for those who haven't seen the movie yet, or have only seen the short US version, I strongly recommend watching the full director's cut. To fully appreciate the story, this version is far superior. I've talked to people before who didn't think much of the movie and they'd all seen the regular shorter version. Upon watching the full director's cut most people love the film!
I don't half get confused on the matter of dvd editions of this, that and the other. Isn't there a 185 minute version of 37°2 le matin/Betty Blue available? The US/UK 'Director's Cut' is an hour shorter! I want the full monty. Any help appreciated.
shareBut the UK/US Director's Cut is the only one out there. I bought it at HMV in the UK - it's only available here through them. And, what can I say, it's perfect. Although I think it's about 179 mins instead of the 185 mins your talking about, but it's definitely the original Director's Cut.
shareMore confusion. Your first sentence, hugo, had me ready to say, "Why, after all these years, isn't an uncut edition available?! And they have the cheek to call the ones available directors' cuts?!" Then you say there's a 179 mins version after all. That's fine, then. I was just plain wrong. Good to hear.
Now you mention it, I've doubled checked. I can get the 185 min version here in the U.K. Yippee!! Haven't seen it for years.
http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/B0002TSZH4/qid=1129800495/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_10_1/202-7870697-1943046
179 mins vs 185 mins:
I think they are the same. It is probably an encoding problem. In France, the video format is about 24 images per second roughly, and in America the format you use is about 25.9 images per second I think. I can't go too much into details because I don't know much about it, but it often happens that the film length "shrinks" a little when they re-encode it to the US format.
It should not be the case, if the thing was done properly, but hey... That's how it is, I have noticed it by experience. 6 minutes diffrence on a 180 minutes movie is acceptable and won't be noticeable. I do not think you will miss a scene: I think it is a format problem.
Just my 2 cts... Cheers.
Thanks, Julie. I was unaware of that. Quite fascinating, actually.
shareNot entirely correct. Cinema uses 24 frames per second. PAL and SECAM (France and a few others) are 25 frames per second. NTSC (US, Japan and Canada) is 29.97 (call it 30) frames per second. Because of the way video conversion is done only NTSC versions have approximately the right frame rate on home video releases, everywhere else it is 4% shorter - 24/25 = 0.96.
shareNTSC can also be 23.976fps, too. I believe most modern films on DVD in the US now use this version of NTSC (although I wait to be corrected.).
shareFor you folks familiar with the content of the two uncut Euro-versions, I realise the encoding issue between NTSC and PAL but really wish to know whether the French version is English subtitled & if there's any additional bonus materials (docus, interviews, publicity, etc.) that the domicile issue has over the UK Region 2? Anybody? Thanks in advance.
share185 mins refers solely to the film running time, and it is subtitled in English. There may be extras etc etc, but they're not a part of the 185 mins.
And unrelated, but I have to wonder why someone thought 29.97 was a nice, even, easy number for NTSC framerate, as opposed to (say) 25, or 30. I always pity my American colleagues dealing in dropframe timecode etc - what an unnecessary chore!
Well after all that nonsense about conversion factors, just what is the diference in the two versions? I have the US version. What was excluded and is it that essential?
shareIt has been decades since I worked in the TV signal processing industry, but here's what I remember. Both NTSC and PAL/Secam have their frame rates based upon their electrical power grid's frequency. Europe's electricity runs at 50 Hz (cycles per second), so European TV broadcast systems scheduled one frame for every two cycles of electricity, or 25 frames per second. North America's frequency is 60 Hz, and the creators of North American TV also decided upon one frame for every two cycles of electricity, or 30 frames per second. When TV was first commercialized, both systems chose the first useful harmonic greater than the cinematic standard of 24 frames per second.
Things got messy only when color was introduced. The European governments decreed that color TV need not be backwards compatible with monochrome TV. PAL and Secam were developed from scratch, and retained their 25 frames per second rate. Europeans got to throw away all of their perfectly good black and white TVs in order to continue enjoying TV in the age of color. The US government stood firm on backwards compatibility (rejecting a color system by CBS in the process), so NTSC was designed to be backwards compatible. Engineers figured out how to inject color information into the spaces in between the lines of video, but this required refreshing the screen 0.1% more frequently than before, or 59.94 times per second. Painting a new frame at once every 'two beats' of the clock yielded 29.97 frames per second.
Thanks! Now I just have to find it...
He said it's all in your head, and I said, so's everything--
But he didnt get it.
Hi,
If you're in the UK it's showing on Tues. 19th Jan. on Film 4 and knowing their ways, probably after that as well.
Even better, the director's cut / full version in French is available on YouTube.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5y_z2m4K8sM
Or search for " 37 2 le matin " the original title.
Don't speak French? Message me for an English subbed version !!🎥
Nickluss
[deleted]