Kino: Steamboat Bill, Jr.

[tojoed]

Steamboat Bill Jnr on Blu-Ray in July.

[Finch]

Kino also listed a DVD + Blu of Our Hospitality and Sherlock Jr in their 2010 catalogue. Hopefully they can keep their promise.

[AfterTheRain]

On ClassicFlix, they've just listed that Steamboat Bill, Jr. is due on both Blu-ray and Ultimate Edition DVD for July 6th. They've also listed Lost Keaton - 16 Comedy Shorts (1934-37) for release on that same day.

[Anthony]

Very strange...

The Blu-ray release of Kino's "Steamboat Bill Jr." came out today... but no one has reviewed it yet? Does anyone know why?

[dadaistnun]

It sounds like review copies may have gone out late; Dave Kehr mentions on his blog that he didn't get the Blu in time for his NYT review. Glenn Kenny makes a favorable comment about it in the comments though, essentially saying Kino's Blu track record continues unblemished.

[Jonathan S]

Very strange...
The Blu-ray release of Kino's "Steamboat Bill Jr." came out today... but no one has reviewed it yet? Does anyone know why?

This review appeared a couple of weeks ago and registers considerable disappointment with the Blu-ray.

[jsteffe]

Very strange...
The Blu-ray release of Kino's "Steamboat Bill Jr." came out today... but no one has reviewed it yet? Does anyone know why?

This review appeared a couple of weeks ago and registers considerable disappointment with the Blu-ray.

In this particular case I'd want to see the actual Blu-ray before coming to any conclusions. Here's an interview on that same site with Bret Wood, the disc's producer.

[Finch]

Edge enhancement and blown out contrast - well, I'm glad I decided against blind-buying this. Can't say I like Kino's artwork for this title either so I think I'll hold out until MK2 (or MOC?) release Bill in Europe.

[Flike]

Oy. I actually adore the artwork (Kino has done a great job with their BD line as compared to their dated on arrival DVDs), but I'll be bummed if the disc is a bust. One of my most anticipated discs in some time.

[nsps]

Edge enhancement and blown out contrast - well, I'm glad I decided against blind-buying this. Can't say I like Kino's artwork for this title either so I think I'll hold out until MK2 (or MOC?) release Bill in Europe.

Cinema Club (2 Entertain) released the DVDs of MK2's Keaton restorations. Not sure if they have dibs on a BD release, or if MK2 will allow another company to release Keaton BDs of their transfer before they do. I've seen their HD restorations of THE GENERAL, STEAMBOAT BILL, JR. and COLLEGE, and they're quite wonderful.

There were some EE problems in THE GENERAL BD and it was ultimately still a welcome upgrade, so hopefully that's the case here as well.

[nsps]

It sounds like review copies may have gone out late;…

I wish there were also an explanation as to why none of my local retailers stock it.

[manicsounds]

dvdbeaver

[zedz]

Looks spectacular. On the basis of those caps, the complaints noted above sound like carping, particularly as this is an alternative version of the film (so even if MK2 do eventually put out a BluRay, it's not going to replace this release).

[unclehulot]

Very strange...
The Blu-ray release of Kino's "Steamboat Bill Jr." came out today... but no one has reviewed it yet? Does anyone know why?

This review appeared a couple of weeks ago and registers considerable disappointment with the Blu-ray.

It always amazes me when some guy writes a review like this speaking with confidence about the "transfer" having various attributes, but who can have NO familiarity with the source materials used! If he had read Bret Wood's comments about the contrast issues he might have learned that the producer found these issues part of the look of the film, and not put the blame on the transfer. I guess we are going to have to go through this crap of self appointed BD specialist blog "critics" sharing their expertise on silent era films not all looking as pristine as Gone with the Wind on BD, by folks that probably haven't seen 2% of the number of silent films that many of us on this board have seen. But then, I'm probably stating the obvious...most of us here know better than to believe such rookie stuff!

[Jonathan S]

If he had read Bret Wood's comments about the contrast issues...

Now I look closely, I see that both the interview with Bret Wood and the review are credited to one Matt Paprocki, and the review was posted before the interview. And get this:

Matt Paprocki is a 12-year movie and video game critic. His work has been featured on a variety of websites, and he currently edits DoBlu.com and Multiplayergames.com

Well, at least he's published two interesting interviews with Bret Wood, even if his review judgements are questionable! Paprocki was actually very positive about Kino's Blu-ray of The General, describing it as "staggeringly beautiful".

[perkizitore]

How can a 12 year old review R-rated movies?
Maybe it's sarcasm regarding his mental age?

[antnield]

How can a 12 year old review R-rated movies?
Maybe it's sarcasm regarding his mental age?

I think it's suggesting he's been reviewing for 12 years, not 12 years of age.

[perkizitore]

Thanks antnield, but can't you see my post is pure sarcasm?

[Matt Paprocki]

It always amazes me when some guy writes a review like this speaking with confidence about the "transfer" having various attributes, but who can have NO familiarity with the source materials used! If he had read Bret Wood's comments about the contrast issues he might have learned that the producer found these issues part of the look of the film, and not put the blame on the transfer. I guess we are going to have to go through this crap of self appointed BD specialist blog "critics" sharing their expertise on silent era films not all looking as pristine as Gone with the Wind on BD, by folks that probably haven't seen 2% of the number of silent films that many of us on this board have seen. But then, I'm probably stating the obvious...most of us here know better than to believe such rookie stuff!

To clear this up, I gave this disc two looks, one before the interview, and then another after. I do not buy that's how it was shot, mostly because of the alternate cut, but also because Bret's statement on the edge enhancement made no sense:

the battle becomes the fight between Blu-ray compression and film grain, especially in scenes were there are not a lot of sharp edges, and the computer is trying to interpret subtle variations in a single color

If that's the case, why does the Killiam version not show the same issue? Why wouldn't every Blu-ray with a thick grain structure show the same problems?

I offered Bret the chance to go live on our podcast. After some back and forth on how to record it, he ended up backing out. It's a shame too, since I had a lot of additional questions to ask, including ones that were brought up by various forums, including the music selection.

It was totally in my benefit to score this disc highly. I had the first chance to review this, an exclusive I worked out last year. I got one of the first discs off the line. I didn't rate is highly of course (except the movie!), because it simply has nothing to do with the source in my opinion. No one shoots films this brightly, and again, the Killiam cut is fine, just wildly inconsistent in terms of sharpness, which would have been acceptable. I provided time stamps for anyone to see the worst when they see the disc. I've seen 650+ discs, and can see when something has been brightened, especially at this level.

[Jonathan S]

I did read it as meaning he was aged 12! (Several decades ago, I was reviewing silent films at that age, albeit for a very small circle of readers!) I think it must be a difference in UK/US usage, and perhaps my lack of familiarity with current lingo, so thanks for translating.

[nsps]

It really wasn't worded very well. Anyhow, based on a brief survey of the disc, I'd say that I don't expect fans of Kino's last Keaton Blu-ray to be disappointed.

[nsps]

Am I the only one who thinks the Killiam print is clearly the primary cut? Whenever an alternate take is used rather than a simultaneous side-by-side shot, the Killiam version clearly has the better footage. (See the hat scene and especially the tree ride, which is slow and unexciting in the Keaton Estate cut and violently rollicking in the Killiam cut.

[Jonathan S]

I don't have the new disc but I've a 1980 broadcast of a Killiam edition (with his customary added tints and William Perry piano score) and, in the hat scene at least, it uses the same takes as the previous Kino and M2K DVDs. So I guess Killiam himself had more than one version of the film.

[nsps]

I don't have the new disc but I've a 1980 broadcast of a Killiam edition (with his customary added tints and William Perry piano score) and, in the hat scene at least, it uses the same takes as the previous Kino and M2K DVDs. So I guess Killiam himself had more than one version of the film.

The Killiam version is the version that's on the original Kino, the Image and the MK2 releases. The "Keaton Estate" one I've seen on 35-mm once or twice, and until now I thought my memory had been playing tricks on me when there was no eye-roll with the bowler hat. (Neither versions are tinted on the disc.)

I'm curious as to why Kino decided to declare the most commonly seen version, which is superior in the case of every notable divergence, to be the "alternative" version (even if they do make an effort in the video essay to declare neither to be definitive). Was it based entirely on print quality?

[Jonathan S]

I'm curious as to why Kino decided to declare the most commonly seen version, which is superior in the case of every notable divergence, to be the "alternative" version (even if they do make an effort in the video essay to declare neither to be definitive). Was it based entirely on print quality?

That's what confused me - thanks for clearing that up. On another forum, someone believed that the UK set Buster Keaton Chronicles also has the lesser-known cut. I had that (mostly awful) set only briefly, but I recall that used a Rohauer version which ties in with the "Keaton Estate" rather than Killiam. I've probably seen it myself, without realising, in 35mm and/or on Channel 4 which used to show Rohauer prints.

I'm puzzled by the contrast issue. Matt Paprocki writes that it's "so blown out, it can be nearly blinding" and even Gary Tooze's more positive review mentions "occasionally whites may be excessively bright. Black levels are generally very strong". But the actual framegrabs on Beaver mostly look too low in contrast (grey and flat), as an e-mail comment now added to Gary's review also suggests. I'm assuming Beaver's grabs and comments pertain to the "Keaton Estate" version too. I can't offer any opinion as I don't have the disc.