Is the dvd transfer as bad as many have said?


I am contemplating getting this version of Nicholas Nickleby on dvd. However, I heard the transfer from VHS to dvd is horrible. Do any of you own it on dvd?

reply

I've got it - have seen no problem at all!

The best in this kind are but shadows, and the worst are no worse, if imagination amend them

reply

I got it on DVD yesterday...I haven't seen any problems with it either.

Then again, I never saw the VHS version.

-Amanda

"She will remember your heart when men are fairy tales in storybooks written by rabbits"

reply

The DVD from A&E has chopped up a two part theatrical event into nine episodes, cutting out some parts and artificially extending it by repeating the opening and closing credits for every hour. It renders this historical masterpiece into not much more than a sitcom.

The British DVD is only three discs, which hopefully isn't as chopped up as it was by A&E.

reply

Um, that's a really harsh and unfair judgment. The DVD edition is in no way a "sitcom". It may be missing a couple of scenes, but it is just as powerful and beautiful a production as ever. I think you're being way too snotty about it, myself.

reply

My opinion, based on seeing the original play, the first broadcast and original video release, stands. The current, chopped-up A&E version is a sloppy disaster.

reply

Sparrowhawk,

Can you confirm atleast you watched the A&E dvd or the British one?

We need confirmation of the British DVD is at all edited from the original version.
We already know the A&E one is edited

reply

I've seen the play onstage and the televised version several times. I'm now watching the A&E DVD and must say it looks better than ever. The video transfer and color and detail are extraordinary, and I find it as powerful and wonderful than ever, if not more so.

reply

Considering the challenges of translating the entire novel to the stage, including how to allow for breaks, it took a great deal of creative effort to format the performance into two plays: the first with one intermission and the second with two. this preserved the narrative and momentum without interrupting important passages. Not so the nine hour version, which utterly disregards all narrative structure and just chops them up wherever they hit the 50-55 minute mark, regardless of where in the story or production one is. This is incredibly irritating for someone who has seen the original. I find the DVD picture not very good and sound needs to be enhanced through my system, which includes a topline upscaling Blu Ray player and 47" HD screen.

I LOVE this production, I just hate how badly it's being presented.

reply

I have the A & E version on DVD and would not describe it as a "sloppy disaster" but unfortunately I have not seen the UK version and would love to compare. I first saw the production broadcast on Australian TV in the early 1980s and recorded it to watch and re-watch on VHS over the years until the tapes wore out. I believe it was broadcast in 9 episodes and the A & E DVDs are also in 9 parts over 4 discs. The new thing to me on the DVDs, compared with my VHS version, was that the actors act out the story so far at the beginning of many of the parts which was not seen in the early 1980s Australian TV broadcast. I share your love of this production, CineSight, and would be keen to see an even better version.

And to reveal something nerdy, when it was broadcast none of the actors were familiar to me, except perhaps John Woodvine from American Werewolf in London (1981) and later recognising Alun Armstrong and John McEnery in The Duellists (1977),and the cast list on the broadcast did not indicate which actor played which role. So, for the next 20 years, I would follow these actors' careers and note down when I could finally put a name to a face after seeing them in another film or TV show. Of course, after getting access to the internet (very late - only in 2002) I could find out all this info on imdb in a matter of seconds. Still, it was enjoyable to discover these Shakespearean actors branch out and appear in a number of quality shows over the years.

reply

I call A&E's version a sloppy mess because this play was NOT written, staged, performed, or even videotaped as nine episodes. Imagine arbitrarily chopping up GONE WITH THE WIND into 15 minute installments, without regard to the structure, plot or continuity of any scene. It's chopped up and served in buns like hamburger (the buns being the extra front and back end credits every time).

I see nothing nerdy about following the actors. I did it myself. I learned a lot of their names in the week I worked at the theatre on Broadway. In the US many of them were offered jobs from their Broadway run. A couple ended up in the next version of A Christmas Carol with George C. Scott. Lila Kaye got a sitcom, Bob Peck was in Jurassic Park... John McEnry - that "demned" Mr. Mantillini - was recognizable (since Romeo & Juliet in 68) before he even came to Nick-Nick. Would it make you feel less nerdy if I told you I walked up to Lila Kaye during their pre-show audience walk through and told her she was "too tremendous!"?

reply



Imagine arbitrarily chopping up GONE WITH THE WIND into 15 minute installments, without regard to the structure, plot or continuity of any scene.


This being, of course, precisely what television does.

reply

That being what COMMERCIAL television does (as opposed to PBS, which originally aired this production in four uninterrupted parts) is of course EXACTLY the reason why people buy DVDs, which usually present the material in its original form. If we liked that TV routinely cuts up its subject matter, we wouldn't be buying the same material elsewhere. Which brings us back to the original point of this conversation.

reply