64 The Third Man

Discuss releases by Criterion and the films on them. Threads may contain spoilers!
Post Reply
Message
Author
User avatar
tenia
Ask Me About My Bassoon
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 11:13 am

Re: 64 The Third Man

#201 Post by tenia » Thu Jun 25, 2015 12:27 pm

After reading this article, I wouldn't take it as a real alarm. I remember watching the new Heaven's Gate restoration at Glasgow GFT and thinking also "it doesn't look like film anymore", but that doesn't mean it's bad looking. And actually, we know that the BDs sourced from this restoration are all fine.

It seems to me that the article is heating up again the old "film VS Digital" projection / shooting, and is using The Third Man's new 4K restoration as a starting point.

Its emphasis on how it's "giving the image a sharpness that was not originally there" does not make me want to trust this. How can you judge that ? It could be problematic, I don't know but there is no mention of Edge Enhancement, grain management or anything to support a claim like "it's over processed".

I would actually be very eager to ask the writer to sustain this appreciation with more technical precisions. Is it too smooth ? Does it have a waxy appearance ? He writes it "loses its shadowy intrigue", does he mean the black levels are off ? "a sharpness that was not originally there", does it mean visible EE ?

User avatar
danieltiger
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2014 8:48 pm
Location: San Francisco, CA
Contact:

Re: 64 The Third Man

#202 Post by danieltiger » Thu Jun 25, 2015 1:04 pm

tenia wrote:After reading this article, I wouldn't take it as a real alarm. I remember watching the new Heaven's Gate restoration at Glasgow GFT and thinking also "it doesn't look like film anymore", but that doesn't mean it's bad looking. And actually, we know that the BDs sourced from this restoration are all fine.

It seems to me that the article is heating up again the old "film VS Digital" projection / shooting, and is using The Third Man's new 4K restoration as a starting point.

Its emphasis on how it's "giving the image a sharpness that was not originally there" does not make me want to trust this. How can you judge that ? It could be problematic, I don't know but there is no mention of Edge Enhancement, grain management or anything to support a claim like "it's over processed".

I would actually be very eager to ask the writer to sustain this appreciation with more technical precisions. Is it too smooth ? Does it have a waxy appearance ? He writes it "loses its shadowy intrigue", does he mean the black levels are off ? "a sharpness that was not originally there", does it mean visible EE ?
Mmm those are all good points. I was already planning on seeing it in theaters as part of the run, so I guess I'll just see for myself.

User avatar
Roger Ryan
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 12:04 pm
Location: A Midland town spread and darkened into a city

Re: 64 The Third Man

#203 Post by Roger Ryan » Thu Jun 25, 2015 1:23 pm

I found this blanket generalization in the article to be insulting:
...If a theater advertises a 2K restoration of a film, don’t bother; you could get the same quality watching a DVD on a computer screen...
The author states that only with 4K technology can you capture and look and feel of "celluloid" (technically a material that hasn't been used in making films for over fifty years) after establishing that the 4K restoration of THE THIRD MAN doesn't look right simply because it's a DCP. And poor Joseph Cotten gets his surname misspelled yet another time.

David M.
Joined: Sat May 10, 2008 1:10 pm

Re: 64 The Third Man

#204 Post by David M. » Thu Jun 25, 2015 1:25 pm

danieltiger wrote:Found this write up about the upcoming Canal restoration looking "weird."

If true, that makes me sad. But also, conversely happy that my Criterion Blu-ray isn't suddenly totally out of date.
It's clear from reading this that the writer doesn't really understand what's involved with film restoration:
article wrote:"...loses its shadowy intrigue when the restoration process oversteps the line of “making the film appear as it was originally intended,” using newfound digital tools to “clean up” the film. Skin tones look polished and movement is stabilized, giving the image a sharpness that was not originally there. In short, it begins to not look like film anymore."
Stabilization gives the image sharpness? What?

How does the writer know what was and wasn't originally there? What is his frame of reference? An old DVD?

Sorry, but this is really confused writing. It's great to have a discussion about the differences between film and digital projection (I prefer film too) but I don't understand why they're using this particular restoration (which by the accounts of expert opinions which I trust fully is absolutely excellent) as a whipping boy for the debate.
article wrote:(If a theater advertises a 2K restoration of a film, don’t bother; you could get the same quality watching a DVD on a computer screen.)
What absolute f******g nonsense. I'd love to know what DVDs this guy is watching!
danieltiger wrote:Found this write up about the upcoming Canal restoration looking "weird."

If true, that makes me sad. But also, conversely happy that my Criterion Blu-ray isn't suddenly totally out of date.
Consider the context of the article. If it looks "weird" to someone who thinks that watching a DVD on a computer screen is the same experience as watching a 2K DCP, well...

User avatar
Jeff
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 9:49 pm
Location: Denver, CO

Re: 64 The Third Man

#205 Post by Jeff » Sun Jun 28, 2015 11:32 am


User avatar
Drucker
Your Future our Drucker
Joined: Wed May 18, 2011 9:37 am

Re: 64 The Third Man

#206 Post by Drucker » Tue Jul 14, 2015 10:28 pm

I just got back from a screening of the restoration and it looked beautiful. Very fine grain that occasionally turned thick. Nothing looking unnatural, and though I haven't watched it in a while, probably better than the Criterion blu.

The only thing that looked weird was when Cotten and Howard have their first conversation, I swear you can see the makeup on their face, and Howard's in particular looked a bit thick.

I'd say it's pretty safe to say if the bd is mucked up, it isn't the restorers fault.

User avatar
danieltiger
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2014 8:48 pm
Location: San Francisco, CA
Contact:

Re: 64 The Third Man

#207 Post by danieltiger » Wed Jul 15, 2015 2:03 pm

So I did indeed see the restoration, last night. It looked absolutely phenomenal, and it was so great to see it on the big screen.

User avatar
hearthesilence
Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2005 4:22 am
Location: NYC

Re: 64 The Third Man

#208 Post by hearthesilence » Sun Nov 29, 2015 10:32 pm

Quick question for anyone who has this on a Criterion DVD or BD:

Around 43:11, right after Harry Lime's associates (as well as Harry but still unseen) meet at the bridge, there's a dissolve to Holly visiting Anna. There's a shot of him asking "can I come in?" and Anna says "yes" as she gets up.

Right when Anna gets up, is there a slight jump cut to the next shot, as if it was missing some frames? (It may even clip the beginning of Holly's dialogue in the next shot.)

I ask because I'm watching the new StudioCanal BD, and it seems to jump there - I don't remember that from before, but it's possible I just forgot and I'm noticing it now. Just want to make sure there isn't any missing footage here.

sabbath
Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2014 6:29 am

Re: 64 The Third Man

#209 Post by sabbath » Sun Nov 29, 2015 10:50 pm

hearthesilence wrote:Quick question for anyone who has this on a Criterion DVD or BD:

Around 43:11, right after Harry Lime's associates (as well as Harry but still unseen) meet at the bridge, there's a dissolve to Holly visiting Anna. There's a shot of him asking "can I come in?" and Anna says "yes" as she gets up.

Right when Anna gets up, is there a slight jump cut to the next shot, as if it was missing some frames? (It may even clip the beginning of Holly's dialogue in the next shot.)

I ask because I'm watching the new StudioCanal BD, and it seems to jump there - I don't remember that from before, but it's possible I just forgot and I'm noticing it now. Just want to make sure there isn't any missing footage here.
Just checked my Criterion BD. Yes, there is a jump cut just like you described.

User avatar
cdnchris
Site Admin
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 2:45 pm
Location: Washington
Contact:

Re: 64 The Third Man

#210 Post by cdnchris » Sun Nov 29, 2015 11:56 pm

I'm pretty sure that has always been there, even on the VHS I had and the old Criterion DVD.

User avatar
hearthesilence
Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2005 4:22 am
Location: NYC

Re: 64 The Third Man

#211 Post by hearthesilence » Mon Nov 30, 2015 4:35 pm

Awesome. Thanks! It's such an odd cut, there's nothing artful about it to suggest that it was a desired jump - I'm guessing they either didn't have the shot/footage that would've facilitated a smoother transition, or there was a little more footage there and they somehow lost it over the years.

User avatar
MrGregoryArkadin
Joined: Fri Dec 31, 2010 4:35 pm
Location: NJ
Contact:

Re: 64 The Third Man

#212 Post by MrGregoryArkadin » Mon Feb 13, 2017 5:23 pm

So, I bought a copy of The Third Man off Ebay several years back, and was always under the impression that the case was a replacement case for the digipak. That is, it was a scanovo replacement for the digipak - as such it didn't include a booklet. It's come to my attention that it's more than likely a fake case. Is there a way to verify the discs origin? Are there any people on here who have the Criterion replacement case that can verify what it looks like, etc. If the disc turns out to be legit and the case not - are there any options for obtaining a legit case without sending an inordinate amount of money? Thanks all.

User avatar
swo17
Bloodthirsty Butcher
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 10:25 am
Location: SLC, UT

Re: 64 The Third Man

#213 Post by swo17 » Mon Feb 13, 2017 5:36 pm


User avatar
diamonds
Joined: Sun Apr 24, 2016 2:35 pm

Re: 64 The Third Man

#214 Post by diamonds » Fri Mar 09, 2018 6:32 pm

What information is there for the German blu-ray of this film? The caps-a-holic images look a lot clearer than the blurry Studio Canal release (closer to the Criterion version), and it looks like it has more information in the frame. But I can't find much about its release or its availability.

Pepsi
Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2010 1:01 pm

Re: 64 The Third Man

#215 Post by Pepsi » Sat Mar 10, 2018 6:40 am

Here:
http://www.dvdcompare.net/comparisons/f ... ?fid=16056" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The Studio Canal caps are from the old version. The NEW studio Canal (2015) are the same in UK and Germany.


German link:

https://www.amazon.de/dritte-Mann-Blu-r ... A383370011" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Pepsi
Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2010 1:01 pm

Re: 64 The Third Man

#216 Post by Pepsi » Sat Mar 10, 2018 6:45 am

The New UK Studio Canal:
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Third-Man-Blu- ... =third+man" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Jonathan S
Joined: Sat Jun 07, 2008 3:31 am
Location: Somerset, England

Re: 64 The Third Man

#217 Post by Jonathan S » Sat Mar 10, 2018 10:52 am

This site (authored, I believe, by one of our members) finds some serious issues with the audio on the 2015 4K StudioCanal "restoration", such as missing words and sound that's out-of-sync by as much as 6 seconds during the chase sequence. Already owning The Third Man in several formats (including film), I'm waiting for the inevitable 70th anniversary edition and hoping these will be corrected!

User avatar
hearthesilence
Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2005 4:22 am
Location: NYC

Re: 64 The Third Man

#218 Post by hearthesilence » Sat Mar 10, 2018 11:25 am

I don't have the technical ability to do this, but if you can take the picture from the new StudioCanal BD that was authored from the 4k restoration and pair that with the audio from Criterion's first DVD release (the older one without the Soderbergh commentary), you'd have the best version possible from all available materials.

Zimmer80
Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 9:42 am

Re: 64 The Third Man

#219 Post by Zimmer80 » Sat Mar 31, 2018 9:52 am

New here. Picked up Third Man studiocanal 4k. Anyone else notice the audio is a bit low? I have to crank up the volume pretty high to get decent audio. Does the Criterion blu ray have these issues? I see an above post mentioning how great the audio is on the original criterion dvd. Thinking of picking up a different copy of the film but dont wanna splurge on the criterion blu if the audio is similar to studiocanals

User avatar
Mr Sausage
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 9:02 pm
Location: Canada

The Third Man (Carol Reed, 1949)

#220 Post by Mr Sausage » Tue Jan 10, 2023 9:52 pm

DISCUSSION ENDS MONDAY, January 24th

Members have a two week period in which to discuss the film before it's moved to its dedicated thread in The Criterion Collection subforum. Please read the Rules and Procedures.

This thread is not spoiler free. This is a discussion thread; you should expect plot points of the individual films under discussion to be discussed openly. See: spoiler rules.

DISCUSSION QUESTIONS

I encourage members to submit questions, either those designed to elicit discussion and point out interesting things to keep an eye on, or just something you want answered. This will be extremely helpful in getting discussion started. Starting is always the hardest part, all the more so if it's unguided. Questions can be submitted to me via PM.

User avatar
vsski
Joined: Thu Oct 13, 2011 3:47 pm

Re: The Third Man (Carol Reed, 1949)

#221 Post by vsski » Wed Jan 11, 2023 8:30 am

This movie is one I have seen countless times and yet it never lessens its impact on me. If anything it has grown in stature for me over the decades. I think it represents one of these points in film history where all the stars have aligned. A magnificent story and script that captures the world weariness and cynicism of the post war time in Europe. A location that is real and hugely contributes to the film’s atmosphere and shows the devastation and struggle for survival that protagonists are faced with and therefore making the reprehensible actions of the main protagonists much more understandable. Plus brilliant casting where the main villain is at the same time a very sympathetic character, while the so called good guys are not above looking the other way, thereby allowing for lots of shades of grey rather than the typical Hollywood black and white view of the world, making it feel far more real and not leaving the impression of watching a movie. A doomed love story and a who-done-it crime story thrown in to provide depth, and allowing the viewer to associate and root for the characters in what in the end is a very bleak view of humanity. And a music score that while deceptively simple and outside the context of the film likely would become repetitive if not downright annoying, adding perfectly to the location, local culture while emotionally supporting the action.
It is a film that I believe rightly deserves its standing in the pantheon of movies.

User avatar
FrauBlucher
Joined: Mon Jul 15, 2013 8:28 pm
Location: Greenwich Village

Re: The Third Man (Carol Reed, 1949)

#222 Post by FrauBlucher » Sat Jan 14, 2023 4:37 pm

I recently watched this again. Seen it many times. But found something I never thought about...
SpoilerShow
When they meet on the bridge was one of those four characters suppose to be Lime? While I was watching I thought was he one of the 4, as I was trying to figure out who were the 4. Something I never thought about before. If you were watching for the first time you would never realize it because Lime was considered dead at that point.
Like vsski this film never fails to keep me engaged. it's one of my all time favorites. If you want to teach a lesson on post WWII Europe you can show this film, it's a very representative documentation. Thankfully, Reed pushed back on many of Selznick's ideas, otherwise it would've had many of those Hollywood tropes

User avatar
Roger Ryan
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 12:04 pm
Location: A Midland town spread and darkened into a city

Re: The Third Man (Carol Reed, 1949)

#223 Post by Roger Ryan » Sun Jan 15, 2023 12:52 pm

Regarding the spoilered plot point “FrauBlucher” (no need to avoid spoilers here according to forum rules as I understand it), the idea that there was a third man involved has already been established, so the meeting on the bridge is to reinforce this point without giving away the man’s identity.

Like others, I think this a nearly perfect film in the way it combines suspense and humor in a Hitchcockian way while providing a vivid depiction of its post-WWII time and place. I think Joseph Cotten is fantastic in this; his Holly Martins is a beautifully developed character, a man too aware of his own shortcomings who wants to believe he can persuade Anna to let him be a part of her post-Lime life through a self-deprecating charm, never quite grasping just how damaged she is from the experience.

I‘ve seen the film numerous times over four decades, but only just realized during the most recent viewing a month ago that Holly’s first encounter with Lime (when Lime is hiding in the darkened doorway) mirrors the same action as the staged death of Lime described earlier in the film: Lime supposedly sees a friend across a street and steps into the street only to be struck by a passing truck. When Lime’s face is revealed by the light in the window, Holly recognizes his friend and narrowly avoids being struck by a truck as he attempts to cross the street. The fact that Lime uses this near miss to make his escape had always distracted me from the parallel that Greene had created with the fictional accident that starts the plot rolling.

User avatar
therewillbeblus
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2015 3:40 pm

Re: 64 The Third Man

#224 Post by therewillbeblus » Thu Jan 26, 2023 2:13 am

I haven't seen this film in a long time, and I might come back soon with more to say if I manage to fit in a viewing soon, but one key aspect that I never really engaged with too deeply before now is how Reed demonstrates the natural loss of character in the elisions of time. The score, forward momentum of mystery, and elevated tone with comic and lighthearted procedural touches all support the mirage that this film is about story, an entertaining crowdpleaser that thematically absorbs the topical experience of how wartime conditions specifically change people. But it's really about something far more universal, complex, abstract, and nebulous, and uses these devices to construct a rational defense, just like the characters do mentally, to allow them to attach significance and reason to something without stewing in the undefined; to coat unbearable pathos with rigid moral positions and distractions in romance, humor, and adventure. I think this film is more broadly about the losses we experience as we grow apart from those we love, progressively pitched at a platonic male friendship.

Holly comes to visit Lime expecting a man he 'knows', conditions that are safe and familiar, and when he arrives, his friend has to be physically absent -potentially dead- for either of them to face the change in their relationship, in order for there to be a chance of it being reborn. Perhaps Lime has subconsciously known this -whether for the sake of friendship or in an effort to sober his friend to the new 'him' and demand he accept the new terms or even to push him away, in the way many people implement harsh interventions like cheating to terminate a relationship. Or perhaps Holly needed this- whether to protectively disrupt him from the false ideal that relationships remain static or to prompt his own moral growth or self-examination of who he is and has always been, both as a person and as a role in this relationship dynamic. Regardless, it's the only way for the average Joe (i.e. the focus is on Holly, not Lime, but there's enough information in the margins to assume that Lime has his own shades of humanity that make him closer to a normal person than his actions and facade of confidence mask in attempts to separate him from his fellows) to confront what seems impossible: that we do not evolve alongside our more intimate fellows, and although our inherent egocentricity and emotional sensitivity hopes for this hard enough to transform it into a complacent expectation, sooner or later we must meet this reality. Lime has changed, but his moral corruptibility is of secondary signficance to the perceived personality change Holly observes, which strikes him like a slap in the face. How could he possibly have missed the events that led to his best friend becoming so different, and how offensive is that to his myopic, self-centered schema- to not be included in this change? Or worse, is Harry Lime actually any different than he ever was? If memory serves, I think we get enough evidence over time -as Holly acclimates to the circumstances happening around him and gets enough distance from his acute shock to start more objectively recounting the history of Lime's persona- that Lime maybe hasn't evolved so much as Holly has (or.. is, actively); Holly just hasn't been aware of it. Perhaps they're actually more similar than Holly ever wanted to admit. Does Lime prompt Holly to change as he decides to turn on his friend, or does the realization of disconnect -that's fatalistically sewn into the fabric of temporal movement in regards to some friendships- serve as a mirror for Holly to discover and accept that he's been gradually changing all along? Not politically or morally, or even in a strong current of character, but just enough of a minute deviation from Lime's own small needle-move to pass each other at sea - the passing of which provokes such a painful and sad and existentially-destabilizing sensation.

Lime still expects Holly to stand with him; he always has, and after all, Lime hasn't changed all that much, has he? Not according to his own myopic, self-centered schema. Do Lime's assumptions about Holly reflect Lime's delusions tainted by amoral wartime conditions, as we are led to believe by the film's surface... or is it something far more tragic and confounding for a viewer, discovering that we are more divorced from our surrogate than we're comfortable with: That Lime's assumptions are based on who Holly is and always has been - a follower, an ignorant man who is blindly loyal before anything - and, thus, within the grey area of amorality himself when tested with a hierarchy of where his behavioral impulses gravitate to. Maybe he has never had to face the kind of moral issues that Lime has, and this awakening punctures the balloon of his soul that's been bunched up with Lime's more mindful and intentional one all this time? Does Holly's sensitivity make him weak or strong, especially in such a broken and demanding world (and is Reed holding a moral position side-by-side with an uncomfortable answer that Lime's self-awareness and engagement with his conditions makes him more of a pragmatic survivalist, and thus partially 'right')? Does Holly's ignorant characteristic shine through again in the final shot, as he confidently waits for a woman he should know wants nothing to do with the trigger for her lover's demise? Does Holly change because he is truly empowered to face morality in a self-actualized manner, or because he's a novice, afraid, unskilled in making decisions like these, and ultimately chooses to turn his back on a friend whose sudden unfamiliarity and/or brutal incitement of Holly's own deficits prove to be too much for Holly to cope with?

I don't know, and I think it's to the film's credit that it conceals these more ambiguous and unanswerable psychological questions in its subtext. They hide in the elisions of the economic thriller, or the bits of sublimated humor, or the diversion of a romantic pursuit- just as they hide in the elisions of the men's respective deviated consciousnesses, or in the time between their last meeting, and in all the events where they were together in prior seasons of life, which were fundamentally skewed by each man's own perspective to create a 'preferred narrative' of their relationship and their 'self', which was in large part defined by their relationship. We are only privy to the final act of their relationship- which this film documents. It feels like a crime thriller, a film noir, a wartime spy film of romantic passion and tragedy, because it is- but it's also structured as such to be emblematic of the feeling that the end of a significant relationship contains, complete with all the repressions and rationalizations and heightened resonances that come through in fun and funny and sweet and amorous and idyllic details. And then there are the times where Reed shows us there's something deeper, though never goes so far as to overstate the meaning of these devastating studies. We might assume that Holly's self was more vulnerably defined by Lime than Lime's was by Holly, though Lime clearly counted on his friend being there for him, and underneath has an implied softness we never get to observe much ourselves, but that makes him less of a sociopath than we might initially diagnose. I believe that Lime actually needed Holly a lot more than his smug disposition lets on- after all, look where his needle moved in the absence of his friend? And what a loss for Holly to 'discover' (read: perceive) that Lime's 'self' wasn't reciprocally sourced in him. The way he's used, the comparison of people to ants.. it all erodes Holly's narrative of how important he is, because to some extent his self-worth has always been measured in harmony with the person who he believed he was most important to. If Lime sees people as ants, and Holly doesn't, and they're no longer in sync in their worldviews.. is Holly under threat for Lime to see him as an ant as well? Moral disgust exists here, but this exchange also ruptures Holly's narcissistic part, which is innately ingrained in humans' mental compositions.

This isn't a novel thought, but perhaps the reasoning is distinct enough from the norm to say it anyways: I don't interpret the ending as happy for Holly. I think he's more or less the same man, only now without the illusion of a stable hetero-life-partner to make him feel whole. It would be a happier ending if Holly was disturbed and permanently disrupted from the naivete he came into the picture with, because at least that would signal growth, or the beginnings of growth or an opportunity for growth. I used to read the ending as a piece of existential surrender -Holly making peace with his actions and confidently putting himself out there to Anna, even if he knew she would likely walk by, because why not take the only chance you have? For a man who used to delude himself, hide from the reality of the world and its mechanics, and fail to see the chances and morality and actions available to him, it seems like the optimistic attitude to translate this as a self-actualized move from a man reborn as a secure individualist. But isn't the film in many ways documenting how distressing it is to be an individualist, or more bluntly, how unfortunate it is that we are being fated by a higher power into a destiny of lonely individualism segregated from intimacy with others? Whether from the world's global and social politics, or the organic process of growing out of sync with people we used to feel a connection with and rely upon that connection for our own literal and spiritual survival.. it doesn't matter. And that's all assuming that Holly did actually hang on to the sobriety forced upon him throughout the film, and that he didn't revert to his old naive self, doomed to walk the world with the same narrow scope, only now in solitude. Yeah, despite the chipper music and sporting fantasy of a Hitchcockian average-man-becomes-spy narrative producing a comparatively leisurely tone, this is a noir with a pitch black heart. And it's all the richer for making us earn the cavernous findings of dim connotations through keen surveillance rather than expressionistic or thematic candor, especially given that none of the characters are granted a lucid reprieve or termination from their perceptual obfuscations.

Post Reply