Criterion releases Othello on blu-ray

[atcolomb]

DVDBeaver has a review of the Blu-ray and Gary says in his review "It includes both "New, restored 4K digital transfers of two versions of the film, the 1952 European one and the 1955 U.S. and UK one" in separate transfer on the same first, of two, Blu-ray discs. The second BD disc has the majority of the extras. The, longer, European cut looks superior to the US/UK version in 1080P. The latter, shows a bit more information in the frame, but may have some minor digitization issues looking notably softer and with less grain than the 1952 cut. I suspect this strong difference was the reason the release date was delayed, and I trust Criterion did the best they could with the US/UK source. The audio tracks have also been restored and now in liner PCM, obviously providing much better support for the music by Alberto Barberis and Angelo Francesco Lavagnino (The Savage Innocents.).  This production did not have a large budget but the dialogue is consistently clear with only a couple of exceptions and thee are optional English subtitles offered".

http://www.dvdbeaver.com/film6/blu-ray_ ... lu-ray.htm

[Roger Ryan]

I think it's pretty clear that the real reason for the delay of a few months were the negotiations to include Filming Othello, which fans had been requesting but was not listed among the bonus features when the set was first announced. That the U.S. version has a less impressive picture quality (and, judging from the screen-caps, it doesn't appear significantly worse) should not necessary be seen as disappointing news. The real surprise could be that the picture quality of the European version looks better than expected.

[Le Chiffre]

I'm assuming that the '55 version is pretty much the same as it was on the original Criterion laserdisc, which was taken from a good 35mm print and then cleaned up digitally. It may have been cleaned up some more with modern technology that was unavailable then, but my guess is that the source is the same. If the '52 looks better, that's exciting, since I've always thought the laserdisc looked very good, although not quite as good as the '92 restoration, which was taken straight from the original camera negative.

[Roger Ryan]

Blu-ray.com has now reviewed the set and also ranks the picture quality of the 1952 European version as better than the 1955 U.S. cut. However, the review notes that the quality of the soundtrack for the 1955 U.S. version is clearer and more consistent than the soundtrack for the 1952 edit. I'll be curious to see how both of these 4K restorations rank, both visually and aurally, alongside the recent theatrical run of the 1992 restoration.

http://www.blu-ray.com/movies/Othello-B ... 76/#Review

[Wellesnet]

Wellesnet review of Othello and supplemental materials
http://www.wellesnet.com/criterion-collection-releases-exceptional-othello-blu-ray-dvd/
"Criterion has expertly restored the 1952 and 1955 versions of the movie and delivered a mother lode of exceptional extras, including Welles' last completed project, Filming Othello."

[Le Chiffre]

I'll be curious to see how both of these 4K restorations rank, both visually and aurally, alongside the recent theatrical run of the 1992 restoration.

That recent theatrical run was in 2K, so the deck might be stacked a bit concerning a comparison. When I watched the '92 during that 2014 theatrical run, I was impressed by how flawless it looked in terms of nicks and scratches and such, but overall each image didn't look as sharp and vivid or have as much depth as the new 35mm prints I saw back in 1992. To my eyes, there is a significant difference between 4K and 2K, but something tells me we're unlikely to ever see a 4K of the '92, which is being readied, it seems, for the dustbin of history.

For the restoration of the 1952 release, Criterion scanned a 35mm fine-grain master positive with a running time of 93 minutes. A 35mm original camera negative was the source of the restoration of the 1955 release, which runs 90 minutes.

Criterion, which acquired the rights to Othello from Beatrice Welles, has ignored the 1992 restoration and stereo soundtrack created for that release.

Very nice article, Ray. Sounds like a great set, although I question those running times. I don't remember seeing three minutes worth of footage in the '52 that was NOT in the '55. Maybe a minute at the most.

Very interesting about '55 having the original camera negative as it's source. If that's the case, then it's strange that '52 would look noticeably better, as the first reviews of the new Bluray have indicated. Maybe '52 is from a superior negative.

If Criterion acquired the rights to Othello from Beatrice, then do they own the negative now as well?

[jbrooks]

Very interesting about '55 having the original camera negative as it's source. If that's the case, then it's strange that '52 would look noticeably better, as the first reviews of the new Bluray have indicated. Maybe '52 is from a superior negative.

I was struck by that too. The 52 version is said to be from a fine grain master (which, I believe, means that it's a positive print from which duplicate internegatives would have been struck). So, it is at least one generation removed from the camera negative and thus should be somewhat inferior to it. If the 55 version is truly from the camera negative and yet looks worse, that would indicate that the original negative was damaged or deteriorated over time. That could have happened if it were used to directly strike prints, and there may be other explanations.

I'm very excited to get this Blu Ray. The laserdisc has been one of my prize possessions for more than 20 years now.

[Roger Ryan]

...Sounds like a great set, although I question those running times. I don't remember seeing three minutes worth of footage in the '52 that was NOT in the '55. Maybe a minute at the most...

For the record, the packaging for Criterion's release of Othello lists a 91 minute running time for the 1955 version. Keep in mind, the original 1952 European edit does not include the end credits seen in the 1955 cut since Welles "narrates" the credits at the beginning over unique footage of Venice. That would suggest that the additional footage in the '52 version runs closer to three minutes if not four minutes. I'm going off my memory of having seen the European edit twelve years ago, but I thought the additional scenes/footage shown during the Venice section felt substantial, setting up the action and the characters (especially Hilton Edwards' "Brabantio") in a much smoother fashion than in the re-edited '55 cut. Of course, once we get the set in our hands, we can time the additional footage to the second!

[RayKelly]

Very nice article, Ray. Sounds like a great set, although I question those running times. I don't remember seeing three minutes worth of footage in the '52 that was NOT in the '55. Maybe a minute at the most.

Of course, once we get the set in our hands, we can time the additional footage to the second!

I just put the Blu-ray on again and checked the actual running times:
1952 -- 93 minutes and 31 seconds
1955 -- 90 minutes and 59 seconds
Difference between the two versions is 2 minutes and 32 seconds.
I will revise the review to put the times down to the second.

If the 55 version is truly from the camera negative and yet looks worse, that would indicate that the original negative was damaged or deteriorated over time.

I think that is clearly the case based on what I have seen.

I'm very excited to get this Blu Ray. The laserdisc has been one of my prize possessions for more than 20 years now.

I was happy they retained the Bogdanovich/Meisel commentary from the laser disc. And now you get all of Filming Othello.

[Le Chiffre]

Thanks for settling that, Ray. Two minute and thirty-two second difference...that surprises me. I guess the exact running time of each version doesn't really matter that much. I like both versions, although I don't think either is entirely satisfactory. Strangely enough, here's an older version of '52 on Youtube that runs 89 minutes!:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U7APPdIxEXg

I'm not that crazy about the spoken credits at the beginning of '52, although I know many prefer it. The fact that Welles's narration to set up the story comes right after we've seen him carried away dead at the beginning gives the '55 version a nice, slightly creepy quality, almost as if he's telling his tragic story from beyond the grave. Also, Gudrun Ure's voiceovers in '55 are far superior to Cloutier's original line readings. Welles redid some of his own lines too, improving them markedly. But it's been awhile since I've seen either. It'll be nice to compare them again at the Criterion quality level.

I wonder if anyone has ever thought to interview Ure about her work on the film and with Welles on the stage. She's still alive (91).

I thought the additional scenes/footage shown during the Venice section felt substantial, setting up the action and the characters (especially Hilton Edwards' "Brabantio") in a much smoother fashion than in the re-edited '55 cut.

No question, '52 is much smoother in this regard, because of the extra footage. I've always wondered which version of the film Welles was talking about when he said this during the 1982 BBC interview:

Interviewer: I find the cutting in Othello a bit confusing in places.

Welles: So do I. There are several bits in Venice that I don't like. I think Venice is the weak part of the picture. In fact, some of it is quite weak indeed.

[Roger Ryan]

I've always wondered which version of the film Welles was talking about when he said this during the 1982 BBC interview:

Interviewer: I find the cutting in Othello a bit confusing in places.

Welles: So do I. There are several bits in Venice that I don't like. I think Venice is the weak part of the picture. In fact, some of it is quite weak indeed.

I suspect Welles was always displeased with the Venice sequence which is why he edited it down for the '55 version. This follows a pattern also found in Journey Into Fear, The Lady From Shanghai, Macbeth, and Mr. Arkadin where Welles would go back and significantly trim expository scenes and add a narration to provide the exposition lost in the cuts. Certainly, external pressure forced this choice with some (most?) of these examples, but Welles did this without pressure on Othello. While we only have a cutting continuity to demonstrate what The Lady From Shanghai was like prior to the re-cutting and the narration being added, the other four examples all have existing versions with longer expository scenes sans narration...and I prefer these versions.

Judging from the YouTube uploads of the '52 and '55 edits of Othello, the Venice sequence (which I timed from the end of the funeral march to the fade out on Othello kissing Desdemona) is about 2 minutes, 20 seconds longer in the '52 version, although PAL speed-up could be factor (the '52 version upload originated as a French TV broadcast).

[Le Chiffre]

I would love to see that LFS cutting continuity become more widely available.

Unfortunately, in the case of Othello, Welles made the Venice section weaker in his attempt to trim it down, IMO. When filmmakers start monkeying with their old films, something is usually lost as well as gained, although the new BLADE RUNNER film opening next week reminds me that that monkeying can actually save a picture sometimes.

Speaking of monkeying, here's something interesting: a little variation in two different European versions of OTHELLO. In the English language cut, the title music ends on the dissonant chord that introduces Iago, whereas in the French language cut, the title music fades out normally before the dissonant chord strikes:
https://vimeo.com/235769496

[maxrael]

I can't find anything to suggest that Criterion has any plans to release this in the UK... but before I order an imported copy, just thought I'd ask here in case anyone's heard of a planned UK release?

[RayKelly]

I have not heard anything about a UK release. This Othello is a locked Region A, so you will need a multi-region player

[Wellesnet]

NYT on the the new Blu, with a surprisingly heavy emphasis on "Filming Othello":
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/29/movi ... elles.html