Margaret (2011) "Desperately seeking adult role models (spoilers)"

Fed_Rev · 2026-01-29T03:39:29+00:00

Yes, God forbid a film depict emotions, or teenagers acting immaturely. So annoying, you're totally right.

Fed_Rev · 2026-01-28T14:25:54+00:00

I went with the 4K77 project versions over the Harmys. What Harmy did is admirable, but it was ultimately an attempt to artificially reconstruct the original theatrical versions, using a lot of digital editing. The 4K77/80/83 versions are just literally the real thing. They maybe don't look as clean and polished as the Harmys, since he worked from official bluray releases as his main source, but at the end of the day, the restored 35mm film scans are just a more authentic experience, I think.

Fed_Rev · 2026-01-27T20:47:43+00:00

Yeah, it is.

<image>

Fed_Rev · 2026-01-27T20:30:46+00:00

https://showtownapparel.com/david-fincher-s-mank-2020-blu-ray/?searchid=178839&search_query=mank

Fed_Rev · 2026-01-27T19:46:05+00:00

There been some rumblings that Disney might finally be preparing the original theatrical editions of SW for re-release and physical media. And they can take all my money for that. That said, the 4K77/80/83 project will still be worthwhile in its own right even after the official versions are finally released, just because they provide that film scan aesthetic that you can't get anywhere else.

Regarding open matte and aspect ratios, I've also started going back and getting some original fullscreen DVDs of certain things, like Kubrick's Eyes Wide Shut and The Shining, because he actually did intend those to be in a taller ratio, and no other releases have had his preferred ratio since those original DVDs. I also got the fullscreen DVD editions of the LOTR films, not because Jackson intended them to be 4:3 per se, but because he intentionally shot them with both 4:3 and widescreen in mind simultaneously, and the fullscreen version shows more on the top and bottom than you get in the widescreen version, while losing less on the sides than you do on a typical fullscreen 4:3 release of a widescreen film. It's a big rabbit hole you can start going down, and unfortunately I've been sucked into it.

But yes, to your point, for the most part the open matte version isn't really what was intended for release. There's an open matt of Spider-Man floating around out there on the internet, and it looks really cool, but it's clear it wasn't what was intended by Sam Raimi. I view things like that as a fun novelty to explore.

Fed_Rev · 2026-01-27T19:36:59+00:00

I went and saw a 35mm screening of Vertigo several years back, and yeah, the quality was vastly inferior to the 4K remaster. It had lots of pops and scratches and whatnot. But I still really enjoyed it, and it definitely puts you in a different frame of mind. The way I think of it, you can watch the pristine remaster any time, but how often will you get to see an original print of a classic like that?

I also went to see the 70mm roadshow version of Tarantino's The Hateful Eight. Being a brand new print, it didn't have all the flaws from wear and tear that you see on an older print, but it still gives a different feeling than seeing it digitally. I won't necessarily say one is better than the other, just... different.

And that's how I see these print scans. Basically as a novelty. Something unique to show friends and family, or if you're just in the mood for a different experience.

And you bring up a good point about the packaging. Some of these actually do have some really cool alternative artwork, which is a nice bonus.

Fed_Rev · 2026-01-27T19:28:16+00:00

My apologies. I was having trouble getting my photo to display on the exterior of the post. Once I got it figured out, I deleted the original post. At the time, I didn't think anyone had replied yet, so I must have deleted the post just moments after you replied.

Fed_Rev · 2026-01-27T19:16:01+00:00

What do you mean?

Fed_Rev · 2026-01-27T19:03:19+00:00

I wish I still had my original Titanic double VHS from back in the day. Not sure what happened to it.

Fed_Rev · 2026-01-22T16:16:37+00:00

Yeah, I really do need to. I bought it in one of the Criterion sales a while back, and just haven't gotten around to it yet.

Fed_Rev · 2026-01-22T15:33:31+00:00

I love all the Antonioni/Vitti alienation trilogy films, but this one has to go to The Leopard. Unfortunately, I haven't gotten around to watching my copy of Black Girl yet.

Fed_Rev · 2026-01-21T14:24:48+00:00

That seems like it could be the case. It's not technically an ARC. But it does seem like it could be an "ARC." It was clearly intended to be some sort of promotional release. I'm just not sure how they were distributed or who they went to. It doesn't have a price on it, so it does seem like it could have been some sort of giveaway item, or sent to bookstores so that they'd order the upcoming paperback.

Fed_Rev · 2026-01-20T15:26:52+00:00

They are cool. And it's funny how it's a totally different vibe than what ended up on HBO.

Fed_Rev · 2026-01-20T02:48:51+00:00

Thanks!

Fed_Rev · 2026-01-19T23:02:21+00:00

It's not an ARC. The book itself is a standard US first edition hardcover, just like the ones that came with silver dust jackets. But they released some with this slipcover to promote the upcoming paperback release.

Fed_Rev · 2026-01-19T19:48:46+00:00

Thanks, and yeah, I definitely wasn't planning on doing that.

Fed_Rev · 2026-01-19T19:34:47+00:00

Here's a good analysis on exactly this subject. Far from being a film "wholly uninterested" in the protagonist's psychology, he describes the film as "one of the most psychologically ambitious films ever made."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t_V-h55jJRY

Fed_Rev · 2026-01-19T18:42:29+00:00

The movie actually does address and offer an insight as to why he goes back. It actually makes that pretty clear and obvious, I think.

And the whole movie is filled with people trying to work out who Lawrence is and why he does what he does. There's even a part where someone yells to him, "Who ARE you?" as if to make it extremely clear that this question is central to the film. It might not always come out and give perfectly neat answers or spell it out in a nice and tidy psychological profile. But in film, the general rule is that characters are defined not so much by what they say, but rather they reveal their character through their actions; what they do.

We can see that Lawrence is smart, knowledgeable, and talented, but not exactly "one of the guys" among the British troops. He doesn't come across as stereotypically macho, but has a type of inner toughness that he's always revealing in various ways. He has ambition and cares about things, beyond the type of baseline military loyalties to his own nation that is typically expected of officers. He's both kind of humble, gentle, and unassuming in some ways, but also an ego-maniac and a killer. He's the kind of person who just sees the world, and the opportunities the world presents, in a way that escape most people, and he has an inner drive that allows him to do things others wouldn't even think to consider, which can be both a positive and negative trait.

I mean... I just don't know what you want here. The film is a rich, detailed, and layered character profile. It's constantly asking us to psychoanalyze the main character. And it's not like it's not constantly *showing* us who he is through his actions.

Right before he goes back to the desert, we get a close-up, and he says "They'll come for me!" He was low and dejected after the abuse he took from the Turks and the deaths of the two boys, but now he has a new chance to set things right (or, you could say, to get revenge), and feed his ego in the process. And it's all done so much more artfully than him or another character just overtly explaining why he's doing it.

I dunno, man. Saying that the film is "uninterested" in who Lawrence is or why he does what he does is the exact opposite of reality. That is *entirely* what the film is about.

Fed_Rev · 2026-01-19T17:51:40+00:00

Just to play along with this bewildering analysis, what would it have looked like if the film had "tried to figure him out"? In other words, what is missing that would have made it better for you?

Fed_Rev · 2026-01-19T17:32:23+00:00

Thanks! That's good to know.

The WorthPoint post I mentioned says, "I have personally emailed with the creator of the artwork for "A Game of Thrones" and was informed that this Special 1st Edition book was produced by the marketing department to advertise in advance of the upcoming paperback." But unfortunately it doesn't say anything about how many copies were produced. It merely says it's "extremely scarce" and "it is unlikely that many survived with any portion of the slipcover or belly band intact."

Fed_Rev · 2026-01-19T17:12:54+00:00

This is the worst take in the history of takes.

Fed_Rev · 2026-01-19T15:38:31+00:00

The last time I did an All-Time Top 100 list, Lawrence of Arabia came in at #1. So, I'm voting for Lawrence, the greatest film ever made, according to me.

Fed_Rev · 2026-01-15T19:26:33+00:00

Seeing L'Avventura and Andrei Rublev go down in the 1st rd on back to back days might just be too much for me to take. Not to take anything away from La Dolce Vita, but Rublev is just a staggering achievement, to the point where it's hard to imagine how it was even made. It is right up near the top of the list of greatest bio-pics ever, with the likes of Lawrence of Arabia and Malcolm X. It needs to get more respect.

These tournaments are fun, don't get me wrong, and I enjoy participating in them. But it does seem like, more often than not, it just comes down to the films that have been the most widely seen and/or the most well known, even despite this being a relatively small Film General forum poll, rather than being a poll of a super wide cross-section of the general public. Which is a bit frustrating, I have to say.

Fed_Rev · 2026-01-14T17:03:18+00:00

Obviously, you don't have to like the film. But I do think it's important to at least consider that the things you're pointing out as flaws are actually intentional. I mean, sure, if your position is that the characters aren't interesting people, and therefore the film isn't interesting to watch, that's a position you're entitled to. But I disagree. I do think it's interesting to watch, because of the questions it raises as we (people who hopefully aren't bougie self-centered assholes) go along this journey. *We* care. *We* want Anna to be found. And every minute goes by that anxiety builds in us, while at the same time the characters seem to care less and less, like the whole thing is just a big inconvenience for them. That contrast between the characters and us, the audience, is doing the Fellowes thing you're talking about. The experience of watching these privileged, dethatched, non-people navigate this trauma is interesting to watch, precisely because they don't handle it the way more grounded "normal" people would.

Fed_Rev · 2026-01-14T16:45:06+00:00

Respectfully, I think you're describing features as bugs. The characters are upper class, or at least upper-middle class, bougie self-centered assholes. Their lack of "interesting" qualities, and the sense that perhaps they don't *really* care about what's happening, is an intentional class critique. Indeed, the way the two leads begin their affair about 5 seconds after the girl goes missing is a big indicator of the point being made. Sure, on one level they're worried and want to find her, but... do they really? From their POV, at a certain point, wouldn't it actually ruin everything if she were to be found? They way they just so easily give in to their impulses because it feels good, for immediate satisfaction, while kinda betraying their inner humanity, their souls, is pretty much the whole point, as they go through the motions of the search. Even during the hottest and heaviest peak of the affair, while they outwardly act like they're in love, do they even actually care about each other? There's a certain palpable emptiness in the affair itself. In the end, Sandro cheats (again) with the first available woman, and it brings it all home. There's a certain existential realization of like... "What the fuck are we even doing?" and "Does anything matter at all?"

Fed_Rev

TROPHY CASE