What To Expect Out Of Bruno Mattei's Zombie Comeback Films

I was always curious about Bruno Mattei's two comeback zombie films, ever since I saw news of their production on mhvf.  But between them being shot on DV, back in the earlier, rougher days of shooting films on digital, and the accusation of it being an Uwe Boll rip-off, I stayed away.  Even when Severin put them out together in 2015, I still hemmed and hawed.  Why DVD only?  Was that some sort of concession even from the company that these films weren't worth anyone's time?  I mean, the bad kind of crap, like those budget digital films that Netflix stuffs its catalog with, not delightful crap like classic Mattei.  Well, I did finally bite the bullet - it helps that the DVDs are nice and cheap - and guess what?  They're classic Mattei crap!  😍
So the first film is 2006's Island Of the Living Dead.  Now, I've seen Boll's House Of the Dead, but fortunately for me, I forgot almost all of it almost immediately after watching it, because that made the more supernatural sequences seem even more surprising and creative.  By the time I was watching Island, it felt more original and amusing than it if I'd kept recalling similar moments from House.  Basically, a bunch of sea-faring treasure hunters shipwreck on an island, which is of course overrun by zombies.  But it takes a step further out of left field when they take shelter in a haunted house, and different characters experience different types of encounters with the undead.  The captain has a drink with the long deceased captain of a similar ship, and another character is chased by grim reapers.  Even if its never entirely original, it still makes things a little more interesting than just your generic zombie flick.  Although don't worry, there's still plenty of your pure, lurching zombie hordes just waiting for the characters to realize that you need to shoot them in the brain, too.
The dubbing is terrible, even by Italian horror standards, but with Mattei, that just winds up adding to the films' charms.  Yes, the film is shot on digital, and so doesn't have that nice filmic look of Hell Of the Living Dead and other vintage titles.  But once you accept it, it's fine.  In fact, it might almost better suit the tone of the film.  After all, this ain't Suspiria.  But Mattei still has the style of lighting and framing to, in some aspects, raise these films above the level of our local backyard productions.  The complete unevenness of the film's quality syncs with the action on scene.  Something new is always being thrown in front of the camera to keep you in your seat, and it works.  The zombies will Flamenco dance if they have to!  The line between laughing at and with the film is completely erased in that way very few cult filmmakers could achieve, constantly flipping you from laughing at how cheesy something is to being genuinely entertained the way the filmmaker intends.  The effects range from laughable to effective, the atmosphere is in high gear, and it's gory just the way horror fans like it.
Then we have the sequel, Zombies: The Beginning.  It's still a Mattei zombie flick and all that entails, but as much as it possibly can, it shifts in tone.  Where Island was a moodier, supernatural piece, this time the zombies are caused by sci-fi means, and we're following a team of Aliens-like marines looking to blow them all apart.  It is a legit sequel, though, with the survivor of the first film being brought along with the marines like Sigourney Weaver in Aliens, though amusingly they had to cheat the ending of Island in the beginning of this one, like those old 1930's serials.  If you like one film, you're going to like the other; but I found this one a little less engrossing.  The characters in Island were stock, cliche and poorly written, sure; but they still stood out from each other.  Here the marines are mostly generic, so you're not too involved when one lives or dies any particular scene.  And without the supernatural stuff, the zombie action is a little more plain... except for the outrageous, over-the-top nutty moments that mostly come at the conclusion.  So, overall this is a weaker film, but on the other hand, we're treated to scenes like this:
Now, I said Severin put these out.  Strictly speaking, each film's DVD release in the USA was from Intervision.  But in 2011, Severin took over the production and marketing of Intervision's releases, so these are essentially Severin releases with Intervision logos on the cases.  Both of these came out at the same time in February 2015, on DVD only.  There has never been an HD release of either film, though there were a few previous, foreign DVDs.  But these are uncut, in English, inexpensive and have the best extras.  So go for these.  Also, I love how they totally ape the old VHS cover of Gates of Hell for Zombies.
Top two: Intervision's Island DVD; second two Intervision's Zombies DVD.
Both discs are anamorphic at 1.78:1, but as you can see, they have some black matting on the left hand side, particularly the first film (by Zombies, it's really just a sliver).  So really these films are 1.77:1.  They're not interlaced, but detail is really soft and compressed.  I don't know if that issue lies with the DVD transfers, though, or if the film looked like that straight out of the camera.  These films are colorful with no interlacing or other issues; but they're far from HD.  I mean, even farther than most modern, SD DVDs.  But apparently Mattei was making his films on HDCAM at this point, so again, I don't know how much better these movies ever looked, even projected theatrically.  I'd definitely be super curious if a blu ever came out, but I really don't expect we'll ever live to see one.

Audio-wise, we just get basic, Dolby Stereo tracks.  It's all dubbed, so it sounds quite clean.  There are no subtitles or other options.
The primary extra on each disc is a roughly 20-minute featurette with the film's screenwriter, Antonio Tentori, who you probably remember from Grindhouse's Cat In the Brain discs.  He's actually quite informative and interesting, telling us everything from his experiences with Fulci to how there was meant to be a third and final film to this zombie trilogy, but Mattei didn't live to see it through.  Island's featurette also includes some comments from the producer, Giovanni Paolucci.  So while we're not talking full-on special editions, these featurettes are quite satisfactory.  Each disc also includes the film's theatrical trailer, and Island also has an "international sales promo," which is essentially a five minute highlight reel.  Not really worth watching once you already own the film, but I'm glad they stuck it on there since they had it anyway.
So I definitely recommend these DVDs if you're interested in the films.  But do I recommend the films?  Well, yes, if you know what you're getting into.  These are fun Mattei zombie films.  Yes, they're shot on old digital cameras, but you'll be glad you pushed yourself to get past that.  But bear in mind, these are also shoddy, trashy films by most mainstream standards, so the majority of people around the world are gonna hate 'em.  This stuff's for a select audience only.  But if you're like me, a fan of Hell Of the Living Dead wondering if that audience would include you, then I'm happy to report, yes, these are a kick.

Another Werner Herzog Import: Salt & Fire

Here's another Werner Herzog film that doesn't seem to be making it here to the states: Salt and Fire.  We're not doing so hot getting physical releases of his work these days.  Nothing for Death Row season 2, and season 1 was already just a UK DVD only.  Into the Inferno is strictly streaming on Netflix, with no plans for any future physical release, stated directly by the production company.  I guess there's always hope they'll come out as catalog titles down the road... Shout Factory is finally releasing Queen Of the Desert this summer.  But these are dark times.  So take this barebones import-only DVD and be happy.  😛
Reading the reviews for this film on Amazon is a kick.  Nine 1-star reviews, and one 5-star review.  Clearly one out of ten people were previously familiar with Herzog's work!  Having watched the film, I get it, but everybody's being hyperbolic.  People going to Salt and Fire expecting some kind of conventional action thriller like the cover suggests are headed for some real disappointment.  Yes, it starts out that way.  Three ecologists working for the UN arrive in Bolivia only to be promptly kidnapped by terrorists.  The early scenes of them stuck waiting in a foreign airport after it's emptied out and we know things can only be bad are genuinely creepy and unnerving.  Like if The Langoliers was good.  But all that soon drops away, and it becomes pure Herzog, and with a preachy environmental message to boot.
But pure Herzog is far from a bad thing.  He goes out of his way to find wild landscapes and environments nobody's ever put on film before.  He masterfully blends music and editing to create beautiful scenes.  It's just that, unfortunately for conventional film-goers, the plot stops being a priority.  The lead terrorist, Michael Shannon (Zod from Man of Steel) removes his ski-mask to debate philosophy with his captive, and they get side-tracked into a discussion on art.  And for a few minutes, the film becomes a documentary on anamorphic art.  A good little documentary, but for anybody expecting a daring, violent escape or something, well, I guess they get angry and leave 1-star reviews.  But that's just reactionary nonsense.  Just mounting this production in these stunning locations, particularly a strange island surrounded by a horizonless salt lake, alone has to raise it above Manos: The Hands of Fate or Red Zone Cuba level fare.  Anybody who can't recognize that is just being disingenuous.
But it's also not a perfect 5-star movie.  He brings more than enough of himself to please his devoted fans, but as is often the case in Herzog's fiction films, some of the line deliveries can get a little clunky.  Worse, the message of the film gets firmly in the way of the drama, leaving us with a downright frustrating ending.  Although, to be fair, this is an adaptation of a story called Aral by journalist Tom Bissell, and reading through it online, it's surprisingly faithful.  All the dialogue is practically word-for-word accurate, except the film is so short, Herzog has to extrapolate and add a lot of additional content.  But those additions aren't really the problem.  The original story just isn't a dramatic one and doesn't try to be.  It's more of an essay on ecological disparity with some narrative trappings.  So Herzog successfully made the film he set out to make, but it just so happens to be the sort of thing that only 1 out of 10 people set out to see.
So, you actually have a couple of options with Salt and Fire, but the distinction's almost completely immaterial.  There's a German DVD from Indigo, a French DVD from Potemkine and the one I chose, the UK DVD from Matchbox Films.  All three are barebones, widescreen releases, released between mid-April and this week.  The film's shot in English, so language-wise it shouldn't matter what you go with.  I'd say just get whichever you can find for the cheapest.
The film is presented in anamorphic 2.35:1, and looks pretty good (it is a new release, after all), except soft.  But that's SD for you.  A film with a look like this really ought to be seen in HD, but c'est la vie.  Even for SD, in fact, I think it looks a little soft; but that could be because the camera is in perpetual motion, so it never quite settles on a perfectly sharp image.  But still, a blu would look better.  But it's not interlaced or otherwise troubled.  We're given the option between a 5.1 mix and basic stereo (which sound pretty similar to my ears), with no subtitle options.  There are no special features, which is a shame, since Herzog's usually pretty good about providing commentaries or interviews to his stuff.  All we get here is the trailer.
So do I recommend this film?  If you're a Herzog fan, sure.  His work is always at least interesting in various aspects.  And it's a cheap DVD, so there's no reason for this to be the one that makes your collection incomplete.  I'm glad to have gotten my copy.  But if you're not already carrying your fan club membership card, this is definitely not a Herzog movie to start your explorations with. 

The Evil Within Is Actually Quite Good

This film has a really interesting backstory, but don't let that distract you.  This new release, indie horror flick has been getting coverage in all sorts of unusual places, like People Magazine and this weak Guardian review, but that's just because they want to dish about how the first time writer/ director Andrew Getty was an heir to the oil fortune, spent fifteen years working on this film, and died to his drug habit before it was complete (one of the producers finished it up).  I mean, I suppose that's all true and all; but the real story is that The Evil Within (a.k.a. Whiplash and The Storyteller) is actually quite a good, original new horror movie.
And Getty may've been working on this film for fifteen years, but he couldn't have been shooting it for fifteen years.  This isn't the Boyhood of horror; we don't see the actors age a decade and a half through the course of this picture or anything.  Just watching the film on its own, you'd have no idea of its tortured history.

It's also not wildly incoherent, the way some write-ups are making it sound.  Yes, it's a surreal, in some ways Lynchian horror flick that shows us the world through the lead character's unreliable perspective, a la Repulsion.  Plus, a large element of the story is about dreams, putting it a bit more in the vein of Phantasm.  But its narrative still manages to be more straight-forward and clear than either of those films, and pointed criticisms from that Guardian review like, "characters appear and vanish without warning or explanation, long surrealist interludes go nowhere, and the plot constantly veers into tangents that appear to bear little relevance to the rest of the film" are flat out untrue.  I think their critic just wasn't paying attention.
But still, it's far from a perfect film.  It's definitely a mixed bag.  On the one hand, this film is filled with stunning visual imagery and wild practical effects that justify the price of admission alone.  Just quickly catching the trailer online, I had to see this film.  And unlike most horror films, it completely lives up to its trailer.  But the story's also quite compelling, with genuinely smart writing and human undercurrents about a mentally handicapped man who's frustrated by a world that has no patience for him, and what his inner demons ultimately push him to do about it.  That's helped immensely by some terrific acting, particularly by the film's lead: Frederick Koehler, the nerdy exposition guy from all those Death Race remakes.  People talk about James MacAvoy in Split, but that's like hammy popcorn fare compared to where this guy goes.
On the other hand though, this has some drawn-out, clunky scenes that really feel like the awkward work of a first-time filmmaker.  Like I think co-star Sean Patrick Flanery is giving a decent performance overall, but when he starts talking to Dina Meyer (whose performance could use a bit of a jolt) or his psychiatrist, feel free to go out to the kitchen and top up your drinks.  It's like being trapped in a student theater group.  Yeah, you need some of that exposition, but some judicious editing could've turned a stilted, uneven film into juggernaut.  Plus, there are one or two "plot convenience" moments and one jokey, meta line of dialogue in the ice cream shop that's so out of place, I can only imagine the director must've left it in the final film on a dare.

So maybe don't come into this film expecting the greatest horror film since the original Hellraiser; you'll probably be disappointed.  But definitely don't let its total garbage dump of a release strategy put you off seeing it, either.  Yes, it's a mixed bag, but one where the highs are so high that the lows are immaterial.  Yeah, it's a DVD only release, and hardly a packed special edition at that.  But it's absolutely worth owning.  Michael Berryman hasn't had a horror role this cool since The Hills Have Eyes (sorry, Cut and Run).
I was pretty disappointed this film got a DVD-only release, but thinking about it, since it was started back in 2002, maybe there's some issue where some of the effects were only finished in standard def?  But it's just as likely, if not moreso, that Vision Films, the company that finally bought this film out to the world, were just cheap.  Spot-checking their catalog, it seems like most of their films are DVD-only.  Anyway, for a DVD, it looks good.  It's anamorphic, 2.35:1, and not interlaced or otherwise troubled.  It's a bit soft, like standard def tends to be, but considering it's got such a unique history, who knows how much better it could look or not?  Watching the credits, you'll see tons and tons of people listed in basic roles like gaffer, so clearly this film was shot with multiple crews at multiple times.  It very possibly might not have even been all shot with the same kind of camera.  If so, they did a good job of making the film look cohesive and professional.  But it's impossible to know what standards to really hold to this release.  I'll say it's a solid, very respectable DVD release and leave it at that.

They do give you the option of a stereo or 5.1 mix, and they include optional English subtitles.  So calling Vision "cheap" might've been a little harsh.  Also, curiously, this film has Canadian ratings markings on the back, even though I ordered my copy direct from Amazon US.  I guess they just made one disc for both markets.
While I said this disc was no packed special edition (an audio commentary by the producer who completed the film would've been terrific), it does have a few short extras that are noteworthy, at least.  First up are three short, on-camera interviews, all clearly filmed during production.  The best is with Getty himself.  This film, and the story behind it, raise a million questions, and he answers about two.  But a little bit's better then nothing.  The next interview is with Koehler, which is alright, but he mostly just heaps praise on Getty and goes over points we clearly saw in the film.  The final interview is with Brianna Brown and is 75 seconds long, so you can guess how substantive that one gets.

Then there are two deleted scenes.  One is a very short clip of repetitious exposition, but the other is a totally graphic and ambitious dream sequence, which seems crazy that they would've cut from the film.  It's possible that they might've had to lose it to prevent an NC-17, though.  Anyway, there's just that plus the trailer and a couple of bonus trailers that play on start-up.  All told, it's like fifteen minutes or less of content, but I'm glad to have it.
It's very rare for a contemporary horror film to make it into my collection.  So yes, it's imperfect (very imperfect), and you can let those flaws ruin it for you if you're the wrong frame of mind.  But seriously, I don't recommend new release horror like this lightly... I mostly just heavily criticize them [whoo! Five bonus reviews!].  It's also priced to sell as a budget title, so it's low risk.  Give it a shot; I'm glad I did.

Back To David Lynch's Mulholland Drive (DVD/ Blu-ray Comparison)

a little pilot-only scene and character
Mulholland Drive seemed to be a comeback film for David Lynch. He got an Academy Award nomination as Best Director for it, despite or perhaps partially because of its long and painful birth process. It was originally shot as a ninety-odd minute television pilot for ABC. A sort of second Twin Peaks. But the network ultimately declined it, and it never aired. A year or two later, Lynch teamed up with the French film company Studio Canal to buy it from ABC bring back the cast, and film all new material to flush it out into a feature film and a complete, self-contained story (the pilot, naturally, was left open-ended, as it was meant to lead into an entire series worth of events).

So it played well theatrically, and eventually in 2002, Universal gave us the slightly controversial DVD. Thanks to Lynch's eccentricity and probably a slight misunderstanding of the medium, it is presented without chapter stops, as per his wishes. As a pleasant surprise, however, it turns out the DVD does have chapter stops, a lot even, they're just not indicated by a chapters menu. But they're there. It also doesn't have any special features (despite some good, on-set interviews being available, as we'll come to later) except for a single page insert with "10 Clues to Unlocking This Thriller." And finally, Lynch personally censored one scene from the film for its home video release. A brief shot of Laura Herring, featuring some below the belt nudity, was optically fogged despite playing uncut in theaters, apparently to prevent nude photos from circulating on the internet.

Meanwhile, in Europe, Studio Canal released a 2-disc special edition. And in 2010, they even upgraded it to blu-ray, something which has yet to happen in the states. So, not for the first time, Lynch fans were compelled to import.

Update: 4/30/15 - 4/6/17 - 5/8/17 - 6/8/17: There is no end!  The Criterion blu did come out, so I updated this post with that.  Then I updated it with the Concorde blu, and now I'm updating it yet again with the new Studio Canal blu (not to be confused with the previous Studio Canal blu).  This one creates even more new special features and uses the updated 4k scan that debuted on the Criterion disc.  Is it the ultimate, definitive Mulholland Drive release?  Is it worth replacing an older edition for?  Let's solve the mystery.
Mulholland Drive is pretty great, but even as a big Lynch fan, I do have minor issues with it. They mostly boil down to what I see as the more conventional characters and story points: like the stuff with the hitmen and the director's subplot. I can't say what was in the writers' heads, of course, but I suspect these elements are concessions for more mainstream television viewers who wouldn't appreciate Lynch's usual work, and as such is more archetypal and less humanistic and compelling than, say, his next film, Inland Empire, even though it's a far less popular work of his. At any rate, even if that's not true about why that material is in there, those points give that impression, which comes down to the same thing. But even accepting all of my quibbles, it's still a smart, creative and gripping drama, with all of Lynch's strengths here in force.

So how does it look on blu-ray and how does the DVD stand up against it? And how does each subsequent blu-ray release stack up against its predecessor?  We've got a lot of comparing to do!
1) Universal 2002 DVD 2) Studio Canal 2010 blu 3) Concorde 2011 blu
4) Criterion 2015 blu 5) Studio Canal 2017 blu
So, not a huge difference, but there is an incremental improvement with each release.  Well, except the 2010 Studio Canal and the Concorde.  They're virtually identical.  In fact, Concorde's encode is slightly worse; so it's a tiny step down.  But the older SC blu-ray clears away all the standard def smudginess of the DVD, and Criterion's new 4k scan of the OCN smartens up the image with a touch more clarity and noticeably deeper colors.  They'll be slim upgrades to casual viewers, but aficionados will appreciate each generation's step forward.  And now, again, Studio Canal's 2017 blu uses the same 4k scan as the Criterion, so I have to say I'm surprised how distinct this new one is.  There were rumblings that perhaps Criterion's encoding could be slightly better, and indeed, I'd say it is on the new SC.  If you just want to look at my close-up comparison, Criterion's encoding does leave things like a hint of horizontal lines running across Naomi's upper lip and cheek, for example.  And areas of grain seem patchy, like little block areas.  This is real magnifying-glass-to-the-monitor stuff, but it's there, and SC does do a better job of not having that problem.  However, what's much more obvious is how much grainier the 2017 SC blu looks.  It looks like Criterion tried to de-grain the image a bit, whereas SC has let it all hang out, which perfectionists always prefer.  I could see some casual viewers finding the Criterion more appealing for looking smoother, but if you're the kind of person who reads up on the distinctions between different blu-ray transfers of the same movie, this new version is the best yet.  All five releases feature a slightly letterboxed 1.85:1 aspect ratio, but the new 4k framing has ever so slightly shifted horizontally and vertically.
2010 Studio Canal blu-ray on top; bootleg DV-R of the pilot below
So now there's nothing to be gained from noting that the blu-ray trumps the DV-R of the TV pilot. That's just a low quality bootleg. There is no legit release of the pilot version, so don't run yourself ragged searching. It's no great loss, anyway, since there's very little in the pilot that's not in the film... It's mostly the other way around: there's a lot in the film that's missing in the pilot. But I thought it was worth posting the comparison because we see that, naturally, the 90s television image is full-frame. And since it was shot for TV first and converted to cinema second, Lynch clearly matted the 4:3 image down. So that means in the lower image you're seeing the image open matte, with a lot more picture on the top and bottom; and that's the way it was originally composed to be viewed. It's the OAR, at least for the footage that wasn't added later.

Speaking of interesting, alternate presentations of the footage, The Criterion release is the first uncensored presentation of the film, and yes, Studio Canal's 2017 blu follows suit.  As you may've already been familiar with, Lynch himself blurred a scene of full frontal nudity for the home video release (that played uncensored in the original theatrical run).  It was already a heavily shadowed scene, so casual viewers wouldn't even notice, but a distinct blur was put over Jeanne Bates in one bedroom scene, and that was on the original US DVD, the 2010 Studio Canal blu, the Concorde blu and pretty much every other version.  But by going back to the original film elements for their new 4k scan, Criterion bypassed it (sorry, no screenshot, kids).

As for audio options, the Universal DVD gave us a choice between DTS 5.1 and Dolby Digital 5.1 mixes, but all three blus simply give us uncompressed DTS-HD 5.1 tracks.  Well, Concorde also has a German DTS-HD 5.1 and 2010 Studio Canal gives us Spanish and French DTS-HD 5.1s (2017 SC keeps the French, but drops the Spanish).  They also include Dutch, French and Italian subtitles, while Concorde just have German subs and the original DVD has French and Spanish subtitles.  Only the Criterion and new Studio Canal actually give us (optional) English subtitles... at least for the main feature.
But what about the extras? Like I said, the DVD had nothing, not even the trailer. Just that insert with "clues." The Studio Canal blu-ray trumps even the insert by including a 20 page booklet, which, yes, includes the clues. But there's also some real, meaty extras on the blu as well:

• Introduction by Thierry Jousse - A ten minute lead in by filmmaker Jousse. This, like several of the extras, are in French, but everything's fully subtitled for English viewers.

In the Blue Box - A 28 minute featurette where a bunch of filmmakers (the guy who directed Donnie Darko, the director of Colt 45, etc) talk about the film and their experiences with it.

On the Road To Mulholland Drive - a 24 minute 'making of' documentary, primarily based on interviews with Lynch, Naomi Watts and Laura Herring, inter-cutting between them with some nice behind the scenes B-roll footage. This one's been around a while, even my pilot bootleg DVD has it on there, and was mostly or entirely shot during filming. One wonders why this was left off the Universal DVD. I guess Lynch just didn't want there to be any extras on that?

• Interview with Mary Sweeny - A short but interesting with the film's co-producer and editor.

• Interview with Angelo Badalamenti - A little under twenty minutes with the film's composer, who also plays a small role, from around the time of the film's release.

• Interview with Angelo Badalamenti - Yes, another one. But this one's newly recorded, and it's audio only. It's about 17 minutes and unfortunately repeats a lot of anecdotes nearly word for word from the previous interview. There are some unique bits, so it's still worth watching, but one wishes Studio Canal would've edited out all the duplicate material.

Back to Mulholland Drive - A 24 minute featurette that focuses on the mysteries of the film and decoding its more symbolic meanings. It includes some additional interview footage of Lynch, and explains the 10 clues, which is nice, because as written they're not illuminating at all, even when you pretty much get the film. Overall, it's a pretty compelling extra, but it's a little silly and I think they arrive at precisely the wrong conclusion about one of the clues. But for the most part, it pretty much explains and clarifies everything for people who saw the movie and felt they didn't understand any of it. And even if you feel you've got everything worked out, you probably didn't catch all of the little hints and touches they point out.
That was pretty awesome, but now Criterion is here to enter the races!  They've got a healthy collection of special features, too; and they're mostly all new.

• Interview with David Lynch and Naomi Watts - Finally, a proper interview with Lynch on this film besides those vintage promo clips. And here he's alongside star Watts for a really engaging talk.

• New interviews with Justin Theroux, Laura Harring, Naomi Watts and Johanna Ray - A substantial featurette with several of the stars that runs well over half and hour.

• Interview with Angelo Badalamenti - Yes, this is different than the two on the Studio Canal discs, running just under 20 minutes, though he doesn't really say anything he didn't say before.

• Interviews with Peter Deming and Jack Fisk - We get to hear from a couple key people we haven't yet, the cinematographer and production designer.

• On-set footage - About 24 minutes worth of behind-the-scenes footage.  We saw a lot of this in On the Road To Mulholland Drive, but this is basically just the raw, B-roll footage without the framing interviews.

• Deleted scene - Robert Forster at the police station.  I'm surprised they didn't put in all the other material from the pilot - it would've been great to see it restored from film elements, too - but maybe Lynch didn't want it included?

• Trailer

Criterion's release also includes a booklet, with an interview with Lynch from the book Lynch on Lynch.  Overall, both blus have some nice, exclusive stuff.  But overall, I definitely have to give the win to Criterion's collection.
Oh, and the Concorde?  That's the whole reason I tracked this blu down and, well, it's pretty disappointing.  I mean, taken on its own, it's okay.  It sure trumps the DVD.
• Making of featurette - This is actually the On the Road To Mulholland Drive doc.  Still a good little doc, but nothing new if you have any of the other releases.

• Interviews - Interviews with Watts, Lynch, Harring and Theroux.  These are actually the exact same interview clips that appear in On the Road.  That's right; it's the same stuff on the disc twice.  I guess the benefit is this lets you jump right to certain interview clips without watching the whole, 23 minute doc?  Meh.

• 3 TV spots

• Trailer - Surprisingly, only this and the Criterion disc have this.  The old DVD and both Studio Canal releases are missing it.

• German trailer

And it has a couple of bonus German-dubbed trailers.  Pretty disappointing.  I figured the 'making of' doc would turn out to be On the Road again.  But I figured the interviews had to be some exclusive press junket clips or something.  Who knew they'd have the audacity to just reuse the same footage twice?  Oh well.
Studio Canal really went for it this time.  They've got new extras, previous Studio Canal extras, they've got Concorde extras and they've even got Criterion extras.  But they still don't have everything...

• Introduction by Thierry Jousse - As carried over from the previous Studio Canal disc.

• Interview with David Lynch and Naomi Watts - I was surprised to see this one here; it's the one Criterion made for their release.  Sweet!

• New interview with Laura Harring - Even sweeter, some brand new content.  A nicely edited, 14-minute on-camera piece.

• Interview with Mary Sweeny - This is from the previous Studio Canal disc, still quite good.

Back to Mulholland Drive - The look at the mysteries from the previous Studio Canal disc.
In the Blue Box - Again, this is from the previous Studio Canal disc.  But don't take that as dismissive comment.  I'm glad they kept all these goodies.

On the Road To Mulholland Drive - This is the vintage 'making of' that's been on every release except the original DVD.

• EPK Interviews - These are the same, short interview clips with Watts, Lynch, Harring and Theroux that were on the Concorde disc and that came from On the Road.

• Interview with Angelo Badalamenti - This is the one from the older Studio Canal disc; the video one.  The audio-only one was not ported over.

• On-set footage - About 24 minutes worth of behind-the-scenes footage.  We saw a lot of this in On the Road To Mulholland Drive, but this is basically just the raw, B-roll footage without the framing interviews.

• Deleted scene - The same Robert Forster scene from the Criterion disc.

So, this may well be the best collection of extras, but even though they brought over the Lynch/ Watts talk, they're still missing a couple featurettes from the Criterion: the interviews with cinematographer Peter Deming and production designer Jack Fisk, the cast featurette interviewing Justin Theroux, Laura Harring, Naomi Watts and Johanna Ray, the on-set footage featurette and their interview with Badalamenti.  And they've dropped the audio-only interview with Badalamenti from their own previous release.  Given how redundant it was, that makes some sense, but it seems odd they'd lose one of their own special features.  Frankly though, the biggest losses are the interviews with Fisk, Deming and Ray, as their voices aren't included anywhere else.  Also, bizarrely, it's missing the trailer.  Why do so many releases of this film keep forgetting the trailer?  But still, the trailer's just the trailer.  In 2017, Studio Canal's assembled a very strong mesh of the best of all the previous releases that's tough to beat.  Also, this release comes in a slip cover and includes six cardstock art cards that you can see in the photo above.
So, the old Studio Canal blu is a pretty spiffy release, and it was more or less a must-have for any serious Lynch fan right up until the Criterion release.  But their 4k scan and superior extras eclipsed it.  Now, the only real question is between the new Studio Canal and Criterion releases.  I think SC edges out Criterion for picture quality.  Their special feature packages are different, each with some unique content, so it's a tough call.  Again, I think I'd pick Studio Canal, but I really miss those other Criterion featurettes.  But none of the blus are bad, and if you're just a mild fan of the film and you already have it, it may not be worth upgrading to any of these other ones.  But for serious fans, yeah, I'd say get the 2017 Studio Canal blu and maybe even the Criterion, too, just for the additional extras.  They do have a separate DVD edition, so you can save a few bucks if you're just buying the special features.  And you won't need any of the older releases after that, unless you're a real completist and want to hold onto the old Studio Canal release for the audio-only Badalamenti interview.  But that's going further than even I would.