New Citizen Kane DVD - actually a collector's edition

[colwood]

I like to keep up with any Welles related news, but only found out about this one last night. On 11/19, there was a collector's edition of Citizen Kane released (or at least it was released on Amazon). Called the Gold Edition it is 3 discs. The first two appear to be the exact same two discs that were on the previous CK dvd edition released in 9/01. The third disc contains the HBO movie RKO 281 about the making of CK. There is also a 16-page booklet and a copy of the original poster included.

Has anybody gotten this yet? Anybody care to review it?

[Welles Fan]

I don't think the addition of the RKO 281 is enough to justify getting another Kane, especially if the first two discs are the same as the original DVD release. That "Battle Over Citizen Kane" documentary disc in the original set was already pretty worthless.

[jaime marzol]

..............
i also think the battle over citizen kane docu is a pretty worthless addition to the kane package, and RKO281 doesn't make the sauce smell any better.

another major flaw was that kane was not uncompressed, and window-boxed. i aquired a window-boxed vhs copy from one of our members here, and have not watched the dvd since. the difference is stunning, and it's just window boxed, not uncompressed.

those guys should come to this site to learn how to put out a quality citizen kane package, they keep messing up adding the wrong stuff.

[Jaime N. Christley]

JM, what's this window-boxed and compressed stuff you're talking about? Is there any image lost on the DVD?

Also, has anyone checked out any of the other DVD editions of Kane? Are any of them as good or better than the US one?

[Jeff Wilson]

Like pretty much every Academy ratio movie, the Kane DVD is formatted for 1.33:1 TV screens, rather than 1.37:1, which is Academy ratio. So technically you're losing the outer edge of the picture, in addition to any television overscan. It's not something most people complain about, and frankly I tend to think it's nit-picky in some cases. I have no idea what the uncompressed complaints are about. The disc looks great, certainly better than any other DVD version.

[jaime marzol]

...................

jaime c:
yes, there is image lost from tv overscan, and the image is compressed making it longer than it was origionally. when you capture the image in a computer you can zoom back then replay it to tape so when you watch it on a tv you can see the edge of the image all the way around. another words the end of the image won't be defined by the end of your tv screen. once you do that, you know your tv isn't ripping off your image. then they compress the image making it longer. you can also uncompress it in the computer. my capture card does it automatically, some don't. i did it with the anamorphic opening of TOUCH OF EVIL and it's incredible what a difference it made.

my next invention will be indispensable for classic film lovers. it will be a unit that goes between the player and the tv. automatically uncompresses the picture and zooms back. of course, i won't be able to do this till i figure out how to make the maintanance free cat box.

yes, dvds rip you off also. letterboxed or not, there is more picture on the source than you are getting. i recently did a few bits of GODFATHER II in LBX, and THE SOPRANOS, was surprised, and angered by how much image i'm missing. i have 3 tvs, a large Toshiba, 2 mediums, a Phillips, and an RCA, and it's the same rip-off on all 3 sets.

it's beyond me why some one has not come up with such an invention as "The Marzol Zoom Back & Uncompress Gizmo."

i never knew about the compression thing till i saw it in a documentary. it ruined me. since then i started noticing characters when they are on certain parts of the tv screen
they are 'longer' than they are in real life.

it is nit-picky to most people, but i'm into the framing and composition much more than i am into the narraative, so for me it's heaven watching the film through the computer. it's not just 1-2-3 to window box and uncompress then play to tape, it takes time, but it can be watched in the computer while it plays and you see the whole image.
the entire film is better window boxed, but stuff like the shaving scene in KEY LARGO, the openings of TOUCH OF EVIL, and OTHELLO, the mexican village in TREASURE OF THE SIERRA MADRE, the ending castle scenes in CHIME AT MIDNIGHT are nothing short of euphoric.
.......................

[jaime marzol]

..............

i wasn't complaining about the KANE dvd quality, it looks great. i'm complaining about the tv overscan, and compression of every dvd and video tape made. i felt that of all films, KANE should have been at the very least window boxed.

..............

[Jeff Wilson]

I still don't know what you refer to with "compression." When I hear the term "compression," I think of the means by which a source is digitally encoded, as a film contains too much information for a DVD player to handle; consequently, it must be "compressed" into a smaller data format so that the player can play it back smoothly. I assume you're talking about the way the image is presented, in terms of the image actually being stretched, yes? I just don't see this. I've watched DVDs on my own, both on my 27" TV and a friend's 53" widescreen HD-TV, and they look the same, in terms of picture composition. The resolution differs, obviously, but nothing looks fatter or longer than it should, unless viewed in the wrong setting, ie a non-anamorphic film viewed in 16 x 9 format or vice versa, and so on. A computer screen may show a superior picture, but that's because it's using progressive vs. interlaced video in addition to eliminating overscan, and a progressively encoded disc will always look better than an interlaced one.

[jaime marzol]

...................

i have 2 mpeg1 discs of AMBERSONS already burned and packaged to send you. the image has been uncompressed (unstretched), and zoomed back. put that image beside the image that you get when you only zoom back with your dvd player. i noticed the difference right away, even in the RKO antena globe opening logo.

yes, not compresed like with what software does to lessen the lines of information, but like if you put your hands on either side of the picture and pushed it together; compressed by what it meant beore the computer age. is compressed the right word? squished together at the expense of the image.

[jaime marzol]

.......................

i noticed a big difference right away from what i had been looking at, compared to the vhs tape of AMBERSONS zoomed back that you sent me.

[Le Chiffre]

Jaime,
If I don't misunderstand you, you're referring to the fact that, at the standard academy aspect ratio of 1.33/1, most of the old Hollywood films are slightly rectangular rather then square. If you look at a book like James Naremore's MAGIC WORLD OF ORSON WELLES, you do see that most of the frame reproductions from Welles movies that appear in that book have a rectangular, rather then square look. Most classic TVs of course, are square-shaped, which is undoubtedly why many people think old movies are supposed to look like a square. Not true. 1.33 indicates a slight but clearly rectangular shape. Compression in this case would mean the film is scrunched from a 1.33/1 rectangle to a 1/1 square in order to fit the TV.

But then, even when it's compressed it still doesn't fit the TV anyway because of all that frustrating overscan you mentioned. Jeff, you said the overscan issue is nitpicky in some cases. Actually, I would say it's not worth the bother in MOST cases. But I'm sure you would agree that Welles films are an exceptional case. Personally, I don't want ANY overscan when I watch a Welles film, which is why I think they ALL need to be windowboxed.

It's a confusing issue, but a very important one if Welles movies are to be seen on video the way they are supposed to be seen.

[jaime marzol]

.........

exactly. mteal expressed what i was trying to say. mteal has been for the past 8(?) months, looking at uncompressed, window boxed videos of the AMBERSONS reconstruction. i remember the first e-mail he sent me about that. he was as excited as i was when i first printed the film from computer to video, to see it rectangular, and window boxed. it's an amaizing difference.

also, with directors like welles, and leoni, directors that use the entire screen to compose, it's especially important to get the whole dang image on the screen.

i capture the footage, then zoom it back to get the window boxing. premiere software has a function, 'maintain original aspect ratio,' i click it, KABOOM, it's like magic, no more square screen, it's now rectangular, and looks incredible. it's a complete shame that it would take me 8 hours of capturing and rendering to do a complete film like this. so THE MARZOL ZOOM-BACK AND UNCOMPRESS GIZMO will be a must for all film lovers that don't have 8 hours to invest into making one film look the way it's supposed to. is it possible to make such a thing? who knows. if the project i'm working on now sells and my bank account runeth over, i think that would be a worthwhile venture. i would hire a tech to design such a thing. if the project i'm working on doesn't sell, it's just one more nail in the coffin that says i'm going to die a broken down man, face down in the gutter. i'll have the plans for that GIZMO under my arm when they find me.
.......................

[Fredric]

Jaime,

Make the gizmo, get that cash, and get TOSOTW to the screen! Pay Bea off!

[Le Chiffre]

True, the window-boxed Ambersons tapes Jaime has sent me have been a revelation. With windowboxing, one starts noticing all kinds of things never noticed before. For example, when the townspeople are talking about the new Amberson mansion towards the beginning of the film ("There it is, the Amberson mansion! The pride of the town!") one can see that two of the townspeople on the left look kind of like Laurel and Hardy. With the windowboxing one can see an additional person on the right who looks like Fatty Arbuckle, whose career was destroyed by Hearst. Coincidence? Maybe. I assume though, that Welles handpicked all the extras for that scene, so with a little help from my wild imagination, a new angle is added to the story, with the mansion a metaphor for Hollywood, or San Simeon or the silent era, whatever. Plus, the whole film just looks better with window-boxing.

Jaime, you are absolutely correct that a director like Welles used the entire frame - including the corners - to compose his images, and therefore it is imparative that the entire image be seen. There is a new video edition of THE STRANGER from Alpha video (or something like that) that has frame captures from the film on it's back cover. Just from those uncompressed frame captures you can see how much more complete the images look then they do on your TV. MACBETH, LADY FROM SHANGHAI, ARKADIN, and OTHELLO likewise, have all kinds of outrageous visual compositions that are seriously marred by TV overscan.

[Jeff Wilson]

Window-boxing is something that should be done on Academy ratio films, I agree. In your last post though, Mike, you use the terms "uncompressed" and window-boxing interchangeably; is this the case? If so, then this discussion is more complicated than it needs to be. Can we just call it overscan and leave it at that? For those who want to eliminate the overscan on their DVDs, find a player that includes a zoom function. My player has this, and I regularly use it to enlarge the frame on all movies, not just 1.37:1 films.