DVD Beaver is reporting that they have been informed that the British import of SALO will now be region B encoded. It was previously listed as region-free on many sites.:mad::mad::mad:

I was so close to skipping the Criterion DVD entirely... :mad:

The screencaps on DVD Beaver don't look all that hot anyway. Faces look awfully smudged and textures/grain almost non-existent. Likely it's the victim of heavy NR, and there's edge enhancement on top of that too (as is the Criterion transfer). Certainly better than the original BFI DVD, but I swear I'm seeing more grain in the Criterion caps!

A real shame... guess I'll stick with the Criterion DVD after all. :(

I also wonder if it's on Criterion's short list for Blu-ray, could be.

So we don't get a horrible film that gained most of it's acclaim from being a rare Criterion, instead of being a great film. I'm heartbroken. :p

Those are strong words... I can take it to assume you've actually seen Salo, if you're willing to call it horrible?

I happen to like it. It's not a pleasant film, but it's a smart and fascinating (but fundamentally flawed) one. It's neither the exploitation wonder bootleggers made it out to be nor the scathing and raw attack on fascism that Pasolini so wanted it to be... in the end it's a long stretch of Nietzsche-like philosophy, brought to life by the literal and cinematic manipulation and degradation of its' cast.

As I've said elsewhere; as the libertines are sitting on the balcony, holding their binoculars to watch the final disgusting scene unfold the audiences winces, thinking them horrible for taking such pleasure in the sight... yet they're no different than us for still being there in the audience, watching, waiting for the inevitable conclusion to strike.

It's not light viewing. It's not perfect, either. But if any controversial 1970s exploitation film is art above simple commerce, this is it.

Those are strong words... I can take it to assume you've actually seen Salo, if you're willing to call it horrible?

I happen to like it. It's not a pleasant film, but it's a smart and fascinating (but fundamentally flawed) one. It's neither the exploitation wonder bootleggers made it out to be nor the scathing and raw attack on fascism that Pasolini so wanted it to be... in the end it's a long stretch of Nietzsche-like philosophy, brought to life by the literal and cinematic manipulation and degradation of its' cast.

As I've said elsewhere; as the libertines are sitting on the balcony, holding their binoculars to watch the final disgusting scene unfold the audiences winces, thinking them horrible for taking such pleasure in the sight... yet they're no different than us for still being there in the audience, watching, waiting for the inevitable conclusion to strike.

It's not light viewing. It's not perfect, either. But if any controversial 1970s exploitation film is art above simple commerce, this is it.

Yes, I've seen it. And I maintain the film has gained most of it's acclaim from being a rare DVD, rather actually being good.

I think because it's so rare and cost some people so much money to obtained they've made themselves think it's some great piece of work. This reviewer said it best when it comes to what I think of it.

"A perfect example of the kind of material that, theoretically, anyway, can be acceptable on paper but becomes so repugnant when visualized on the screen that it further dehumanizes the human spirit, which is supposed to be the artist's concern. "

Oh yes. Because the Marquis de Sade is so much less repugnant in print... :rolleyes::D

Fair enough, I'll agree to disagree on the merit of the feature. I'm still upset by the loss though, and only hope something better comes along. That Criterion turned the original release into a debacle (and made a truly awful DVD in the process) is a footnote that should have little impact on the content itself, and how "valuable" or "important" it is.

Personally, if I could somehow replace House of Wax or Meet the Spartans with Salo, I think the market would be just a touch better for it... different strokes, I guess. ;)

Yes, I've seen it. And I maintain the film has gained most of it's acclaim from being a rare DVD, rather actually being good.




Right. That explains perfectly why it was an acclaimed film before there was even a VHS version of the movie. :rolleyes: Your logic is sound.

Eww, the caps at DVD Beaver (http://www.dvdbeaver.com/film/DVDCompare/salo.htm) look absolutely disgusting. Edge-enhanced to hell and the grain structure looks like a complete, smeary mess thanks to DNR.

I know it's just a check disc, but if this is the future of BFI Blu-rays then maybe you Region A people are lucky they'll be region coded. Better to wait for Criterion and hope they do these old films right, BFI obviously has no clue what they're doing.

I think claiming this looks disgusting and that BFI have no idea what they're doing is rather harsh. Yes, the edge-enhancement detected in certain outdoor scenes is annoying, but those screen caps clearly illustrate that this is a very decent upgrade...and it includes the missing scene not found on other editions...

Detail on the single-layered BFI Blu-ray is as good as we expected. It towers above the new Criterion in that regard. It looks quite stunning although I did detect some edge enhancement (see below) in certain outdoor scenes. There is still some noise but I also see grain. The big difference is in the color scheme. Directly beside the Criterion - that edition look to have been boosted with the BFI showing a much softer palette. I prefer this more subdued look, which I suspect is more accurate, but I'd like to do some further analysis this weekend perhaps simultaneous viewings toggling back and forth between the 2 transfers. I'm sure I'll get abundant advice on which is more 'true' in email.

The BFI Blu-ray has the missing scene (see capture #6 - 25-second sequence during the first wedding ceremony, where one of the masters quotes a poem by Gottfried Benn) and the UK Blu-ray has an immediate option for the English credit sequence (as well as that DUB).

To each their own, but I stand by that it looks terrible. I wouldn't take it if I got it for free, and would rather watch the Criterion DVD upscaled (which is also transferred from a superior source.)

In due time Criterion will no doubt release it on Blu-ray as well, and hopefully we'll see then if I was right.

I think claiming this looks disgusting and that BFI have no idea what they're doing is rather harsh. Yes, the edge-enhancement detected in certain outdoor scenes is annoying, but those screen caps clearly illustrate that this is a very decent upgrade...and it includes the missing scene not found on other editions...
If the 1080p stills are accurate this transfer is utter crap and BFI should be ashamed for releasing such garbage. Looks as bad as "Gangs of New York", if not worse. :mad:

Right. That explains perfectly why it was an acclaimed film before there was even a VHS version of the movie. :rolleyes: Your logic is sound.

Most and I do mean most people who aren't normally into films of these types became interested in it when it's became the holy grail of Criterions.

I know, I had never heard of the thing until then. And I know a lot of people on other message boards and in real life who only saw it because of it's rarity.

I'm quite aware it's an important film for those for buffs and others into that type of movies. But, for the average DVD or movie watcher, nobody paid much attention to it before it became of the most saught after DVD's on the market.

Most and I do mean most people who aren't normally into films of these types became interested in it when it's became the holy grail of Criterions.

I know, I had never heard of the thing until then. And I know a lot of people on other message boards and in real life who only saw it because of it's rarity.

I'm quite aware it's an important film for those for buffs and others into that type of movies. But, for the average DVD or movie watcher, nobody paid much attention to it before it became of the most saught after DVD's on the market.

So, is it important, or is it horrible? And, Salo isn't exactly a movie for the "average DVD or movie watcher." So, again--just because you weren't aware of it doesn't really mean much.

So, is it important, or is it horrible? And, Salo isn't exactly a movie for the "average DVD or movie watcher." So, again--just because you weren't aware of it doesn't really mean much.

It's not important to me, and I think it's horrible. Although, I recognize it's important to some people and it does have a place in film history.

Since, we are in a DVD/Blu-Ray watchers forum, those people's awareness of the film (including mine) seemed to be known because of it's rareness. So, it really does mean much. If we were in some film buff forum, then no it probably wouldn't mean much.

Edit: The original post was meant is jest as well. Just for the fact the that most people I know who went out of their way to get the Criterion, hated the film. That's all I was commenting on.

I'm curious why the Criterion reissue is still missing the Gottfried Benn poem... copyright issues, maybe? :confused: Why the rarity of a film would factor into people NEEDING to see it, I'll never know.

I'm not surprised that someone who'd never heard of Salo would hate it. It's not a cheery film, it's not a perfect film, and it combines the unhealthy hyper-realism of a live play with utterly repugnant (but often brief/hard to see) acts of human suffering. In a sense, it's there because Pasolini was fascinated by de Sade's thoughts on the human condition, and brought them to the screen in the only way he knew how, while adding his own political slant to the table. It wasn't intended to be loved, it was supposed to be a shocking and unpleasant experience. He wanted the viewer to be angry rather than entertained, lest he would have made the rampant nudity directly sexy and the graphic violence drawn out voyeuristic. Actually, if he'd lived to see the film's premier I wonder if he'd have been quite satisfied with the reaction it got. :D

So it's not Jack's cup of tea. That's fine. But it's certainly an important film, insomuch as Dawn of the Dead, I Drink Your Blood, The Exorcist, Suspiria, Venus in Furs, Lone Wolf and Cub, The Texas Chainsaw Massacre, or any other infamous and unique 1970s exploitation film is important. (And if none of them are, then I'm in the wrong place.) It grabbed audiences by the throat and throttled them into looking serious and unpleasant concepts right in the eye, and Salo did it better than most of its' era. It's not for everyone, but compared to plenty of other similar period films that are hailed as modern classics now (*Cough*Last House on the Left...) I think it's worth its' infamy and occasional praise.

I'm curious why the Criterion reissue is still missing the Gottfried Benn poem... copyright issues, maybe?
You can read all about it on the Criterion blog here (http://www.criterion.com/blog/2008_08_01_archive.html#3999477088388292832). The short version: it was not in the original negative and only appears in the UK print that BFI used. No one knows where the scene came from, whether it was cut from the negative (and by whom, why or when) or whether it was supposed to be there at all.

DVD Beaver is reporting that they have been informed that the British import of SALO will now be region B encoded. It was previously listed as region-free on many sites.:mad::mad::mad:

Timothy,

Thank you so much for this information. I just canceled my order with amazon.co.uk

Ah, thanks! I'd assumed it was cut for whatever reason (I always figured copyrights or something strange like that), since without it the scene just... ends all of a sudden.

Nice of them to include the scene on their blog, at that. :)

SALO had a very strong reputation long before the Criterion DVD (besides the film had been on laserdisc and VHS for years).

IMO it's importance far outreaches the exploitable elements, I find it truly does work as a horrific essay on the dangers of fascism. It's certainly one of the most disturbing films I've ever seen, and I'll never forget it.

Eww, the caps at DVD Beaver (http://www.dvdbeaver.com/film/DVDCompare/salo.htm) look absolutely disgusting. Edge-enhanced to hell and the grain structure looks like a complete, smeary mess thanks to DNR.
I agree, it's a disaster, what the hell were they thinking. Like you've inferred, BFI can region lock them all they want if they're going to do this to their transfers.

I agree, it's a disaster, what the hell were they thinking. Like you've inferred, BFI can region lock them all they want if they're going to do this to their transfers.

...and yet I would snap it up over the Criterion DVD or possibly even potential Criterion BD for a few reasons.

One, it still carry's a lot more detail than the Criterion DVD.

Two, it has footage missing from the Criterion source.

Three, there is about 5% more frame info present on the BFI, that isn't in the Criterion DVD master, and presumably would not find it's way to the BD either.