Our Mission

To provide all owners of large projection systems with reliable information you can trust when seeking high resolution DVD recommendations. While most DVD’s look great on typically-sized monitors and TV’s, the real litmus test in terms of DVD video quality is revealed on much larger displays.

Technical Considerations

A well-mastered DVD has the amazing ability to transcend the screen size and doesn’t seem to lose anything in the way of resolution or detail. Conversely, even poorly mastered DVD’s may sometimes appear acceptable on smaller displays in terms of overall clarity, but look terribly out of focus on large screens. This could be an important consideration when building your DVD library. Coventional wisdom indicates that 16:9 enhanced (anamorphic) DVD’s render the best image quality, however some non-enhanced discs have fared surprisingly well. We sort out the good, the bad and the ugly so your next DVD purchase or rental won’t be a surprise anymore.


Our goal is to bring you accurate, timely and consistent ratings of the technical qualities of the films we view, rent and purchase for large screen viewing. You’ll find our 5-globe rating system easy to follow and I hope you find the information contained herein helpful when making your DVD purchase decisions. Remember, our ratings of image and sound quality are independent from the subjective reviews of extras, artistic merit or content of the storyline. The overall impression of a movie and all those cool extras can sometimes overcome even a less than stellar transfer. Ultimately, you will decide what to purchase, but at least you’ll know going in what you can expect in terms of picture quality and sound. That’s our promise to you.

Visit satellitetvguru.net for information on Dish Network

Secondary Focus

It is our hope that by differentiating the quality difference between DVDs in a fair, consistent and impartial way, we might somehow make a small contribution toward the continuing evolution and growth of the format, encouraging studios and other content providers to strive for the highest quality that current technology allows when authoring discs, rather than pandering to the lowest common denominator for the sake of expediency and short term profits.

WITNESS

Witness


Reviewed by Jeff McNeal
July 16, 1999

PARAMOUNT
Drama
Widescreen 1.78:1,
Anamorphic - Enhanced for 16×9 viewing
Dolby Digital 5.1 Surround
Color
112 minutes
Rated R, 1985

COMMENTS Peter Weir’s WITNESS was a real pleasure to watch again after several years in memory only. Thanks largely to Paramount’s return to their senses and anamorphic enhancement, the experience of watching this film on DVD proved to be a real delight to my optical nerves. For awhile, I was afraid that BLADE RUNNER was going to be the only Harrison Ford flick I’d ever see with any real clarity.

Paramount let a few real gems get mastered without the proper treatment. PATRIOT GAMES and CLEAR and PRESENT DANGER are two that come to mind. What a waste. Although their transfers were a bit better than average, nothing could compare to the visual treats found within WITNESS. The detail of windswept grass or even the fine weave of the straw hats worn by the Amish characters revealed the potential of DVD at its’ best.

This movie also happens to be one of Harrison’s finest dramatic roles according to many critics, but I have a hard time distinguishing one Harrison Ford role from another. He’s always Harrison Ford to me and he’s always great and in WITNESS, this is no exception This, in spite of the relatively flat chemistry between Ford and his co-star Kelly McGillis. As it turns out, that ends up being okay. It helps to soften the blow later.

Peter Weir has directed some outstanding films filled with great entertainment value. Among them, THE DEAD POET’S SOCIETY, THE YEAR OF LIVING DANGEROUSLY and THE TRUMAN SHOW to name three. I consider this film to be among his finest efforts.

Danny Glover makes a memorable performance here, and 1985 was a breakthrough year for his career. That year alone, he had significant starring roles in WITNESS, SILVERADO and THE COLOR PURPLE. It wouldn’t be until two years later when he’d finally earn his good guy stripes in LETHAL WEAPON. Glover’s first shot on the big screen came in 1979’s ESCAPE FROM ALCATRAZ as one of the inmates, but don’t blink or you’ll miss him.

Lukas Haas deserves mention here also. His first theatrical role came in the film TESTAMENT, about two years before WITNESS. In this film, he’s a cute little Amish boy who appears to be about six years old and his performance is a highlight of the film. Sweet, innocent and unaffected, it’s impossible to tell the kid actually grew up in West Hollywood. His face is a familiar one on the TV landscape and a few years back, he had a large starring role in MARS ATTACKS. Good for him. It’s rare when a young child star makes the transition from kid to adult and Haas, though still young today, looks like he has a shot at actually going somewhere. Whatever happens to the lanky young man, he can always look back on this role with pride. In WITNESS, he did a great job.

Lest I forget, there’s a fair sense of that dry Harrison Ford-ish humor that we all know and love. Though somewhat muted like the colors in this video (at least they can be enhanced), it’s nice that the film is lightened up on occasion with the banter. Though the attempts at clever discourse doesn’t always work — like the corny, awkward love scenes between McGillis and Ford, the occasional quips are a refreshing change of pace now and again throughout the script.

The special feature of this disc is an interview with Peter Weir (one sided in that we never hear the questions), the director talks about how he came to direct the film; the protection of seven-year-old Lukas Haas from the violence of the bathroom murder scene; the depiction of the Amish lifestyle that really hadn’t been revealed on film before; the detail that went into filming the Amish shots to reflect paintings of Amish life that were studied prior to the shoot, etc. The director also explored the relationship between Ford and McGillis’ characters and the casting of Alexander Godunov as Ford’s Amish rival. The interview segment, while certainly interesting, is a brief seven minutes or so.


SYNOPSIS After the premature death of her husband, a young Amish widow named Rachel (Kelly McGillis) and her son, Samuel (Lukas Haas), travel to the city of Philadelphia enroute to Baltimore to visit Rachel’s sister after the funeral. In a public restroom at the Philly train station, young Samuel bears witness to a brutal murder. He gets a clear view of the assailant and barely escapes certain death himself.

A detective, John Book (Harrison Ford) picks up Rachel and Samuel at the scene of the crime and brings the young lad in for questioning. As it turns out, the man who had his throat slashed was a narcotics officer.

—-SPOILER ALERT————SPOILER ALERT—–

At the police station, Book shows Samuel a lineup of possible suspects. None of them match. While Book is on the phone, Samuel wanders around the precinct office, stopping in front of a trophy case. The kid stares wide eyed at a newspaper article featuring a story decorating an officer, Lt. McFee (Danny Glover), who four years prior, had run a raid that netted 550 gallons of a substance called P2P, needed to make speed — and worth $5,000 a pint.

McFee is the killer.

Book goes to the home of his commander, Paul Schaeffer (Joseph Sommer) and tells him what he’s learned about McFee. The $22 million dollars worth of P2P that McFee had confiscated disappeared — or was never even delivered to police storage to begin with, which had no record of it. Now that Book has found the motive, he feels he has a case and Schaeffer concurs, suggesting that they lay low and keep things quiet.

When Book is nearly gunned down by McFee shortly thereafter, he knows that Schaeffer is “in on it”, too. Fearing for Samuel’s life, Book flees with the frightened mother (who oddly never seems quite frightened enough) and her son back to their Amish village. Wounded in his gun battle with McFee, Book passes out on his way out of the village and smashes into a tall wooden pole supporting a birdhouse. Book is taken in (reluctantly) by the Amish villagers to mend. The birdhouse is in splinters on the hood of the VW.

The only person Book confides in is his partner, whom he asks to destroy all records of the case so that Samuel (and his) whereabouts will be unknown to his pursuers.

However the corrupt McFee, Schaefer and Co. are determined to find their quarry.

This is where the film really slows down with the pseudo love triangle that develops between Book, Rachel and Daniel Hochleitner (Alexander Godunov), a handsome, strapping (and very proper) Amish villager who has his sights set on Rachel.

As Schaeffer and McFee seek to close in on Book and Samuel, Book begins the process of healing from his bullet wounds and pitches in with all the other Amish men in a barn-raising, among other quaint, pastoral activities.

Friction develops within the Amish community due to Book’s cultural differences. He carries a gun, among other things and you can see that the elders feel that Book’s presence is damaging to the overall good of the village, even though Book repaired the birdhouse he smashed, and gave a sporting attempt at milking cows at four thirty in the morning.

Amish Elder: “You never had your hands on a teat before?”

Book: “Not one this big”.

The last straw for Book is when he loses his temper and kicks a little tourista ass when a group of teens taunt and defile the Amish men in their horsedrawn carriages when the men go for some supplies in town. Ford becomes to the Amish what Billy Jack was to the Indians. Well, almost.

Unfortunately, this draws the attention of law enforcement and now McFee and Schaeffer know where to look for Book. It’s highly out of character for an Amish man to smash somebody in the nose. It draws unwanted attention to the clan. Book has gotta go.

The elders decided that Book has healed well enough to leave the village — the following morning. Only trouble is, McFee and Schaeffer don’t want him to have the chance.

A HIGH NOON-style faceoff ensues.


IMAGE Paramount has really done an excellent job with this one. Though some grain can be observed in darker scenes in particular, it doesn’t post any unusual distraction. Black level is solid, colors are a bit muted, but detail is outstanding throughout with no visible sharpening artifacts. Fleshtones almost take on a sepia tone, particularly during the indoor or evening Amish scenes. The source print was either very clean or the authors did a nice job cleaning it up. With a bitrate of 9.80Mb per second, it’s no wonder that the picture looks so good. A fine anamorphic transfer it is.


SOUND The Dolby Digital 5.1 soundtrack gets the job done with good separation and wide dynamic range. You almost want to duck for cover in the underground garage shoot-out between Book and McFee. The gun blasts pack one wallop of a sonic punch. They’re LOUD. The reverberation is all around you. Dialog is easily understood througout.

WHAT’S LOVE GOT TO DO WITH IT

What's Love Got To Do With It


Reviewed by Jeff McNeal
September 11, 1999

DISNEY
Drama
Widescreen 1.85:1,
Letterbox
Dolby Digital 5.1 Surround
Color
118 minutes
Rated R, 1993

COMMENTS Based on her autobiography, “I, Tina”, WHAT’S LOVE GOT TO DO WITH IT was hailed by many critics as one of 1993’s top ten films. Siskel and Ebert gave it “two thumbs up — way up”. After revisiting this amazing story, I must agree that the accolades were well earned, particularly by the riveting performances by Angela Bassett in the title role as Tina Turner and Laurence Fishburne as her cruel and abusive husband, Ike Turner.

WHAT’S LOVE GOT TO DO WITH IT contains some of the most disturbing depictions of domestic violence ever put to film — and these passages are difficult to watch without wincing and looking over your shoulder for the exit. These scenes however, along with Bassett’s uncanny portrait of Tina Turner make for an incredibly compelling piece of work. Especially because it’s all true.

Ike Turner is forced to eat crow and pay for his years of violence and drug abuse by a decidedly unflattering portrait. Turner is a man with limited talents but strong desires of control and failed dreams, which manefest themselves into a deep resentment of the success his wife has attained. This won’t be the first, nor the last time an impresario gives a leg up to an ingenue, only to find that his protégé’s talents far exceed his own.

The more successful “Ike and Tina Turner” became as an act, due to Tina’s rich abundance of raw talent and stage presence, the more Ike’s abuse would escalate, until finally, through Buddhism, Tina found the inner strength she needed to break free from the cycle of abuse.

WHAT’S LOVE GOT TO DO WITH IT is an incredibly inspired, and in the end, triumphant piece of work that will no doubt haunt Ike Turner for the rest of his days, despite anything else he might say or do. He picked the right woman to make a star, but the wrong woman to batter and abuse (not that any woman could have been right for that treatment). Through Bassett’s amazing performance, Tina Turner emerges uplifted and fulfilled. As an audience, so do we.

SYNOPSIS Raised by her grandmother in Nutbush, Tennessee after her mother abandoned her at a young age, Anna Mae Bullock took to singing, finding herself at cross-purposes with the church choir conductress, who considered Anna Mae’s melodic outbursts of soulful emotion too disrespectful in the house of The Lord.

When her grandmother dies, Anna, now a young teen is sent to live with her mother and older sister in St. Louis. Neither has seen Anna since she was five or six years old. Though Anna still carries the pain of abandonment in her heart, Anna does her best to maintain a cheerful disposition and “fit in” with her no-nonsense loose-goose mother and her streetwise, sophisticated older sister.

Taking Anna to a club to discover St. Louis’ nightlife, Anna’s sister points out the handsome bandleader, Ike Turner, and warns Anna that he’s had practically every girl in the place. Smooth and sophisticated with an alluring baritone voice, Ike Turner and his band has the place rockin’. Anna, attracted to the older man, gets a chance to sing with the band on a subsequent visit when the microphone is passed to her. As part of his “schtick”, Turner allows different women to “sing” with his band for the laughs their usually horrible attempts generate.

This time, however, something’s different. Anna Mae brings down the house and Ike is truly impressed. Pursuing Anna Mae to join his band, Ike pays off Anna Mae’s mother, who at first refused his offer on behalf of her daughter, who she wants to become a nurse. “You ever see a nurse driving an automobile as fine as mine?”, he asks her, pointing outside to his Cadillac convertible. Once he slips Mrs. Bullock a $100 bill, Anna’s mother acquiesces, so long as she can chaperone the recording session that Ike has planned.

Ike molds Anna Mae into a formidable vocal talent, encouraging her to dig deep and emit some raw vocal power, which her mother doesn’t understand, but Anna is clearly capable of. “Sing rougher!”, Ike commands. Anna Mae is clearly attracted to Ike, but knows that he is married and the father of two. As Ike and Anna begin to spend more time together, Ike’s jealous, drunken or otherwise drugged wife attempts suicide after threatening Anna Mae with a loaded pistol.

Ike pours his heart out to Anna Mae, claiming that anyone he has ever been close to has left him — and feeling his pain based on her own experiences with that kind of hurt, swears that she would never do that. He further explains that he was never really “married” and that the relationship he had with the other woman was over.

Soon, there’s a record deal, a marriage and a new name for Anna Mae. Ike, without consulting her, renames her “Tina” for the “Ike and Tina Turner Review” and tightens his grip on her career and life. When Ike’s ex-girl shows up and leaves his two young sons on his doorstep for him to raise, we begin to see more of his true, selfish nature. As the two young boys stand on the porch, rejected by both parents and trembling with confusion and fear, it is Anna/Tina who comforts them — not their own philandering father, who can only think of how their presence is going to adversely impact his life. It’s an emotionally wrenching scene. One of many to come.

After a few hit records, Phil Spector approaches Tina after a performance and wants to record her. Ike intervenes, doing his best to include himself in the credit that Tina has earned for her performance. Spector, not so subtlely, makes it clear to Ike that Tina is the only one he is interested in recording. Ike escorts Spector to his “office” to discuss business, which ultimately led to Tina recording “River Deep and Mountain High” for Spector (in one of the films most impressive performance sections). The song is credited to “Ike and Tina Turner”, even though Ike had nothing whatsoever to do with the recording.

There is much domestic abuse during the period of the mid-60’s when Ike and Tina Turner were at the peak of their popularity. Ike’s drug abuse and philandering were demoralizing to Tina. But his raging temper, jealousy of her success and frustration over his inability to write any more hit songs, would soon boil over into unspeakable acts of rage. This would include repeated beatings and even violent rape in the couple’s small recording booth which immediately followed a vicious physical attack by Ike. This is by far the film’s most shuddering, disturbing scene. It’s very difficult to watch and may be too intense for some.

Desperate for help, Tina seeks the assistance of a close friend, Jackie, who walked away from the band earlier after being struck by Ike. The disturbance took place in a restaurant after a melee in which Ike, high on drugs, smashed cake in Tina’s face after she refused to take a bite to celebrate her success with the Spector record.

Jackie teaches Tina a Buddhist chant that will help her to see things clearly and help her break free of the escalating abuse from Ike.

Later, in a limousine enroute to a Dallas hotel for a Texas engagement, Ike begins to pummel Tina again. Only this time, Tina fights back with vengeance. The couple stumble into the posh hotel in one of the movie’s unintentionally funny scenes. Funny, because Ike has finally taken a taste of his own medicine. The two of course, look absurd, in their expensive, bloodied clothes, trying to put on airs as if nothing had happened. The rest of the guests in the lobby, however, stare in shock at the spectacle.

Once the two are in their room, Ike acts as if nothing unusual had occurred between them. Tina, examining her bloodied face and swollen lips in the hotel’s bathroom mirror, finally sees her situation with clarity and flees the hotel, nearly getting run over in the process while crossing a busy interstate, blinded by tears.

Lurching into a nearby Holiday Inn, she tearfully pleads with the manager for a place to stay. With less than fifty cents in her pocket, she starts to take off her wedding ring to offer as collateral. The manager, obviously moved by her awful predicament, exhibits a touching affirmation of his own humanity by calming the battered superstar, gently assuring her that no collateral would be required. “I would be honored to give you a room, Mrs. Turner”, he says.

In divorce court, the judge for his outbursts during the proceedings and for wearing his sunglasses admonishes Ike. Ike insists that he gave Tina everything she has earned, including her stage name, and wants to block her from using it. Tina, meanwhile, agrees to hand everything over to Ike. All their assets, publishing rights, royalties, etc. The ONLY thing she wants is her stage name, which she has clearly earned through her own blood, sweat and tears. The judge, while surprised that she is laying no claim to anything else, agrees that Mrs. Turner will indeed, keep her stage persona. This is a huge victory for Tina — and she knows it.

Ike, still desperate to regain some semblance of a career, would try to latch onto Tina even after the divorce, but having emerged stronger and wiser from her ordeal, Tina held her ground, even when threatened with death by Ike just prior to a comeback performance before an adoring crowd.

At 43, with a new manager, Tina Turner had defied the common perception that she would be too old to continue as a rock star. Instead, her star would rise even higher — breaking new ground and making new hit records. Far from a “nostalgia act”, with legs “up to there” and a wild mane of a wig, Tina Turner emerged triumphant from her harrowing experience with emotional abuse and physical violence, while Ike sank deeper into drug abuse, earning himself an eventual state prison term for possession.

I particularly enjoyed the final moments of the film, as the real Tina Turner is shown on stage, smiling and triumphant before her fans. Though it interrupted the flow of continuity slightly, seeing the actual subject of the film was not only appropriate, but gave us an even deeper appreciation for Bassett’s stunning performance. Angela Bassett, through her physical characteristics, right down to her throaty speaking voice, becomes Tina Turner during the course of this movie. A more convincing performance I could not imagine.


IMAGE It’s a shame that Disney still clings stubbornly to letterbox transfers and haven’t opted to embrace 16×9 enhanced transfers to date. It would have made a huge difference to this film, which only earns average marks for image quality. Many of the scenes are soft and sometimes even hazy in appearance. I also noticed a bit of aliasing. The key lighting throughout was dimmer than it should have been. Even in daylight scenes. Color saturation appeared a bit on the bland side, but monitor adjustments brought them up to an acceptable level. Flesh tones and color rendition was true and contrast levels were a bit on the lean side, adding to the somewhat hazy appearance to the film in some spots. In all, a very average transfer that wasn’t nearly as impressive as the subject matter.


SOUND The Dolby Digital 5.1 mix didn’t offer much in the way of split surrounds, except for the musical numbers. Fortunately, there are plenty featured on this disc — and they all sounded exceptional. River deep and mountain high, baby. The music sounded spacious and natural, with an excellent and broad pallate of frequencies to color the sound, from low to high, with only slight emphasis on the mid-range. The mix was nearly neutral across the board and featured good dynamic range and very little noise. As funky as it was at times, dialog was always easy to discern and we never felt the impulse to reach for the remote to activate subtitles. There is, however, an alternate French language track. I wish that the image quality could have been on par with the sound. This is a very nice mix.

WAG THE DOG

Wag The Dog


Reviewed by Bob Banka
December 31, 1998

NEW LINE HOME VIDEO
Comedy
Widescreen 1.85:1,
Anamorphic - Enhanced for 16×9 viewing
Dolby Digital 5.1 Surround
Color
96 minutes
Rated R, 1998

COMMENTS Suppose they gave a war and nobody came. Suppose nobody came, and they gave a war.

Suppose nobody had to come to the war because it could all be ‘fought’ by talking heads on television, spilling out manufactured ‘fact’ after fact as quickly as they could wag their tongues. This is all the American public in Barry Levinson’s brilliant satirical film, WAG THE DOG, sees of our country’s latest war, or ‘police action’, or ’storm’, or ’shield’, or whatever you want to call it. A manufactured war - made to order as determined by a mister fix-it spin doctor and a Hollywood producer. American people believe what they see on TV. If it’s burped out of their Sony, Zenith, or Mitsubishi, it must be genuine.

Politicians know this and they use it to their advantage. Even when they know what’s being reported is a fabrication - a LIE, they realize that many folks out there in TV land are likely to give it credence if it’s comin’ out of the boob tube. And the news folks are aware that if they present it in a sexy way, or hype it up enough to give it all the drama of a Hollywood film, then folks will stay tuned in. Hell, if a juicy bombing at a fast food joint, or a shooting on Mainstreet, USA is presented just right, they can even pull folks away from Jerry Springer. No, I’m not being sarcastic. We see it all the time.

Barry Levinson’s WAG THE DOG is the latest in a distinguished line of bold, satirical movies that hold a mirror up before this country’s people and says - “Look at what we’ve become. Pretty scary isn’t it? Funny? Yes. In fact it’s hysterical. But it’s also tragic.”

There is an interesting documentary included on this DVD which features comments from Levinson and a number of influential film makers, spin doctors, and reporters. An interviewee, Jane Rosenthal, one of WAG THE DOG’s producers, sites the 1976 prophetic film, NETWORK, as an example of fiction becoming truth. If you’ve ever seen this poignant, potent, satirical look at television broadcasting, you recall the scenes where a ‘newsman’, spouts off about television, and how it’s turned us into a bunch of drones or sheep that ingest and put faith in whatever drivel it spills out. It only seemed SLIGHTLY far fetched in ‘76, but today - it’s dead on. WAG THE DOG is in the same vain. All the technology used to produce the big lie manufactured in the film is available today. And as William Macy notes during an interview, also on this DVD, any concentration of enormous power and money is a breeding ground for corruption. The technology is here, an people with great power have it at their disposal. WAG THE DOG is a very funny film with incredible performances all around. But it’s much more than a comedy. It’s a warning.

New Line’s release of Barry Levinson’s WAG THE DOG is one the latest titles in their premium ‘Platinum Series’ collection. This is an outstanding political satire with superb performances by Robert DeNiro, Dustin Hoffman, and a wonderful supporting cast. It’ll keep you chucklin’ until you stop and think how much reality is grazed by its storyline.

Both image and sound transfer are excellent. Though the film is loaded with darker, dimly-lit shots, the picture remains solid, sharp, and detailed. Colors are fully saturated, and flesh tones always appear natural. The DD 5.1 mix is very good. It won’t generate ooohs and aaahs, or shiver your timbers, but it will surround you with subtle, finer ambient sounds and a wonderful score written by Mark Knopfler. In addition to a running commentary by Levinson and Hoffman, New Line has also included an interesting original documentary and a number of other informative features. A wonderful addition to any film enthusiast’s collection. I recommend that, at the very least, you rent WAG THE DOG. It’s very possible that the experience will push you toward a purchase.


SYNOPSIS With less than two weeks until election day, a scandal erupts which could cause the sitting president’s favorable numbers to nose dive off the charts, and ruin his chances for re-election. Apparently the most powerful man in the world didn’t have the will power to contain himself in the presence a teenage ‘Firefly Girl’. The little gal has a lawyer and the story is about to break. Enter Mr.Fix-it, a spin doctor named Conrad Brean (Robert DeNiro) who possesses the creative talents needed to divert the public’s attention from the pending scandal using razzle-dazzle, smoke and mirrors, and a dash of modern technology. Conrad is a major league manipulator of the press, politics, and the naive American people - people who know what is, and isn’t, true when they see it on television. If it’s on TV - it must be so.

But with less than two weeks, Conrad needs something BIG if he’s going to shift public attention from a president who’s groped a Firefly Girl. He needs something like… well, like a WAR! But a war with who? A war with Albania. When asked by his assistant, Winifred Ames (Anne Heche), why Albania?, Conrad explains that no one knows anything about them, so they’re immediately suspect, shifty, and untrustworthy. Albania is perfect.

But this is too big even for Conrad, so he seeks the help of the one man who can manage such a major league hoodwinking of the American public - a Hollywood Producer, Stanley Motss (the “t” is silent) (Dustin Hoffman). A producer who has never won an Oscar, but has at least produced an Oscar Night ceremony. Motss welcomes the opportunity as a great challenge - his biggest ever. He quickly calls in some cronies to help throw together a war and a publicity campaign that’ll win over the support of the American people.

Johnny Green (Willie Nelson), writes songs to capture the spirit of the crises, turn it on its head, and squeeze out some patriotic emotion. Fad King (Dennis Leary) invents nifty slogans to print on T-shirts, leopardskin berets for the troops ‘deployed’ in Albania, and armbands that American citizens can don to show their support for our fighting men.
All is going well with Brean and Motss’ little war until the CIA catches wind of their shenanigans, cuts a deal with the president’s opponent in the election, and effectively shuts the war down - announcing that the problems with Albania have been resolved. But Motss is not the type who lets interfering numskulls shut down his greatest production - not even the CIA. So, a second plan of action is put into motion, and the hoodwinking continues.

But, can all the presidents men keep the public distracted long enough to get him elected to a second term?


Dustin Hoffman and Robert DeNiro in
Barry Levinson’s WAG THE DOG


IMAGE New Line presents WAG THE DOG in its original theatrical aspect ratio of 1.85 : 1 on side A of the disc, and Full Frame on side B. It has also been enhanced for viewing on 16×9 televisions. This is a very good transfer. Primarily what we see in WAG THE DOG are dimly-lit interiors - the dark little room deep under the White House where Brean’s plot of attack is formulated, or the back seats of limos where plans are changed via cellular. These scenes look very solid. Blacks are deep and colors are fully saturated. The room at the White house is dark and dank, and Levinson makes it seen very closed in by using almost exclusively close-ups to pull us in tight as the characters discuss there big moves, shuffles, and sidesteps. In addition to the dim lighting and long shadows - the set itself is pale with large dull color fields. Despite these conditions, which occasionally make the production of a solid digital image difficult, the picture on this DVD looks excellent.
It’s completely free of ‘noise’ or graininess.

The visit to Motss’ palatial Beverly Hills home introduces some color to the film’s palette, but still softer, warmer colors are most abundant - the only brighter, vivid hue being that of the producer’s tanning bed which releases a glaring blue. The scenes at Motss’ are moderate key-lit and it’s here that the image’s high level of sharpness and detail can be appreciated. The set design is wonderful, and we can take in its finer touches. Even more so than in the film’s abundant darker scenes, here, colors are richly hued and fidelity is extremely natural. Shadow delineation and resolution is excellent.

The night time exteriors are also very well done. Blacks are solid and true and the picture remains sharp and detailed. For example, the airport scene which occurs as Woody Harrelson’s character, Sgt. William Schumann, is escorted to Brean’s jet during a heavy downpour. Other than a bright blue which halos Harrelson and his escort, nearly all is black. Edges are very crisp, and one can see the rain striking the light-reflecting puddles on the runway.

There are abundant close-up shots in this talkie, dialogue-driven film (And what dialogue! Mamet is an artist). For an excellent piece of acting and almost poetic reading of the film’s razor sharp dialogue, refer to the scene shared by DeNiro and the wonderful William Macy, who plays a CIA honcho, during chapter nine on the disc. This is another dimly lit scene. It occurs in a shut down, darkened, Mexican restaurant. DeNiro’s close-ups reveal so much detail - more than I recall seeing when viewing the film in the theater - and this is in a low-key lit scene! Very impressive work by the folks at New Line.


SOUND This is a Dolby Digital 5.1 mix. Though the soundtrack of WAG THE DOG won’t put your amp and processor through the paces, or thrash your speakers with screeches and rumbles, it’s wonderful with small details and subtleties. For example, the slight hum emitted by surveillance monitors which track Brean and is entourage through the White House, or imitation scratches, pops, and hisses added to a phony ‘old’ recording created by Brean and his team as part of their hoodwinking of the American people.

The sound and digital image ‘mixing’ room shown in the film is a quiet muffled space, where film studio techies piece together a bit of propagandist footage for Brean to leak to the press corp. Here, voices are ever so slightly muffled and dense - as they should be, and every click of a knob, or flip of a switch, is audible, but also, slightly muffled. This is a very subtle quality which one hardly notices in the context of this hilarious scene, but I was tuned into it because I’ve spent time in such rooms and the acoustics are unique - and they’re captured in this mix perfectly.

The airport scene noted above also shows off the soundtrack’s excellent handling of subtleties. The falling rain sprinkling onto the runway, and the splashes created by every G.I.’s foot fall, can be heard clearly from all speakers just under Anne Heche’s anxious bantering, as she chases the soldiers for a much needed explanation.

There are no occasions for the use of the .1 effects channel, and the split surrounds, other than the occasional need for ambient sounds, are employed primarily in support of the film’s music. The score for WAG THE DOG was composed by Dire Straight’s guitarist and vocalist, Mark Knopfler (LOCAL HERO). You’ll recognized his trademark finger picked riffs on guitar, as well as his voice, which can be heard on the closing credits tune ‘Wag The Dog.’ In addition to Knopfler’s fine music, there are one or two occasions for tunes composed by Willie Nelson’s character, Johnny Green, as part of Conrad Brean’s plan to whip the American public into a patriotic frenzy over his phony war. The music is very well recorded and expansive across the front soundstage, and it wraps into the surrounds.

Dialogue sounds natural throughout the film whether in whispered tones, or raised angry voices. Even Hoffman’s trademark mumble is smooth and clear. All voices are well integrated across the front three speakers, and the occasional sound effects are well localized in the front left and right speakers.


Director Barry Levinson

VIRUS

Virus


Reviewed by Bob Banka
July 25, 1999

UNIVERSAL
Sci-Fi
Widescreen 2.35:1,
Anamorphic - Enhanced for 16×9 viewing
Dolby Digital 5.1 Surround
Color
96 minutes
Rated R, 1999

COMMENTS With the Academy Award-winning effects meister, John Bruno in the director’s chair, one might expect VIRUS to dazzle the viewer with cutting-edge visuals. Though bits and pieces do look convincing, for the most part they’re run-of-the-mill, and provide nothing we’ve not seen before in countless sci-fi pics over the past five years. There’s been a flood of films hitting cineplexes that perhaps deserve their very own genre - let’s call the ‘VisFX’ flics. These are films which have nothing going for them in the way of story, and are clearly fashioned only to exploit the successes of more original sci-fi and action flics. The pitch to filmgoers, primarily by way of theatrical trailers, is the special effects sequences which are evolving to produce more and more fantastic images by the month, thanks to computer graphics. Films like VIRUS, DEEP RISING, THE FACULTY, SOLDIER, and EVENT HORIZON all fall into the new ‘VisFX’ genre. In this genre, visuals are everything, story is less than secondary.

Rare is the film of the nineties that concentrates more on .character and story, and only uses FX to support them. TITANIC had incredible effects, but it also had a solid story. Recently, I had the pleasure of seeing Jan De Bont’s latest feature, THE HAUNTING, which has amazing visuals, but they’re not overdone. They’re not center stage. DARK CITY and CONTACT are two other examples. VIRUS is a VisFX flic, but since its effects are also very drab - and typically shrouded in almost impenetrable darkness, the film is left with virtually nothing to prop it up and make it even slightly interesting.

There’s little point in tearing down the film’s script or the actors’ performances (except maybe to have a bit of fun). Even though both Jamie Lee Curtis and veteran Donald Sutherland are present to try and lend some credibility, it matters little. Robert DeNiro, Al Pacino, Dustin Hoffman, and Meryl Streep couldn’t do the job with this script. With a VisFX flic, one need look at the effects. The film’s premise has an energy field of some sort, beamed down via the MIR space station, and take over a satellite tracking ship. The crew is killed off and then used for body parts in an onboard robotics workshop that makes machines which incorporate their limbs and brains. The droids produced, when a bit of light manages to fall on them, look like bloody action figures constructed from an erector set and raw hamburger. The big, behemoth robot, which speaks using a deep synthesized voice, looks like a Transformer toy with headlights for eyes. Really silly stuff.

Credibility is stretched, twisted, broken, and strewn about time and time again. At one point, Jamie Lee is in the clutches - face to oil pan, with one of the robot baddies which explodes after it’s hit with a round from a rocket launcher. The robot is shredded into piles of twisted metal by the blast, but Ms. C. is fine - not even a concussion from the blast. What a gal! Later, she and William Baldwin (who CARES which one he is), are launched from the ship through some rocket tube to escape the droids. How the two of them survive this is, well …I dunno…?

VIRUS was made on a budget of $75 million. Apparently producer Gale Ann Hurd still swings a lot of clout in Tinsel Town. It must really chafe the butts of up and coming directors who can’t get a green light for a new and interesting project, to see such dreck coming off the assembly line. Universal is really having a bad go of it these days. With bombs like VIRUS, MERCURY RISING and MEET JOE BLACK, they’re in dire need of a hit. If what they’ve been trying hasn’t worked - perhaps they should consider shifting gears a bit and trying something new. Hey guys, if it’s broke - fix it!

SYNOPSIS An ocean-going tug caught in a typhoon loses the barge it’s towing. The captain, Robert Everton (Donald Sutherland) is made angry and desperate. Everything he had was invested in its cargo. Also on board the tug are the hot navigator, Kit Foster (Jamie Lee Curtis) and the handsome guy, Steve Baker (William Baldwin), along with some monster fodder (remember, the larger the crew, the higher the body count).

Having sustained damages in the furious storm, Kit navigates to the eye of the storm for a few hours of calm. It’s here that they come across a dead in the water, Russian communications vessel. Packing shotguns and walkie- alkies, the crew climbs aboard to survey the situation. After finding the bridge deserted and no signs of life aboard, Everton figures he can tow the ship in and collect a thirty million dollar finders fee from the Russians. He agrees to split this among the crew. All are ecstatic and begin making plans to spend their share. However, after their tug is sunk by a fallen anchor, and shots are fired below deck, they realize they’re not alone on board after all.

During the opening credits sequence we saw a space cloud engulf the MIR space station and send a bolt of energy down to the Russian ship. Apparently, this carried an alien entity which wiped out the crew and took control of the ship. It’s now manufacturing robots in the ship’s high tech workshop. Many resemble insects, but now body parts from the slaughtered crew are being used to make androids. These droids begin to bump off members of Everton’s crew - one at a time, in the dark, and in nasty fashion. No prizes for guessing who gets out alive.


IMAGE This is an outstanding transfer from the folks at Universal. The quality of the films they’re releasing to theaters may be on the decline as of late, but their transfers of newly released pics, more often than not, are very good or excellent. As noted above, being the typical ‘VisFX’ flic, many scenes are masked in darkness. Despite the predominance of darkness, large and long shadows and heavy mist and smoke, the image is nearly always free of grain, with deep solid blacks. Contrast and brightness levels are good and consistent throughout the presentation.

Colors are very well rendered and fully saturated. There’s a great deal of blue in the scenes aboard the Russian vessel as well as splashes of red, green, and orange. Hues all look very good with no ‘bleeding’ into surrounding darker fields. Explosions and balls of fire are bright and natural looking with no ‘blooming’ or bleeding.

There are a handful of shots where some ‘ringing’ can be seen around dark edges of objects that are brightly back- it. Other than these few occasions, edges look quite good and detail is excellent. The opening typhoon sequence - probably the only exciting bit in the film, looks very impressive - with ocean spray across the frame, many shades of gray and blue, and a great deal of black. It’s a good looking sequence, but it’s all downhill from there folks.
Fleshtones look natural throughout the feature. The print used by Universal to strike there master was pristine. There are no nics, scars, or scratches in the picture. This is a very good transfer. High marks.


SOUND This is a good Dolby Digital, 5.1 mix. Our only gripe is its rather lame use of the .1 FX channel. During the opening typhoon sequence, one would expect some serious thunder as the towering waves slam against the hull of the tug and the barge in tow. At other points in the film - the numerous sequences of madness and mayhem, more bass would be expected as well.

The forward soundstage is wide and fairly deep with good imaging. Panning effects and sound effects placement are smooth and accurate. The surrounds have many an opportunity to serve up effects as well - quite often they’re split with the sounds of explosions, crashing metal, and hammering on bulkheads. More subtle ambient sounds and effects- hums, grumbles and the clicking of little robot feet can be heard over the shoulders as well.

Joe McNeely’s rather uninspired score is well recorded and rises up nicely from all corners to fill the room with music - strains which cover a wide portion of the dynamic range. Dialogue is well recorded and nicely integrated across the forward three speakers. Voices sound full and natural - not distorted or compressed. But as clear as the dialogue is - I’ll be darned if I can figure out what type of accent Donald Sutherland was trying to use. This is a very solid DD soundtrack from Universal.

ULEE’S GOLD

Ulee's Gold


Reviewed by Bob Banka
August 28, 1999

MGM
Drama
Widescreen 1.66:1,
Letterbox
Dolby Digital 2.0 Surround
Color
113 minutes
Rated R, 1997

COMMENTS ”… the best character I ever read. It’s the kind of role you pay money to do - a complex character, full of possibilities, and the script was full of moments that were very deep, very pure and very simple.”

- Peter Fonda, speaking about the role of Ulee Jackson in ULEE’S GOLD

After his unforgettable performance as ‘Captain America’ in the classic 1969 flic, EASY RIDER, Peter Fonda went adrift in a B-movie ocean - only occasionally making the grade in films like THE HIRED HAND in 1971. Much of the buzz over writer/director/editor Victor Nunez’s ‘hybrid-indie’ flic, ULEE’S GOLD, no doubt had to do with welcoming the actor back into the fold of more credible filmmaking. The actor’s performance in ULEE’S GOLD was very highly praised by attendees of the 1997 Sundance Film Festival.

ULEE’S GOLD is a graceful film about a hermit-like Florida beekeeper, shaken from his stoic state by some serious family problems. Fonda, 57 at the time, and looking so much like his famous father, has never been better. He walks cautiously - as a beekeeper should, and with a limp - apparently an old war wound. But it’s the internal wounds which scar Ulysses ‘Ulee’ Jackson much deeper. He’s the only survivor of his unit in Vietnam - a war he came home from by being ‘tricky.’ His wife died six years ago, but he still grieves the loss, and his son has been jailed for bank robbing - leaving him to care for his two granddaughters. His daughter-in-law, a drug addict, ran out on the girls some time ago.

A complex role indeed, since all of Ulee’s emotions are harnessed within. There’s rarely a raised voice in the film - though Ulee has much to be angry about. In one very tender scene, Ulee talks about the loss of his wife to a neighbor. Fonda is heartbreaking as he pours out the tale but tries to keep his emotions bottled up. Some tears manage to escape. Fonda plays his beekeeper as a very patient man - no doubt something he learned from beekeepers he interviewed while shooting in Florida. But Ulee’s patient manner extends beyond his work with the bees. During dangerous situations with two armed, small-time criminals, we can see him calmly, but quickly work things over in his head and settle on the safest manner in which to proceed. This cool approach is certainly what brought him home in one piece from Vietnam. Fonda is absolutely marvelous in ULEE’S GOLD. This is a performance that shouldn’t be missed.

In the late eighties, Victor Nunez was a bit of a folk hero and leader of the Florida indie filmmaking community. He has made some small, and well-received pics like GAL YOUNG ‘UN, A FLASH OF GREEN (starring Ed Harris) and RUBY IN PARADISE (with Ashley Judd in what is arguably her best performance to date). Despite the success of his lower budget features - he’s elected to stay ‘small’ and continue making films from the heart - films with good characters and simple, believable stories. He’s not been bitten by the Tinsel Town bug. ULEE’S GOLD is not quite an indie film, since backing was garnered from Orion pictures - thanks to Nunez’s fellow Floridian, Jonathan Demme, however the director was free to make the film his way.

ULEE’S GOLD could easily have lurched into a typical, Hollywood ‘man-protects-the-family’ tale, but Nunez keeps things reined-in and gives his film a deliberate, slower, calmer pace. Sequences of discord are balanced with quieter moments of Ulee working with his bees in the field and extracting honey in his small facility. In one scene Ulee has the chance to grab a discarded gun from a pair of thugs, but he calmly takes stock of the situation and does what’s clearly the smartest, safest thing. In a more conventional flic, perhaps one starring Harrison Ford or Mel Gibson, the weapon would be scooped up and violence would ensue. ULEE’S GOLD builds slowly toward an ending that ties everything up nicely - perhaps too nicely for those who really dig amazing revelations and shock endings. Such a close is mercifully avoided in Nunez’s film. ULEE’S GOLD remains true to itself from opening titles to closing credits - no common feat in the cinema of the nineties.

SYNOPSIS Ulysses ‘Ulee’ Jackson (Peter Fonda) is a reclusive, small town beekeeper in the Florida panhandle. He’s the sole survivor of his unit in Vietnam and a widower for six years. His son, who has no interest in beekeeping, has been jailed for a bank robbery, and his drug-addicted daughter-in-law has run out on her children - two daughters, now under his care.

For the last couple years, Ulee has managed to keep his small business going, and care for his granddaughters, but a phone call from his son, Jimmy (Tom Wood) throws his world off kilter. He asks Ulee to drive to Orlando and pick up his wife who’s in the care of his two sleazy bank robbing accomplices, Eddie and Ferris (Steven Flynn and Dewey Weber). Ulee would rather leave her where she is, but his son urges him - reminding him that she’s ‘sick.’

Though this is the busiest time of the year for Ulee, and he must extract honey to sell, he makes the trip south for his daughter-in-law, Helen (Christine Dunford). He finds her with Eddie and Ferris who tell him at gunpoint why they really wanted him to come down and collect the strung-out Helen. They’ve learned of a stash of cash that Jimmy managed to conceal from the holdup and they want their share. If Jimmy doesn’t come clean and hand over the dough, they plan on going after Ulee’s family. It’s agreed that the money will be turned over in a week.

With the help of a neighbor, Connie (Patricia Richardson), Helen is cleaned up and put on her feet. It takes a while, but the kids adjust and welcome her back into their lives. However, things get ugly and very dangerous when the impatient Ferris and Eddie show up early for the loot.


IMAGE Other than Columbia Tristar and DreamWorks, none of the studios seem committed enough to anamorphic transfers to serve up ALL letterboxed titles as 16×9 enhanced - even the smaller, lower profile pics, like ULEE’S GOLD. Time and again, these pics hit the shelves with transfers that are less than they could’ve been - simply because they’re not expected to sell in higher volumes. Such is the case with MGM’s DVD release of ULEE’S GOLD.

Nearly the entire film, save for the last reel and one or two other nighttime scenes, is shot in well-lit interiors or naturally-lit, brightly sunlit exteriors. The darker scenes look fine, but these higher key-lit scenes are a bit softer and have weaker lines. Save for this one negative aspect of the transfer - all is well.

Colors are very well rendered and saturated. The numerous sequences set in the forest, fields, and swamp lands have excellent greens and multiple shades of earthy colors. We noted no color bleeding between fields and no ‘halo-ing.’ Brightness and contrast levels are very good throughout the presentation. Both brighter and darker scenes are solid, with no ‘grain’ or image break up of any kind.

There are no instances of ‘ringing’ or ‘shimmer’ from digital over-enhancement. Flesh tones look natural in all lighting keys. The print used by MGM for their master was very clean and free of distracting nics, scars, and scratches.

If one can overlook the softer looking sequences, this transfer will provide a pleasant viewing experience. Those using smaller displays may not notice the softer images at all. Though it’s not a certainty that an anamorphic transfer would’ve ‘firmed up’ the picture, it would have improved the chances. It’s getting more and more difficult to accept this lapse in sensibility for those producing DVDs. If a film is worth releasing at all on DVD - it’s worth releasing with an anamorphic transfer - that is, with an eye to the future. People are beginning to buy widescreen sets and sales will, without a doubt, increase. Those who don’t yet own one will only regret these non-anamorphic releases later. It’s a certainty. Either companies like MGM will re-release these titles with anamorphic transfers - which will be a shame for those who’ve already put out some cash, or they will not re-release them - which will also be a shame because then we’ll never see them at their best.

Perhaps most won’t concern themselves with lower profile titles like ULEE’S GOLD, but if anamorphic releases were POLICY from ALL studios we wouldn’t be served non-anamorphic discs like TITANIC, THE AMERICAN PRESIDENT, GOODFELLAS, RAGING BULL, SPEED, THE ENGLISH PATIENT, ARMAGEDDON, THE ROCK, CON AIR, THE KUBRICK FILMS, THE THING, SCARFACE, THE DIE HARD FILMS, THE HUNT FOR RED OCTOBER, CRIMSON TIDE, THERE’S SOMETHING ABOUT MARY, KUNDUN, PLATOON, MEAN STREETS, JFK, THE DEER HUNTER, and so many more. Are the studios counting on our repurchasing these titles when, or if, they decide to re-release them anamorphically?

And what are we to expect for future titles - like the letterboxed animated features from Disney that’ll be hitting the shelves for only sixty days and then going on moratorium for TEN YEARS? Can we count on Paramount to release the Indiana Jones films and the Godfather films in the future - with anamorphic transfers? What of Fox’s releases of THE ABYSS, ID4 and the STAR WARS films? You can bet these will all come to DVD some time. Let’s hope the studios are committed to releasing only anamorphic transfers by then. In fact - sometimes I wish they’d just hold off releasing them at all until they decide to do them right.


SOUND This is a very good Dolby Digital, Surround Sound mix. Of course, there’s nothing lost by MGM’s decision to provide a mix without split surrounds or a .1 FX channel. All that’s required for ULEE’S GOLD is a reasonably wide forward stage and a signal to the surrounds that’ll produce a convincing ambiance. Indeed, this mix does just that.

Sound effects placement is rarely needed in the forward stage, but when called for, imaging is accurate. The surrounds, as well as the mains, produce a convincing ambiance with sounds of birds and bees, and crickets in the night. Charles Engstrom’s mellow score, primarily sweet sounds on the piano, is well recorded and rises up nicely from the mains and the surrounds.

Dialogue is well recorded. Voices usually sound natural, with no distortion. This is a good, solid mix from the folks at MGM.

TRUE CRIME

True Crime


Reviewed by Bob Banka
August 17, 1999

WARNER BROS.
Drama
Widescreen 2.35:1,
Anamorphic - Enhanced for 16×9 viewing
Dolby Digital 5.1 Surround
Color
127 minutes
Rated R, 1999

COMMENTS I’m a long time fan of the tall, squinty-eyed icon, Clint Eastwood. After many years of taking in nearly every one of his flics as they hit theaters, I’ve come to the conclusion that it’s impossible for the man to make a bad film. Though his earlier pics were westerns and ‘urban’ westerns, more recently, his features have more toned-down characters - consider THE BRIDGES OF MADISON COUNTY, MIDNIGHT IN THE GARDEN OF GOOD AND EVIL, ABSOLUTE POWER and his most recent drama, TRUE CRIME. Eastwood’s most recent on- screen persona has been that of the old professional - one seeking a last chance at redemption and happiness. This is certainly true of Steve Everett, his character in TRUE CRIME - a discredited newspaper man, suddenly dumped into a capital punishment story in the eleventh hour. After a mere glance at a file, he’s nearly convinced that the condemned man is innocent.

One would think this plot has been drilled and excavated so many times over the years, there’s no chance of yielding anything new and interesting. But don’t rule out all possibilities until Eastwood has gone down the mine shaft with pick in hand. It’s a simple matter to predict how TRUE CRIME will end, but as is the case with so many good films, it’s not necessarily the destination that’s important - but the ride that takes you there. With a seasoned pro like Eastwood behind, and in front of the camera, you can be certain the journey will, at the very least, be engaging and entertaining.

Reporter Steve Everett’s desperate attempt to clear Frank Beachum (Isaiah Washington) before the midnight hour is only part of the story. TRUE CRIME also contrasts the relationships these two men have with their wives and children. Everett is an unfaithful, self-absorbed, irresponsible husband and father. He’s a recovering alcoholic, kicked out of New York after sleeping with the underage daughter of his newspaper’s owner. Now, writing in Oakland, he’s on the wagon, but sleeping with his editor’s wife. His own wife waits at home with his little girl, wondering if he’ll keep his promise and take the girl to the zoo. Everett’s solution is to do ”speed zoo” - that is, place the girl in a stroller and run at breakneck speed through the park while calling out the names of the animals whizzing by. After risking everything to clear the name of a rapist, who was ultimately found guilty beyond question, Everett is desperate to prove that his reporter’s nose can still sniff out the truth. He sees the Frank Beachum story as his chance - no matter the cost.

Eastwood gives a terrific performance. We somehow manage to care about, and root for his character, despite the fact that he’s a womanizer and such a poor father and husband. Some will wince at an opening scene which has Everett in a bar putting the moves on a twenty-something year old colleague. Everett looks silly, but that’s the whole point. Everything about the way he handles his personal life is objectionable - he’s a bit of teenager in a grown man’s body. Though he believes he can turn things around by pulling one last rabbit out of his hat and proving Beachum’s innocence, we know things aren’t that simple.

In contrast, Beachum - living his last day, spends time with his wife and daughter. These are the most powerful scenes in the film. Washington is a very gifted actor. It’s a shame we don’t see more of him in this film, and in other projects. There are a number of heartbreaking moments. A brief visit by an overzealous, cruel priest is stirring, but the last good-bye’s between father and child and husband and wife are wrenching. Washington plays Beachum as a strong, sensitive, father and husband who’s resigned himself to the fact that he’ll not wake to see another day. He accepts his fate, but what it’ll do to his wife and daughter is tearing him apart. Only twice does he let his feelings escape - once as his daughter is taken from him, and again when his wife is pulled through the door. Both moments are shattering, and Washington plays them marvelously.

As sad as these scenes are, Eastwood doesn’t seem to be taking a strong stand against capital punishment with his film. Everett is driven because an innocent man is to be executed. Apparently, he doesn’t have objections to the death penalty itself. In addition to the powerful drama centering around the race to save a man’s life, there are numerous memorable scenes with Eastwood and his co-stars. Perhaps the best being those shared with the fiery James Woods, who plays Everett’s hard-nosed, but fair chief at the paper. Woods steals these scenes - hands down. TRUE CRIME may use an old, dusty, formula script, but exceptional performances, and Eastwood’s usual dedication to character development characters, makes this a highly entertaining, engaging piece of work.

SYNOPSIS After a young beat reporter is killed in a car accident, Steve Everett (Clint Eastwood) gets the nod to complete a story she’d been working on. The gal was to interview convicted murderer, Frank Beachum (Isaiah Washington) just hours before his execution. After only a cursory glimpse of the late reporter’s file, Everett’s convinced of Beachum’s innocence. Against the urging of his editor, Bob Findley (Denis Leary) and his chief, Alan Mann (James Woods), the seasoned reporter pulls a ”Dick Tracy” and begins digging into the years-old case. He has until midnight to prove Beachum’s innocence.

Findley keeps the heat on Everett to cool his heels and simply handle the story as a human interest piece, but he’s ignored. There’s much tension between the two since Findley has discovered that the reporter is sleeping with his wife. Everett’s own wife is fed up with Everett’s lack of commitment to their marriage and their daughter. Everett’s judgment is in question since he played a bad hunch and tried to prove a rapist’s innocence. He feels things will turn around for him if he can save Beachum.

Beachum has always claimed that he didn’t commit the murder he was convicted for. In his last hours, his wife and young daughter visit to say their good-byes. While the family is together, Everett arrives for his interview. After looking into Beachum’s eyes, he becomes still more convinced that the man is innocent. The race is on. But, with just hours before the lethal drugs are to be injected, Everett has no leads to follow.


IMAGE This is an outstanding transfer from the folks at Warner Bros. As was the case with Eastwood’s ABSOLUTE POWER, this is a fairly dark film, with but a handful of brighter, sunlit exteriors. Whether dimly-lit or out in the California sun, the images remain very sharp and detailed. Edges are clean with no ‘ringing’ from digital enhancement, and no halo-ing or color bleeding between fields. Only during two or three exteriors did we note a somewhat softened image.

Most scenes in the film display rather subdued colors, but on occasion - for example in a bar during the opening scene, brighter colors do catch one’s attention. Hues are nicely rendered and saturated. Blacks are deep and solid. Flesh tones look natural throughout the presentation. Shadow detail is excellent and contrast and brightness levels are very good. We noted no ‘grain’ or image breakup of any kind during the feature. The print used by Warner Bros. to strike their master was pristine. We saw no nics, scars, or scratches on the picture. This is a top notch transfer. Very high marks.


SOUND This is a very good Dolby Digital, 5.1 mix. The forward soundstage is deep and wide, and on occasion it reaches around to meet the split surrounds. Panning effects and sound effects placement are smooth and accurate.

The split surrounds contribute primarily by serving up more subtle ambient effects and by providing support for the typically reserved Lennie Niehaus score. However, there are a few occasions when more dynamic sound is required - for example, during the film’s finale, which as you would expect, involves racing automobiles. There are convincing panning effects in the rear channels and good effects placement as well.

Dialogue is very well recorded and nicely integrated across the forward stage. Voices sound full and natural - never distorted or compressed. There’s very little use for the .1 FX channel during the course of the film. Nearly all bass to be heard is served up adequately by the front mains. Lennie Niehaus’ score is very well recorded - rising up primarily from the forward stage, but having some support from the surrounds. This is a subtle piece of work that serves to nicely compliment the action on screen without ever overpowering it. This is a solid Dolby Digital track from the folks at Warner Bros.

TREES LOUNGE

Trees Lounge


Reviewed by Jeff McNeal
August 24, 1999

PIONEER
Drama
Widescreen 1.85:1,
Letterbox
Dolby Digital 2.0 Mono
Color
94 minutes
Rated R, 1996

COMMENTS “I love hanging around in bars during the day time. There’s something special about that. I don’t know why”
–Steve Buscemi

Steve Buscemi (pronounced Boo-SEM-ee) made his directorial debut with this small little film of very limited theatrical release in 1996. Buscemi also wrote the screenplay and provides an interesting commentary that’s also contained on this disc.

The film draws many elements of Buscemi’s own past into the story, including the namesake of the movie, TREES LOUNGE. The original bar was in Valley Stream, NY and eventually became a sports bar with too many renovations, so the filmmakers found another bar elsewhere to “re-create” Trees Lounge. Buscemi explains that this story, though not autobiogrphical, might describe his life had he not discovered acting. For Steve’s sake (and ours) let’s be glad he found the stage. The portrait of his character isn’t a particularly flattering one.

I was drawn to this film for the very simple reason that Buscemi has become one of my favorite contemporary actors, along with Edward Norton, Gary Oldman, Tim Roth and a few others. Unlike the extremely versatile Norton and Oldman, however, Buscemi is basically a one-trick pony, performing within a very limited range. His specialty is playing the fed up, frustrated everyman. That’s the bad news. The good news is that the dimension Buscemi performs in is always interesting to observe and TREES LOUNGE is no exception. I’m not so certain that Buscemi sets the world on fire with his writing or direction here, but he’s always a pleasure to watch act.

TREES LOUNGE is a character study of the life of just an ordinary schlep who drinks too much and regrets his missed opportunities — not really certain of where his life is heading and lacking any sort of a plan to get ahead. He finds himself surrounded by others in varying degrees of aimlessness and/or pain, and despite his efforts to straighten his life out, ends up being drawn into the problems of others, flowing from one to another like a churning tide of despair.

Buscemi’s character, Tommy, is a mechanic who can’t even keep his own car running, yet he wonders why he can’t find a job. The fact that he was caught stealing from his last employer probably doesn’t help matters. Having been turned in by his own brother only deepens his resentment of his present unemployment circumstances.

Obviously produced on a shoestring budget, Buscemi managed to lure in some high power talent to help fill TREES LOUNGE. Samuel L. Jackson, though onscreen only briefly, steals his scene with delightful ease. Other notable names include Mimi Rogers, Daniel Baldwin and Anthony LaPaglia who plays a key role.

I didn’t know what to expect going into TREES LOUNGE, but Buscemi shows that yes, he’s able to write, direct and star in his own film, while providing an interesting, non-linear slice of life in a depressed little town without pity. It will be interesting to see if he ever gets another chance to try his hand at the juggling act again.

TREES LOUNGE mixes humor with pathos and drama in a respectable effort from Buscemi, but there’s a reason why this film wasn’t a blockbuster. Still, I found it a worthwhile watch. I probably even would have enjoyed it more had the transfer been better. If you’re a big fan of Steve Buscemi, you’ll probably enjoy this film, regardless. A trivia note: There are five actors that appear in TREES LOUNGE that were also in GOODFELLAS. See if you can pick ‘em out. If not, Buscemi will tell you during the commentary.


SYNOPSIS There really isn’t much of a plotline to really relate without spoiling the flow of the film, so this will be brief out of necessity. Even the tagline of the movie foreshadows the content: “A story about one man’s search… for who knows what.”

Tommy is an unemployed mechanic, who spends too much time hanging out at the local watering hole, the TREES LOUNGE. The corner bar is inhabited by a few memorable characters, including the barmaid, played by Carol Kane. There’s also a heavyset mess of a man in his mid-30’s named Mike. He’s actually quite successful, but you’d never know it by his appearance. Like Tommy and Bill — an older man who says nothing but drinks volumes — Mike’s problem is the bottle — at least partially.

Tommy tries vainly to find a job, and he wants a girl. He misses his ex-girlfriend Theresa,( Elizabeth Bracco) and is a burr under the saddle of her new beau, Rob (Anthony LaPaglia). Just as we’re never really quite certain that Tommy is an alcoholic, there’s some question over who the father is of the baby that Theresa is carrying, which helps add to the friction between Tommy and Rob. We ultimately find out who the real father is — a decision that the director never wrote into the screenplay but let Bracco decide.

When “Uncle Al”, a friendly gent with a care-worn face and an ice cream truck passes away (in a rather dramatic fashion), Al and Tommy’s relatives suggest that Tommy take over Uncle Al’s business. With nothing better to do, Tommy takes over the route and deadpans his way through the route, missing kids who want to buy ice cream and disillusioning others who find his style less than appealing. Tommy is nothing like good ‘ol Uncle Al, who decidedly had a raunchy adult sense of humor that the little kiddies never got to see (as well they shouldn’t have).

A young troubled 17-year-old named Debi (Chloë Sevigny), who had been friends with Uncle Al, begins to hang out with Tommy on his ice cream route, under the watchful eye of her stepfather, Jerry (Daniel Baldwin) and trusting mother Patti (Mimi Rogers).

As Debi and Tommy’s friendship intensifies, trouble looms for Tommy as he finds himself drawn into situations that he hadn’t prepared himself for. Tommy slowly, finally comes to the realization that he has to change himself because his life is going absolutely nowhere. Even the bar doesn’t hold the same allure and mystique when Tommy returns for another beer and learns that one of its’ mainstay patrons is no longer there. Things around Tommy have changed, giving him pause to reflect, but it remains uncertain as to just how Tommy will end up when the day is done at the TREES LOUNGE.


IMAGE The quality of this transfer was my biggest disappointment in the film. I’m not certain if even a 16×9 enhanced transfer would have saved this effort, but it certainly couldn’t have hurt. The colors are somewhat muted, the clarity is quite poor throughout and the contrast balance is really awful. Sorry, there’s just no other way of putting it for the sake of diplomacy. On a small screen, TREES LOUNGE may not look as bad, but on a large screen, forget it. I didn’t detect any problems in terms of nicks or scars on the print that was used for the transfer, but that’s not enough to rescue this flick from close to the bottom of our image ratings barrel.


SOUND The Dolby Digital soundtrack appears to be 2.0 mono. I didn’t detect much channel separation to speak of and the disc documentation doesn’t really say anything either. The soundtrack of TREES LOUNGE is really something special, featuring obscure tracks from the Ink Spots, The Mills Brothers, Bill Deal and the Rhondells, Brenda Lee, Hayden (the more I listen to their Trees Lounge theme, the more I like it) and others. Considering that composer Evan Lurie didn’t have much to go on (Buscemi admits that he had trouble articulating what he wanted) the incidental music, jazzy and spare, fits nicely with the mood of the film.

TITUS

Titus


Reviewed by Jeff McNeal
July 28, 2000

20TH CENTURY FOX
Drama
Widescreen 2.35:1,
Anamorphic - Enhanced for 16×9 viewing
Dolby Digital 5.1 Surround
Color
162 minutes
Rated R, 1999

COMMENTS I have the feeling that this film wasn’t seen by many moviegoers in 1999. I know that I don’t get out all that much these days, but I’d never even heard of TITUS until it showed up at our HQ recently. All I know, is that I was intrigued when I opened the package containing this two-disc set. Thank goodness that Anthony Hopkins recanted his decision to leave acting a couple of years ago. He’s made some terrific movies since then and TITUS is one of his best ever.

One of our alert readers informed me that this very production is what prompted Hopkins to throw in the towel, which is surprising since he contributes to this DVD by way of commentary during specific scenes. It seems Hopkins had a change of heart somewhere along the way and we’re the happier for it. Perhaps it was that thick blue paint he was plastered in and forced to endure for the promo shots. I mean, enough is enough, right Tony?

Directed by Julie Taymor (who had received acclaim for her stage adaptation of “The Lion King”) and adapted from one of William Shakespeare’s first successful and most enduring plays, Titus Andronicus, Taymor brings to the screen an abundance of sure-handed direction gleaned from her stage adaptation of TITUS.

Personally, I have never been a big Shakespeare fan. His dialogue typically involves too much work for my neanderthal brain to keep up with and interpret. I might as well admit that I did not care for SHAKESPEARE IN LOVE while I’m at it. Sure, Gwyneth Paltrow was cute, the costumes and set design were first-class, the supporting cast solid and the story mildly entertaining. But for me, it was a ponderous snore.

Given the fact that Sir Anthony Hopkins had the title role in TITUS, starring opposite another of my favorite underrated actors, Jessica Lange, I simply had to give this film a chance.

Is it too late for me to become a fan of Shakespeare now?

In experiencing TITUS, I discovered one of the most interesting films from 1999 that I have had the pleasure of reviewing. I came away from the screening both haunted and mesmerized. Not too many films have that kind of effect on me.

TITUS is a highly stylized adaptation of Shakespeare’s Titus Andronicus that travels through time, not unlike Andrew Lloyd Webber’s JESUS CHRIST SUPERSTAR. Only this is not a musical. TITUS is a dark, shocking, absorbing examination of the human heart pushed to excruciating extremes; driven by revenge, betrayal, vengeance and love.

Though mildly distracting for the first few scenes, the melding of modern dress and various props with ancient Rome works just fine by me. From chariots to motorcycles… oil-burning torches to remote-controlled halogen spotlights… or togas to tailored suits… the imagery that comes from TITUS is fresh, inventive and brash in its’ contemporary stance. Once you have seen TITUS, you won’t soon forget the dramatic staging and haunting CGI effects which are incorporated into the tragic, yet compelling story line. One of the pitfalls of being a film or DVD reviewer, is that we often receive so much content to review, we simply don’t have the luxury of going back to enjoy our favorites again. I am making an exception to this reality for TITUS. My next review will simply have to wait.

The words which are spoken by the actors comes straight from Shakespeare with very little intervention by Taymor. This of course means that at least some of the dialogue is going to do in one ear and out the other — at least for admitted Shakespeare-o-phobes with average vocabulary skills such as myself. However — and this is a very big however — once you get into the rhythm of the dialogue and the flow of the script, understanding and/or interpretation is no longer an issue. The motivation and intent of the characters becomes crystal clear, except we’re really not certain what drives Aaron the Moor into doing some of the things he does. We certainly know what drives him towards the end of the film, however. Like Andronicus, his character makes a 180 degree swing out of phase into a different mindset altogether, once his circumstances change and he adapts to them.

The symbolism that Taymor uses to translate ideas from the stage onto the screen are magnificent. Note how Hopkin’s character begins wearing black and as the film progresses, dons various shades of grey until the final moments of the picture when he is adorned in bright white from head to toe. Externally, he appears innocent and benign to his enemies, yet internally, his tortured soul has become darkened and malignant with bitterness and rage.

Having the intimate experience of conducting the stage play, Taymor knew exactly how she wanted to shoot this film and therefore no storyboards were used. Even some of the actors were surprised by this and felt as though she wasn’t shooting enough film to cover enough angles for later use. As it turns out, according to Taymor, only about 10 minutes was trimmed from the 162 minute film during editing.

I highly recommend watching the Q&A with Julie Taymor that was filmed at Columbia University just after a screening of the film there. In a format reminiscent of The Actors Studio, Taymor is accompanied by a professor onstage who serves as the moderator and accepts questions from the film students in the audience. Taymor’s intelligence and connection with the subject material becomes obvious very quickly and adds a new dimension of appreciation to the film. Her comments are really quite fascinating.

Though I normally don’t get too excited about liner notes, I heartily recommend that you read the included film review from a guy who knows a lot more about Shakespeare than I ever will — Jonathan Bate of the New York Times. Like Shakespeare himself, Bate likes using those big words — and wields them well, providing the rest of us with a better understanding of “the big picture”.

Another reason to experience this two-disk set besides the fascinating movie itself, are the running commentaries by Julie Taymor and composer Elliott Goldenthall (with an isolated score) and an additional commentary track with scene-specific commentary by Anthony Hopkins and Harry Lennix (Aaron). Lennix, while unknown to most viewers, is the only actor to make the transition from Taymor’s stage adaptation of Titus Andronicus. Hopkins’ comments don’t always seem to jibe with what’s happening on the screen, but they are of great interest nonetheless because they reveal certain insights into his method of acting and provides us a sneak preview of things to come including the reprise of his role as Hannibal Lechter in the forthcoming sequel to THE SILENCE OF THE LAMBS. Hopkins also reveals his disregard for critics, including Charlton Heston whom he claims “hated the movie” because “he expected us to all walk around in togas, I guess”.

Although TITUS features Jessica Lange in a prominent role, the real story is between Andronicus and Aaron, a Moor who is exceptionally evil and manipulative simply for the sake of being so. Watching the transitions that these two characters go through while maintaining a sense of wit and fierce purpose throughout the film is the greatest joy of watching TITUS. If you’re as big a fan of Anthony Hopkins as I am, you owe it to yourself to race out and pick up a copy of this fascinating, shocking and deliciously disturbing film. Complex, riddled with black humor, sarcasm and symbolism, TITUS is truly a magnificent, contemporary masterpiece.

SYNOPSIS The movie begins in a very contemporary and somewhat confusing fashion that symbolizes how our culture derives entertainment from violence. We see a young boy at his kitchen table surrounded by toys as he watches violent content on television. Before we know it, the little boy is going berserk, toys are being mutilated, ketchup is flying everywhere and we’re thinking “huh”?

Hang in there, though. A moment later, the child is swept up by a soldier and transported back in time to ancient Rome, and it is there where we see the drama unfold through the young boys’ eyes. At first simply a sad witness to the carnage, the youngster eventually succumbs to it and becomes an eager participant in the ensuing drama.

Titus Andronicus is a loyal general to the Roman Empire. Returning triumphant from a battle with the Goths, he offers the eldest son of the Goth Queen, Tamora (Jessica Lange) as a live sacrifice to the gods, despite her tearful and desperate pleadings for her son to be spared. Titus, a warrior and fiercely loyal to tradition is unresponsive to Tamora’s maternal horror and misery.

Meanwhile, Saturninus (Alan Cumming) and his brother Bassianus (James Frain) are vying for power in the wake of the death of their father, Caesar. The Tribune, Marcus (Colm Feore), announces that his brother, Titus Andronicus has been elected by popular vote to succeed Caesar.

After leading Rome in battle for 40 years and having no interest in politics, Titus declines the honor and responsibility of becoming Emperor and announces that Saturninus, the eldest son of Caesar, shall rule all of Rome, instead. Ironically, this becomes a decision Titus will come to woefully regret, for Saturninus, the impetuous, tempermental and immature weasel that he is, is eager to misuse the power he now wields.

As his first decree, Saturninus announces his intention to marry Titus Andronicus’ daughter, the lovely and gentle Lavinia (Laura Fraser), who is betrothed to Saturninus’ one-time rival for power, Bassianus.

Although Titus is clearly not pleased with Saturninus claiming his daughter as his bride, Titus is a loyal subject of Rome and slays one of his own sons when the lad tries to block the path of his father, in pursuit of a fleeing Lavinia and Bassianus.

Titus is furious that his sons have dishonored him by conspiring to deny Saturninus the prize of Lavinia, and Titus’ sense of loyalty for Rome clearly outweighs his sense of loyalty to his own flesh and blood.

Saturninus, himself furious of the dishonor and treachery of Titus and his clan, impetuously decides that Tamora shall be his bride instead, thus freeing her two remaining sons, a wild and aggressive pair named Dimitrius and Chiron, placing her in a dangerous position of power and influence which she shall use in vengeance against Titus for murdering her first born son.

Another who is captured with Tamora and her sons is a Moor named Aaron (Harry J. Lennix) who seems to have some sort of a relationship with Tamora which becomes more clear as the film progresses. Aaron delights in treachery and goes in league with Tamora in order to help her exact her revenge against Andronicus. Aaron prevents Dimitrius and Chiron from destroying each other with their jealosies and raging hormones and instead manipulates them into eventually channeling their destructive focus upon Bassianus and Lavinia. But that will come later.

Disarming her enemies by insisting that Emperor Saturninus pardon Andronicus and his sons — and Lavinia — for their act of treachery, Tamora and Aaron begin to lay the groundwork of an elaborate scheme that will destroy Andronicus by decimating his family, reducing the once-great warrior to madness, tearfully pleading for mercy upon a deserted crossroad of stones for the lives of his sons.

The two were framed of the murder of Bassianus, who was actually slain by Dimitrius and Chiron, who further devastated Andronicus by ravaging Lavinia and ensured that she could never identify her attackers — or so they thought.

Andronicus, feigning insanity to Tamora, is in fact plotting his own revenge in a most inspired way that truly takes the cake — and came close to converting me to vegetarianism. Considering some of the other “meaty” roles that Anthony Hopkins has played in the past (and shall play again, hint,hint), the shocking conclusion of TITUS seems strangely appropriate. By the end of the story, Dimitrius and Chiron, along with Tamora, Aaron and Saturninus all receive their just “desserts”, but at an extremely heavy cost to TITUS.


IMAGE Fox has done it again. At one time the bane of the true DVD enthusiast, Fox seems intent on making up for lost time in a big way, with some of the finest transfers we’ve seen lately. The color palette that director Taymor has chosen is limited to help bridge the gap of time that is used throughout the production. Look for heavy emphasis on white, black, grays, blues and reds — though occasionally other colors are used. The lighting is powerful and dramatic throughout the film with wonderful texture and shadows which are created by careful placement. The effect is surreal and stage-like and works wonderfully. Black level is deep and solid, shadow detail is excellent and clarity is outstanding at all times. The print is completely devoid of nicks, dirt or scratches and appears pristine in every detail on our 119 in. reference screen.

To see how few five globe ratings we issue to DVD’s is to check our “Premium Picks” page at TheBIG PictureDVD.com. See how fewer still that we issue five globes for picture and sound. TITUS is in very select company around here. It will look superb on any size display — but from our perspective naturally, the bigger the better. If it wasn’t for the unlimited refills and real butter on the popcorn, I would have sworn that I was in a commercial theater while watching this DVD.


SOUND Julie Taymor had known composer Elliott Goldenthal for at least 15 years prior to the making of this film. They say familiarity breeds contempt, but in this case the familiarity turned into an enormous challenge for Goldenthal after Taymor had gleaned portions of previous scores that Goldenthal had recorded over the years for various films and used them as “temp” tracks for TITUS. This place to Goldenthal in the unenviable position of having to create a new score that built upon or otherwise exceeded his previous works. During the Q&A that’s included on the supplemental disc, Taymor vows to never put Goldenthal in that position again in the future. Ironically, we are the beneficiaries of Goldenthal’s labor and are rewarded with an outstanding score that accompanies the visuals with equal weight. Frequency response is wide and dynamic, with bone-piercing brass and thundering bass.

Just as the visuals travel through time, so too does the musical styles. For instance, during the scene were Saturninus and Bassianus are vying for support from the masses, each in their own version of the Pope Mobile, the music is very contemporary, edgy jazz that clicks and pops to a snappy beat.

The BIG Picture is pleased to award our highest honors for sound as well as picture. So long as you can stomach the violence and funky orgy scene contained in TITUS, you will be rewarded with the best in image and sound that the current limits of DVD technology allow.

Although the spoken word was clear and easy to discern from the music and background effects, thanks to Will Shakespeare’s other-worldly command of the English language, even the subtitles couldn’t help me with some of the dialogue. Suffice to say, the next time I watch TITUS, and may have to resort to using a dictionary to help the sort things out. I look forward to the exercise.

TITANIC

Titanic


Reviewed by Bob Banka
August 30, 1999

PARAMOUNT
Drama
Widescreen 2.35:1,
Letterbox
Dolby Digital 5.1 Surround
Color
194 minutes
Rated PG-13, 1997

COMMENTS

”I’m sorry I didn’t build you a stronger ship, young Rose.”

There’s no BIG news attached to Paramount’s release of James Cameron’s blockbuster, TITANIC. We’ve known for months that this would be a stripped down disc, having no special features of note - unless you consider a trailer and an alternate language track newsworthy. What we have here is the movie, the whole movie, and nothing but the movie.

But wait Jimmy C fans - what’s that we see over the rainbow? Is it?… Is it?… No, wait a minute. It CAN’T be… Yes, IT IS! It’s a loaded-to-the-gills, cup-runeth-over, all-but-the-kitchen-sink, SPECIAL EDITION release of TITANIC, and Yes!…YES!..YES! it’s ANAMORPHIC! Oh, Yes. Mmmmmmm! I think I need a cold shower.

“But, wait a minute. I just bought a copy of TITANIC. What do you mean, Mr. Paramount? I need to buy another?”

“Well yes, Mr. B. If you want all those value added features, you’ll have to pony up with some more cash. Surely, all those special doo dads are worth what we’re asking.”

“Yea, I suppose. But I didn’t know anamorphic enhancement was considered a special feature.”

“Well… uh,… umm,… no, it’s not.”

“Then why couldn’t you have made the bare bones release, you know the one that came out LAST summer, why couldn’t you make IT anamorphic?”

“Well we were in a hurry to get that title out to all the fans of the film who wanted it on DVD.”

“Oh, I see. And having the film in your vault for two years wasn’t time enough. Man, Warner Bros., Universal, and Columbia must be a bunch of wizards then, because they can serve up anamorphic releases - WITH value added feature of titles like ANALYZE THIS, THE MUMMY, and GODZILLA, in much less than a YEAR after their theatrical release. Maybe you ought to talk to those fellas. Now, THEY’RE firing on all cylinders.”

Sorry, sarcasm runs in my family. I try not to be too cynical. But I just can’t think of one good reason why Paramount, or Fox, or whoever’s responsible here, for this non-anamorphic release of the biggest money maker in film history. I just completed a review of MGM’s non-anamorphic release of the small, low profile film, ULEE’S GOLD. A terrific little film with an excellent performance by Peter Fonda. I noted that the only reason it could’ve been released non-enhanced was that, being such a small film with limited appeal, MGM figured it wasn’t worth the extra investment to produce a new transfer - best to just use the master used for the laser disc release. At The BIG Picture we don’t agree with this short-sighted policy. If a title is worthy of a DVD release at all, then it’s worthy of an anamorphic release. That is, if you’re going to do - do it right.

Of course, this ‘low profile film’ rationalization won’t work when discussing the DVD release of TITANIC - a film that raked in about a billion dollars before it hit video, and many millions after. And my fit of dialogue isn’t all make believe. We CAN expect a special edition, anamorphic release of TITANIC. My guess is it’ll happen in the second half of 2000, or maybe a bit later. Paramount doesn’t consider anamorphia a special feature - and well they shouldn’t. Since their original retreat from releasing anamorphic discs, they’ve returned to the fold, and remained (until now) - serving up 16×9 releases of films like STAR TREK: INSURRECTION, THE PARALLAX VIEW, VIRTUOSITY, DAYS OF HEAVEN, and HEAVEN CAN WAIT. These were not special editions.

So what’s the deal with Paramount? I think the answer is simple - It’s BECAUSE TITANIC was so incredibly successful and made such a boatload of money that it’s been released on DVD in a bare bones, non-anamorphic edition. Paramount’s thinking is that we love the film SO much, we’ll buy it NOW just to see it on our beloved format, and then we’ll not hesitate to buy it AGAIN later, when it’s released with extra features and a 16×9 enhanced transfer. We can’t help ourselves. This isn’t short-sightedness on Paramount’s part. On the contrary, they’re looking ahead - and seeing dollar signs.

I know, I know - they’re in the business to make money, not to make us so-called ‘rabid 16×9-ers’ happy. But consumers don’t like being taken for a ride. In my opinion, it’s fine to have a bare bones release now, and a spec ed release later. Those of us who came to DVD from laser discs have been used to that policy for years. And paying more for the extra features isn’t out of the question either - as long as the price is reasonable. But, I don’t agree that anamorphic enhancement should be counted in as one of the ‘added features.’ Make the bare bones release anamorphic and make the spec ed release anamorphic. When we decide to buy the value added edition, we’ll be paying for special features, like commentaries and documentaries - not an improved picture. Cameron was absolutely right, with respect to his highly successful film - “Bigger is better.” But with respect to this initial DVD release of TITANIC - Better would have been better.

SYNOPSIS James Cameron’s TITANIC isn’t just a story of a ship’s sinking - it’s a love story, and there’s no question that this is why the film was so successful. This is why so many youngsters, many of them girls, came back repeatedly to see the film. Casting Leonardo DiCaprio had less to do with acting ability, and so much more to do with box office draw for the youngsters. Cameron’s a smart one.

However, this is not to say that there’s nothing else to the movie. JC is brighter than that. A love story is a love story, and as such tales go - this one is far from a revelation. In fact it’s terribly simple. A guy wants a gal that’s out of his class. Folks try to keep them apart, but in the face of disaster, true love conquers all. The story is made unique because it’s set against the sinking of the Titanic. A simple idea really - but brilliantly executed. Cameron harnessed all tools available to a director to make this one awesome spectacle, but at the same time he kept the central love story in the fore. The biggest film in history - a love story. Who’d have thunk it?


KATE WINSLET and LEONARDO DiCAPRIO

A sketchy synopsis will do for those readers who haven’t seen the film yet. So, listen up - all three of you. Jack Dawson (Leonard DiCaprio) wins two tickets to sail to America aboard the unsinkable R.M.S. Titanic. Jack’s a poor sketch artist with a few bucks in his pocket. He and his good buddy, Fabrizio (Danny Nucci) find their bunks down in steerage - the best accommodations they’ve ever had - hardly any rats.”

Also aboard, but traveling in the highest class possible, is the soon to be unhappily married, Rose (Kate Winslet). Rose is engaged to the disgustingly wealthy, and just plain disgusting, Cal Hockley (Billy Zane) - a real Snidely Whiplash if ever there was one. The two are sailing to Philadelphia to be married. Rose’s mother, Ruth (Frances Fisher), a widow, impresses upon her daughter the importance of the match. If Rose doesn’t marry into money - and soon, she’ll be back at the bench sewing for a living - working for a living! Perish the thought. Independent minded Rose has been reluctantly going along with the engagement, but after meeting Jack - during her feeble suicide attempt, she decides that money or no money, Cal is not her cup of tea.

Dodging Cal’s armed manservant, Lovejoy (David Warner), Rose and Jack manage to spend an evening together kicking up their heels in steerage. The next evening, Rose asks Jack to sketch her in the nude - wearing only a ridiculously huge diamond - a gift from Cal that once belonged to Louis XIV. Later, they spend some sweaty time in the backseat of a car in a storage hold. Shortly after, the ship smashes into the iceberg and begins to sink. Together and separated, Rose and Jack struggle to remain alive as the ‘unsinkable’ ship fills with near-freezing ocean water.


Are You Ready To Go Back To Titanic?


IMAGE All being said about anamorphic transfers, the truth is - there’s no absolute guarantee that enhancing a transfer for 16×9 viewing always yields a superior image. However, we do know that it greatly improves the possibility of a top notch image. In the case of this transfer of TITANIC, the problems we see when viewing on our 100” projection setup could very well have been avoided. THX certification or not folks, there are some blemishes here worth noting.

The image is excellent during the darker, second half of the film, that is - before the iceberg rips through the hull of the ship. It’s during the sunnier, brighter scenes topside that the picture suffers. The earlier scenes, before Rose and Jack board the ship, are usually sharp and detailed. However, some shots are softer. Detail is wanting in a number of the more densely-framed shots of the hundreds of passengers and well wishes on the dock. Later, aboard the ship, particularly during out on deck, there’s a bit too much color in characters’ faces. This is not in all shots - but in enough to distract. A few of the shots off of Rose’s luxurious cabin - the private deck, and in the posh dining room at tea time, have the same problem. Red line halo-ing can be seen around character’s faces as well - particularly in medium and full shots. Obviously, if one cuts back the color on their projector or large screen set, the problem can be reduced, but this should not have to be done, and of course, darker scenes which look fine will then have noticeably less color.

One particularly blemished sequence is the ‘Rose and Jack on the bow’ scene. When the camera is back further and panning to hold the two in medium, full and then long shot, the fleshtones are over-saturated, and faces lack detail. The sequence is noticeably soft. Again, these problems may not appear as significant on smaller viewing set ups. Mind you - at The BIG Picture we always view on at least a 100” front projection set-up.


Kickin’ Up Heels In Steerage

Darker sequences in the film - and those shot inboard, at dinner time and during the nude sketch sequence, look excellent. No complaints here. The picture has clean edges and a high level of detail. Color resolution is superb - including flesh tones. Blacks are deep and solid, and shadow detail is very good. As water begins filling deck after deck, and the image takes on the colder blue shade, the hues are clean and include the slightest shadings. Contrast and brightness levels are very good and consistent throughout the presentation.

With respect to the work involved in getting the entire film on one side of a disc - this has been accomplished with no compression artifacts, ‘grain’ or image break up of any kind. The picture remains solid throughout - whether in brighter color fields, duller fields, or black fields. We noted no ‘shimmer’ or ‘ringing’ from digital over-enhancement. In earlier shots - in the bright sunlight, or glowing sunset, we did note softer edges, as stated above, but never harsh, over-enhanced edges.

The final sequences in the film look the most impressive. As the images become nearly black and very deep blue - after the ships lights go out, and there are only bits of color in frame, the picture continues to remain solid, with very well-rendered hues and no smearing or bleeding of colors between fields. The print used by Paramount to produce it’s master is pristine. We noted no nics, scars, or scratches in the picture. So, what we have here is a mixed bag. Earlier sequences in the film have some negative aspects, but the second half is outstanding in every way.


I Hope You Enjoy Your Time Together!


SOUND Without question, the highlight of the disc is this awesome, Dolby Digital 5.1 mix. The track has exceptional clarity which even slightly surpasses that heard on the laser disc. However, it does seem to carry a bit less bass during a few sequences. This aside, the track is one of the very best we’ve heard in quite some time.

The forward stage is very deep and wide - reaching around to merge with the aggressively employed split surrounds. During the first half of the film this is most notable for passages of James Horner’s Academy Award-winning score and for ambient sounds of crowd murmurs - on the dock and during the hoe-down in steerage. However, beginning with the crash with the iceberg and then forward, the track really shines.

Sound effects placement in the front mains and the split surrounds is accurate and very impressive. The dynamic range served up is wide and includes a fair amount of lower end. However, we did note that during the engine reversal sequence there seems to be a bit less bass than we recall hearing on the laser discs edition of TITANIC. This is one of those exceptional soundtracks which delivers effects to the surrounds with significant volume and bass. This is most notable during the collision sequence, and throughout the sinking, as bulkheads and structures groan under the burden of water. The sequences taking place below decks as Rose finds and rescues Jack are loaded with a smorgasbord of terrifying sounds of metal groaning and water gushing and trickling. Both powerful and subtle tones are served up with impressive clarity and pinpoint accuracy.


All Dressed Up And No Place To Go

Memorable sequences include the brief scene underwater when Rose and Jack are sucked down by the ship with the sounds of the churning ocean water surrounding the viewer, the quiet before the storm as the string quarter plays ‘Nearer My God To Thee’ and painful images of doomed passengers are seen, the scary sequence showing the coal loaders hustling out of the flooding engine rooms - trying to beat the locking doors, the horrible splitting of the ship when the keel gives way and sends the stern crashing back down to the ocean, every horrible punch of flesh against metal as passengers tumble down the inclined, and finally vertical ship, and the desperate, terrified screams of hundreds of souls thrashing about in the freezing water after the Titanic has gone under. Each sound is perfectly located and clearly delineated. Imaging is some of the best we’ve heard.

The .1 FX channel has numerous occasions to serve up some low level tones. These accompany significant bass from the forward mains as well as the split surrounds. Those readers who took the plunge and invested in full range speakers for all corners will be mighty pleased with themselves because this track will take advantage of them. Paramount’s mix exploits most of the dynamic range afforded by Dolby Digital.

The film’s visuals are stunning to be sure. Every bit of the production’s mammoth budget can be seen. The believability of these awesome images is sold by this terrific soundtrack. Paramount has succeeded in preserving the Academy Award-winning efforts of Tom Bellfort and Christopher Boyes, and Tom Johns and his crew. Regardless of the reservations we have about Paramount’s foolhardy decision to present TITANIC in the non-anamorphic mode, the viewing experience is still mighty impressive, given this audio mix - one of the best we’ve heard, and surely deserving of The BIG Picture’s highest marks.