Re: Forthcoming: Cruising
Posted: Tue Jun 25, 2019 12:51 pm
Though the original commentary was dropped, a redone version with Friedkin involved may be added to this release, if Kermode's tweet here is anything to go by.
http://forum.criterionforum.org/forum/
http://forum.criterionforum.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=48&t=5931
Agreed, especially because they're good friends and I hope that will allow for a more interesting dynamic. Hopefully they get deep into everything.
Arrow updated specs yesterday to include such a commentary:soundchaser wrote: ↑Tue Jun 25, 2019 12:51 pmThough the original commentary was dropped, a redone version with Friedkin involved may be added to this release, if Kermode's tweet here is anything to go by.
Brand new restoration from a 4K scan of the original camera negative, supervised and approved by writer-director William Friedkin
High Definition Blu-ray (1080p) presentation
Newly remastered 5.1 DTS-HD Master Audio supervised by William Friedkin
Optional English subtitles for the deaf and hard of hearing
Brand new audio commentary with William Friedkin and critic and broadcaster Mark Kermode
Archival audio commentary by William Friedkin
The History of Cruising – archival featurette looking at the film’s origins and production
Exorcising Cruising – archival featurette looking at the controversy surrounding the film and its enduring legacy
Original Theatrical Trailer
Do you follow him on Twitter? He's always been strangely incoherent (In my opinion) online, to the point Mark Kermode asked once if he was physically okay. It's weird because he's always so well spoken in filmed interviews.domino harvey wrote: ↑Fri Aug 16, 2019 6:48 pmHe’s confusing shooting anamorphic, which is ‘Scope, with anamorphic-enhanced transfers of his film (ie 16X9) on home media, for anyone trying to figure out how he could make this blunder. That a director doesn’t know what this means in a DVD/Blu-Ray listing is... odd
If I recall correctly, on a podcast he revealed that he thinks the color fades from old video tapes. I don’t think he fully understands video.domino harvey wrote: ↑Fri Aug 16, 2019 6:48 pmHe’s confusing shooting anamorphic, which is ‘Scope, with anamorphic-enhanced transfers of his film (ie 16X9) on home media, for anyone trying to figure out how he could make this blunder. That a director doesn’t know what this means in a DVD/Blu-Ray listing is... odd
He says some crazy shit in person too. There’s an interview that’s always stuck in my head where he explains his admiration for Birth of a Nation by describing Griffiths’ contribution to film grammar (so far so good) and then breaks into a small rant about how you’re not allowed to justify the Ku Klux Klan in our “politically correct society” and that the film is really about black crime.
Yes I'm familiar with the interview in question. He also goes into his opinion on black crime which he feels was the justification for Southern Whites to create the Ku Klux Klan. I have no idea how the hell he arrived at his completely asinine conclusions about the Klan but he really could not be less informed about it. And then in the same God damn interview (Of course!) he goes on to champion Godard. What a pivot. For those who want see Friedkin go full gonzo here is the interview.HJackson wrote: ↑Sat Aug 17, 2019 3:11 amHe says some crazy shit in person too. There’s an interview that’s always stuck in my head where he explains his admiration for Birth of a Nation by describing Griffiths’ contribution to film grammar (so far so good) and then breaks into a small rant about how you’re not allowed to justify the Ku Klux Klan in our “politically correct society” and that the film is really about black crime.
CRUISING hit a year before AIDS was being medically reported. And as far as the protests during shooting of the film go there is also the counter story that they were drummed up by assimilationist anti-BDSM queens who didn't want *that* kind of gay on screen. There is a great write up on the scene at the time and the making of CRUISING here: http://www.jackfritscher.com/PDF/Drumme ... 8_PWeb.pdfBig Ben wrote: ↑Sat Aug 17, 2019 4:02 amI suppose thinking about this now I think it makes sense that he made a film like Cruising which has always felt really tone deaf in my opinion. I realize I'm way out the loop being born when I was but I can't help but feel being born in the nineties really insulated me from the realities of the HIV/AIDS crisis and all the ensuing disinformation, homophobia and sense of loss that the LGBT community felt at the time.
Thank you for posting this. My only real experience with oral history around this time came from David Ehrenstein who really, really, really doesn't like Cruising. I understand his sentiments about the matter very clearly but he really never insinuated that there was more to the story. Naturally people are going to have strong opinions on this entire ordeal, not least the gay community. The most sobering thing about the conversation for me was David's lamentation of how much chaos HIV had really caused, with him explaining to me how much (And I'm paraphrasing here) "didn't exist anymore". It's nice to have a longer second opinion.R0lf wrote: ↑Sat Aug 17, 2019 6:53 amCRUISING hit a year before AIDS was being medically reported. And as far as the protests during shooting of the film go there is also the counter story that they were drummed up by assimilationist anti-BDSM queens who didn't want *that* kind of gay on screen. There is a great write up on the scene at the time and the making of CRUISING here: http://www.jackfritscher.com/PDF/Drumme ... 8_PWeb.pdf
It's also to my understanding that Cruising was plagued by various productions issues and that in turn had an effect on everything that went into the film itself. I won't deny that parts of Cruising are really well made but I've always felt the overall product is so muddy I was really unsure just what Friedkin was communicating. I know that the book (Obviously) goes deeper into motivations and so forth but Cruising has always left a bizarre aftertaste in my mouth. I'm obviously at a perceptual disadvantage though for reasons I've state above but so much of the content in Cruising has always appeared to me to be a product of it's time, both in it's aloofness and apparent (Although I'm not convinced outwardly malicious) misconceptions about the gay community. Not that these things still don't impact the LGBT community today mind you but the film feels so late seventies early eighties. It exists in a state right before a time of great strife for so many people and I just can't view it outside of all that due to my place in the world.MichaelB wrote: ↑Sat Aug 17, 2019 7:17 amAnd it's also worth recalling that this project had a very long gestation - back in 1973, producer Philip D'Antoni (then fresh off the unexpected Oscar triumph of The French Connection) developed it with Steven Spielberg as the latter's directorial debut. I forget why it collapsed, but it wasn't Spielberg's fault, and D'Antoni was so impressed with what he'd done that he recommended him to his former production head at Fox, Richard D. Zanuck. Given D'Antoni's track record, Zanuck took him seriously... and the rest is history.