28 Toni

[Michael Kerpan]

Not a fan of late (Pierre Auguste) Renoir at all. But I do like much of his earlier work (with the exception of ghastly things like the Woman in the Red Kimono -- which resides here in Boston, I believe).

[GringoTex]

I am turned off by most pre-New Wave French cinema in much the same way that I am put-off by most pre-Impressionist 19th C. French painting.

My quibble with this is that Renoir has nothing to do with any other pre-New Wave cinema. He was the first to film "the actors" rather than "the characters" and the New Wave followed suit: Godard, Truffaut, Chabrol -- they filmed actors.

This is why Renoir was the first modernist filmmaker.

I also think Ozu only filmed actors in his later years.

[HerrSchreck]

Totally agree, Gringo.

Not to mention this is also one of the legion reasons that the Vague worshipped Renoir.

I never understand these "I don't like pre (date) (country) cinema" generalizations, since most national cinemas worth anything (nothwithstanding the incredible vitality and robust variegation and inventiveness of French cinema from the late teens thru the late 50's) are incredible diverse and always resist descriptives like "French cinema prior to (date) was primarily __________." Not to mention the fact that most "inventions" of so many Revolutionary Film Movements are red herrings and albatrosses that were probably old news by the year 1929, but no later than 1939.

Gringo-- what did you mean by "the first to film actors"? I think I know what you mean but I just want to hear for sure what you mean.

[ellipsis7]

A couple of points re father & son, regardless of how you like the elder's paintings...

Pierre-Auguste encouraged the young Jean to become a potter - I've seen several of JR's pots - it was not a career he was going to excel in, but it was an initial mode of artistic expression, and an exploration of creativity....

The paintings JR inherited from his father literally paid for JR's first films - he sold them off first piecemeal, and then in quantities to pay for the commercial disaster and indulgence of his wife that was NANA - squandering his inheritance?... I think not...

JR's first wife Catherine Hessling was his father's model, and that's how he met her. In 1917 she was 17 and modelling at the Academie de Peinture at Nice. Matisse asked the Academie to send him a young female model, and Dedee (Catherine) was sent to him. Matisse took one look at her and said, "You're a Renoir", and told her to visit Auguste Renoir at Les Collettes on his behalf. Renoir pere saw a likeness to his recently deceased wife, and took her on. Jean & Dedee married in January 1920 just 7 weeks after his father's death in December 1919.

The book JR wrote at the end of his career, RENOIR, MY FATHER can be read as his own artistic manifesto as well as a memoir of Renoir pere... Certainly his father was a major influence in the manner in which JR engaged artistically with the world, his down to earth approach and focus on the quotidien...

"I have spent my life trying to determine the extent of the influence of my father upon me, passing over the period when I did utmost to escape from it to dwell upon those when my mind was filled with precepts I had gleaned from him." - JR, 'My Life & Films', 1974



On the other point, influence on the French New Wave etc., a key post 1968 text, is the passionately a politically committed book by Francois Poulle, 'Renoir 1938 ou Jean Renoir pour rien?' (1969)... Final page is a pic of Godard with Renoir with the quote, "Les personnes formees cinematographiquement le sont rarement politiquement, et vice versa" - JLG , 1967

[ellipsis7]

Lovely story, David, very funny indeed... I must remember that, "Don't look at the fuckface..."

[Michael Kerpan]

I can't claim to understand my lack of "sympathy" for pre-NW French cinema. It is just something that happens to exist. I don't make any real attempt to justify it. I f asked for an explanation, I will say what I can -- but even I know that my answer is partial (at best). (yes -- I know that JR is different from his contemporaries -- which was why I had higher hopes of liking his work).

The mystifying thing about JR is that I really do like HIM. I love his performance in Rules, I love listening to his interviews. And yet -- so far -- none of his films (other than Toni) have really resonated. It is not only a mystery -- but an annoyance.

[MichaelB]

The paintings JR inherited from his father literally paid for JR's first films - he sold them off first piecemeal, and then in quantities to pay for the commercial disaster and indulgence of his wife that was NANA - squandering his inheritance?... I think not...

As a footnote to this, he sold the paintings but kept the empty frames, which remained hanging on his wall as a reminder of what he'd sacrificed for his career.

Fortunately, in his case, it was well worth it.

[Jonathan S]

And Mike I totally agree w you-- the Kurosawa Lower Depths is imho endlessly superior film versus the Renoir

Oddly enough, for me it's the other way round. I love the Renoir and find the Kurosawa almost unwatchable (the only other Kurosawa I feel that way about is Dodeskaden).

I suppose it's because I got to know the earlier version in the 1970s in the context of other Renoirs (I don't even think of it as a Gorky adaptation!) I recall the BBC televising it twice, the second time in the massive Renoir retrospective after he died in 1979. The films were shown at peak time and the season was so long and comprehensive there were jokes in satirical TV shows and mags on the lines of: "Tonight, a very special event on BBC2: a film not directed by Jean Renoir..."

Unimaginable in the world of today's television, sadly....

[Saarijas]

Jones and Lopate together must be audio commentary hell.

While I'm not a huge fan of the commentary on this disc; knowing Lopate personally. He is really an entertaining guy and isn't condescending at all. He really is perfect for conversation cause he knows everything about everything, btu will talk about it at whatever level is required of him. No matter how relatively simpleton the subject is. Really a cool guy, I had higher hopes for the commentary.

[ellipsis7]

While I'm not a huge fan of the commentary on this disc; knowing Lopate personally. He is really an entertaining guy and isn't condescending at all. He really is perfect for conversation cause he knows everything about everything, btu will talk about it at whatever level is required of him. No matter how relatively simpleton the subject is. Really a cool guy, I had higher hopes for the commentary.

I actually like the commentary here and the hidden egg supplement... Sometimes they stretch the bubble a little too far (too many other names, cross references and analogies which actually are quite stimulating) but it is clear when and they return soon to topic which is informative, informed and provoking - they do know their stuiff.. Only glaring error - JR was born in 1894 not 1888/89 as insisted by I think Kent Jones...

[HerrSchreck]

So according to Geoff Andrew on his vidpiece, one of Ren's early sound films that preceded Toni was-- along with La Chienne, Madame Bovary-- N a n a?

Ouch.

[Drucker]

According to DVDBeaver, this is Region 0. Doesn't that mean Universal? According to amazon.uk it's Region 2. Does anyone know what it actually is?

[peerpee]

Never go off Amazon for any information. 9 times out of 10 it's wrong. DVDBeaver isn't always correct, but 9 times out of 10 it is!

TONI is R0, region-free, but it's a PAL disc. So if you're not in a PAL territory, make sure you can play PAL!

[Drucker]

I don't think I can. What is PAL again, exactly?

[MichaelB]

I don't think I can. What is PAL again, exactly?

Phase Alternate Line - it's the video standard used in Europe and Australia. In America (north and south) and Japan, the main system is NTSC (National Television Standards Committee).

The problem is, both systems are quite different - PAL has 625 lines of picture information and plays at 25 frames per second, while NTSC has a lower resolution (525 lines) but runs faster, at 30fps (or 29.97 if you're being pedantic).

Up until about the mid-1990s, both systems were pretty much mutually incompatible, and you'd need dedicated TVs and VCRs to play them, but things have changed quite a bit since then. In my experience, virtually all European DVD players and TVs (and PS3s) can handle NTSC with no difficulty whatsoever, but American setups often struggle with PAL, unless they're dedicated multiregion systems.

But the most effective workaround is to play the disc in a PC or Mac, which should have no problem handling either system.

[Tommaso]

In my experience, virtually all European DVD players and TVs (and PS3s) can handle NTSC with no difficulty whatsoever, but American setups often struggle with PAL, unless they're dedicated multiregion systems.

Allow me an off-topic question, and perhaps even a stupid one, but I never really understood this. According to my experience, all the TVs and dvd players manufactured by the major companies come neither from Europe nor the USA, but invariably from Asian countries like Korea, Malaysia and so on. So why do these companies apparently manufacture different models for Europe and the USA? Why not manufacture the same players and TV sets in the same way for worldwide use, that is, both being NTSC and PAL compatible from the beginning? All the problems that our American members experience with PAL discs would be gone, and manufacturing one type would be cheaper as well, I suppose.

[colinr0380]

According to Wikipedia it seems NTSC was created in 1940s (colour NTSC in late 1953) with PAL coming along in the 1960s (and throw in the French SECAM system too at the same time as PAL!) to try and refine and deal with some of the problems with NTSC. Presumably by that time NTSC was ingrained in the US and elsewhere so it was never superceded/upgraded (until everything was abandoned with the digitial switchovers), plus the different systems probably helped reinforce regional separations.

[Tommaso]

That is true, but it still doesn't answer the question why the same companies offer NTSC-only TVs and players when they already have the same or similar models capable of displaying both NTSC and PAL. It just doesn't make sense to produce two different devices if one is clearly inferior in its capabilities; if regional separations were the cause, all European TVs and dvd players would only be able to play PAL. But almost all of them play both systems nowadays.

[MichaelB]

In fact, so universal is NTSC compatibility in Europe that most classical music DVDs are released in that format, so that the same pressing can service America, Europe and Japan.

[Jonathan S]

In the very early days of DVD, I was told that the main or perhaps only reason most European DVD players had NTSC playback was because we were grouped in region 2 with Japan which uses that format (and makes a lot of the equipment too). I was rather doubtful of that explanation, though, as for a few years then many European VHS players had already offered NTSC playback as a special feature. I assumed the reason it hadn't been standard before the mid-90s was because the electronics were too expensive or perhaps not even reliable enough. (I believe they actually play back in a sort of hybrid called PAL60, not true NTSC, but I'm no expert on this.) There were a few earlier multi-standard machines but I recall they were very pricey.

Another reason might have been a lot of prejudice against NTSC in Europe. When I worked in a college technical department in the mid-80s, NTSC was always disparagingly referred to as Never Twice the Same Colour! American TV shows on UK TV did often look terrible, but since they now appear fine on DVD I guess the bad colour was perhaps a result of NTSC-PAL conversion? Equally, I sense that a lot of Americans hate the 4% PAL speed-up for films shot at 24fps, though - having grown up with this - it rarely bothers me.

The average person used VHS (and now DVD) mainly for recording off-air, and that's where things get complicated. Very few VHS players in the UK ever offered NTSC recording as DVD recorders do. This may have been for technical reasons, but I suspect it could also have been to prevent average users making mistakes. Even I have been caught out a few times with my DVD recorder - using it in NTSC mode to copy say a tape, then forgetting to switch back (unlike with players, this has to be done manually on mine and isn't automatic), resulting in unwatchable timer recordings on the hard drive that should be in PAL.

I can't really comment on the US situation but my impression (even on some film forums, though not this one) is that until recently most American collectors were far less likely to import from Europe than vice-versa. And those are dedicated film collectors - probably a tiny fraction of the whole US market for equipment. So - the manufacturer might say - why add a complicated or expensive (less so now) feature for something that most people will never need? Of course, the internet and increased use of credit cards made importing far easier in all countries - another reason technology has developed to follow a need.

These are just speculations, and I'm happy to be corrected, especially on technical facts.

[MichaelB]

I was rather doubtful of that explanation, though, as for a few years then many European VHS players had already offered NTSC playback as a special feature. I assumed the reason it hadn't been standard before the mid-90s was because the electronics were too expensive or perhaps not even reliable enough. (I believe they actually play back in a sort of hybrid called PAL60, not true NTSC, but I'm no expert on this.)

As I understand it, PAL60 was a kind of simplified conversion that could fool most (then-) current PAL TVs into thinking that it was a genuine PAL signal. But you couldn't record it (a VCR would have insisted on pure PAL or pure NTSC, depending on the system), so it wouldn't work if you actually wanted to convert tapes from one format to the other. Even to this day, while I can happily watch NTSC VHS tapes, I can't convert them into something that will play on my MacBook or iPad as I simply don't have the hardware to be able to deal with the signal. Even the conversion box that I bought a decade or so ago to convert VHS tapes into Quicktime files is useless - it can deal with a genuine NTSC signal, but my VCR can't produce one.

There were a few earlier multi-standard machines but I recall they were very pricey.

When I had a US-based girlfriend circa 1995-6, I had my eye on a Samsung VCR that would actually convert between PAL and NTSC and which was compatible with any British telly, but it cost about a grand so I decided that she wasn't worth it. The cheaper alternative was to buy a dedicated NTSC VCR and TV, but you could only use that for viewing NTSC material off tape - the TV would be useless for picking up European broadcasts, so you'd have to make additional space for it alongside your main one.

Another reason might have been a lot of prejudice against NTSC in Europe. When I worked in a college technical department in the mid-80s, NTSC was always disparagingly referred to as Never Twice the Same Colour! American TV shows on UK TV did often look terrible, but since they now appear fine on DVD I guess the bad colour was perhaps a result of NTSC-PAL conversion?

No, it looks just as terrible in the US - in fact, after spending three months there I was really startled at how good PAL broadcasts looked when I got home. My understanding is that PAL is much better as a broadcast medium, because NTSC loses a lot in transmission - and you'd expect this, since PAL was invented much later, at least partly with the aim of addressing some fundamental problems with broadcast NTSC.

On the other hand, there's much less to choose between PAL and NTSC on recorded media like DVDs. PAL offers a slightly better picture resolution, but has the potential (albeit sometimes corrected) drawback that the sound is a semitone too high because of the 25fps playback speed. By contrast, NTSC offers the correct pitch but a lower picture resolution - and a further problem in that in order to convert from 24fps to 30fps, additional "ghost" frames have to be inserted. This is rarely a problem when viewing in motion, to be fair - the most notorious side-effect is "judder" during pans at a certain speed, though I find this is much more visible in poorly-executed NTSC-to-PAL conversion jobs.

I can't really comment on the US situation but my impression (even on some film forums, though not this one) is that until recently most American collectors were far less likely to import from Europe than vice-versa.

That's absolutely my impression. In fact, even to this day I come across people who express delight that a particular film is coming out in the US, even though it's been freely available in Europe, often in a cheaper and/or superior edition with English subtitles, for literally years.

Mind you, we can be just as selective in Europe, where "importing from abroad" usually means from English-speaking countries or, at a pinch, the French, German and Italian versions of Amazon, as they're reassuringly familiar. I've lost count of the number of times I've recommended Polish or Czech suppliers, only to be asked if I'm not worried about handing over credit card details to dodgy foreigners - as though I'd have any more redress when it came to a US or Australian company.

[Jonathan S]

Thanks, Michael. I find the PAL60 compromise on VHS players - though as you say useless in the past for copying to another tape - works fine for converting black & white NTSC tapes to DVD-R, and in my case that's almost all I want to do - partly because it's my main area of interest but also because colour was so usually so poor on VHS (both NTSC and PAL) that I rarely feel it's worth the bother transferring them anyway. I only play the b&w transfers on standard DVD players, so don't know if they work on other types of equipment.

Your comments about the "judder" effect on panning shots on NTSC are interesting in the light of the problem several of us have noted on Criterion's DVD of Senso. But I've never noticed it as bad on other NTSC DVDs, except as you say in badly executed conversions, and I find it hard to believe Criterion would be guilty of that - but after 10 days I've received no reply from them about it.

[MichaelB]

Thanks, Michael. I find the PAL60 compromise on VHS players - though as you say useless in the past for copying to another tape - works fine for converting black & white NTSC tapes to DVD-R, and in my case that's almost all I want to do - partly because it's my main area of interest but also because colour was so usually so poor on VHS (both NTSC and PAL) that I rarely feel it's worth the bother transferring them anyway.

This is probably a good opportunity to mention that the only significant difference between PAL and the French SECAM system (as far as I'm aware) was the colour encoding - with the result that French VHS tapes played in black and white on British setups.

But that obviously wasn't a problem if the film was black and white to begin with - and often you could get English-language films in Paris that weren't available on UK labels. (You'd have to put up with burned-in French subtitles, of course, but that was a very minor inconvenience).

When DVD came in, the French seem to have switched to PAL, though I do remember them flirting with other non-standard systems in the very early days, notably MPEG-compressed soundtracks. My player could handle them, but apparently that was more down to luck than universal compatibility.

[PillowRock]

Speculation possibility for why European TVs play NTSC but (many) American TVs don't play PAL:

It might have to do with the native playback resolution of the TVs (speaking of the pre-HD world here). Maybe it is simpler (in ways making it much less expensive to build in) to upsample NTSC frames than to downsamlple PAL without creating artifacts so bad as to draw complaints from even the masses who don't mind pan & scan.

In the same way that people generally don't really notice the frame replication when movies are shown in NTSC, a similar line / column replication might slide by most people. On the other hand, the simplistic version of going in the other direction, deleting every fifth line) creates discontinuities that people might be more prone to notice. Interpolation based conversions take more processing and therefore more capable internal electronics.


As a separate point when looking at electronics manufacturers who are also content providers (like Sony), they may be more concerned with keeping the American market isolated than they are with keeping the Region 2 (or 3 or 4) markets isolated.

[Dick Laurent]

As a separate point when looking at electronics manufacturers who are also content providers (like Sony), they may be more concerned with keeping the American market isolated than they are with keeping the Region 2 (or 3 or 4) markets isolated.

That's very true, a good example of this is the PS3, the EU models play both 50Hz and 60Hz, while the US models can't handle 50Hz.