Wait, so, clearly, the aspect ratio is "better" on this new DVD than it is on Eros/DEI's; is it, however, "better" (you see more) than that or Eros/B4U's version? Also, the picture quality looks very similar to the Eros/B4U release. Is it possible that this new release is simply Eros/B4U's, only matted? How is the sound? Eros/DEI's audio quality is much better than Eros/B4U's. Unfortunately, even this DVD seems to fall far short of what would be preferable on a movie of this caliber. Oh well, I suppose we have to live with what we can get. If only BEI would just re-do this whole thing, though.

So.................where can the good people of the UK buy this from?

amazon , France;

http://www.amazon.fr/exec/obidos/ASIN/B ... 74-5349831

Thx everyone! I placed my order.

By the way, the Carlotta edition looks like it has the same aspect ratio as the ULTRA edition -- which means more picture on the edges compared to DEI.

If you look carefully, the Carlotta version crops some area from the bottom though!!

Also, it's strange that Amazon.FR lists the runtime as 3h-24min "Le film (3h24)"... Is it really PAL? Is it really the theatrical cut??

The Carlotta is ever-so-slightly vertically stretched compared to the DEI. Or the DEI is horizontally stretched. Sometimes these differences occur between versions.

no other place except amazon.fr?

I cant understand french

If you register at either the U.S. or U.K. Amazon, your details will also be automatically entered at the French one - then just click the usual buttons to order.

Thx. This is interesting. And just to clarify, my observation was about more "visible information" on the top and bottom (just where the "mat" begins") in the DEI version (when compared to Carlotta). You can see some additional picture just before the mat begins (top and bottom edges) in the DEI version (though the DEI is cropped from the right and left edges).

What scene is that?
I stand by what I said. On my LCD monitor DEI looks quite some better on these stills.
What looks better in motion on my projector is a different issue. DEI has colder color temperature, the other warmer. I prefer colder. DEI is sharper looking. I prefer that. Carlotta looks flat. I don't like that. Detail is comparable on my LCD monitor. DEI wins.
In motion all might change as DEI has notorious noise reduction issues.

Just received my copy through the post today.. i think the DEI is better than this version by far.. this version is very grainy and extremely soft.. the lack of colout doesnt help as well... Glad I got the amitabh documentrary though.. its good!!

what's the runtime faddy? 3h-24 mins?

Everyone seems to be comparing this "Carlotta" version with Eros/DEI's; how is it in comparison with Eros/B4U's release? Is the image quality better? I forget whether this was mentioned or not, but is Gabbar killed at the end? Which cut is this? What's in the "Amitabh documentary"? Thanks, all.

The Carlotta DVD has the theatrical cut where Gabbar is spared. It seems no widescreen print of the director's cut has survived. The only advantage I'd say the B4U DVD has over the Carlotta release (as far as image quality goes) is that it's open-matte, so there's more to be seen in the picture.

I'd say that that's not necessarily an advantage, especially if the film were never meant to be seen "open-matte." In this particular case, I don't think that a format is detrimental, but, in general, it's better to see what's intended than it is to see "more." If such were not the case, every shot would be a wide-angle long shot.

All the Gabbar-spared cuts have been known to be the "shorter" versions... that means less than 3h-24-minutes. So it is strange that Amazon.FR says that the runtime of Carlotta version is 3h-24min. Very strange! Is it possible that the Carlotta version is exactly the same and as long as Eros-B4U extended cut except the ending?
= = =



I agree to a large extent.

Take a look at this example. See the section which has movie stills from "Forever Young." One is widescreen still generated by matting (as intended by director) and the other is the same scene in open-matte. See how the open-matte ruins the shot. This ruining happens because the director intended to show this movie only in a matted form. This is the link:
http://www.michaeldvd.com.au/Articles/W ... imer2.html

The other side of the coin is when the director shoots (with matting) with an intention to show both in cinemas as well as on TV. In that case, the open-matte is actually intended to be shown on TV screenings! I'm not sure what Ramesh Sippy had in mind.