never had an issue with it. I am sure in a side by side comparison with a blu-ray I would be upset with the SD as well but when it came out years ago I thought it was beautiful.
Now the original release of Ashes of Time, that was horrendous.
I get that the format is great but I also think many watchable DVDs are now called “jokes” simply because a somewhat prettier format has come out. What gets me is that there are still so many important films that have_never_ been out even in murky formats.
Plenty of DVDs look great. It’s a fantastic format all-in-all, but it’s had its duds (along with Blu-ray). Barry Lyndon isn’t an awful DVD, but the fact alone that it’s 4:3 letterboxed necessitates a new release, even if in terms of picture quality it was up there with DVDs like The Queen or Criterion’s stuff
I would love to see LYNDON out on blu-ray. This seems like good news that it is in the works.
-the fact alone that it’s 4:3 letterboxed necessitates a new release-
“It seems to have been Kubrick’s preference for his films to be shown in the 4:3 or “full frame” aspect ratio, because, according to his long-standing personal assistant Leon Vitali, that was the way he composed them through the camera viewfinder and if it were technically still possible to do so, he would have liked them to be shown full frame in cinemas as well. As Vitali said in a recent interview (2): “The thing about Stanley, he was a photographer that’s how he started. He had a still photographer’s eye. So when he composed a picture through the camera, he was setting up for what he saw through the camera – the full picture. That was very important to him. It really was. It was an instinct that never ever left him. […] He did not like 1.85:1. You lose 27% of the picture, Stanley was a purist. This was one of the ways it was manifested.”
There seems to be a lot of confusion regarding this issue whenever we talk Kubrick, I think because we tend to confuse negative, theater screen, and our TVs. The orignal negative aspect ratio of Lyndon is 1.37:1 and, as far as I know, Kubrick composed the film with this in mind. The intended aspect ratio for the projected films seems to have been 1.66:1, neither of which completely fills a 16:9 screen.
Not this crap again.
Kubrick protected the 1.33:1 frame because he knew his films would eventually hit TV/VHS. His main goal was theatrical projection, and he composed for 1.85:1 most of the time. Some of them, like Lolita and Barry Lyndon, were composed for 1.66:1. A Clockwork Orange and Dr. Strangelove have BEAUTIFUL anamorphic 1.66:1 releases right now.
With all of the back and forth, it’s funny that so many people overlook the actual EVIDENCE. There is a photograph from the research on The Shining where Kubrick hand-wrote “protect the full frame, of course, but the exact ratio is 1.85:1”. In other words, he wanted it to be widescreen, and only protected the 1.33:1 so he could also have control over what a “full screen” version would look like, rather than letting VHS/TV companies do their own discretionary cropping.