Showing posts with label HBO. Show all posts
Showing posts with label HBO. Show all posts

Branagh's Shakespeares

We've already taken a look at Henry V, the underrated Love's Labour's Lost and Kenneth Branagh's not-actually-a-Shakespeare-adaptation, but highly adjacent Midwinter's Tale.  It was only a matter of time until I covered the rest.  But not all of them have had particularly extensive lives on home video.  Hell, a couple of them are still, sadly, DVD only.  So I figured why not round them up into one big post?  And what better way to start one big post than with what is still, easily, the biggest Shakespeare adaptation of the silver screen: 1996's Hamlet?
Branagh's is hardly the first Hamlet to hit the silver screen - they did it first in 1921 with Asta Nielsen as the titular prince(ss!), and Olivier's Best Picture winner had been the reigning version for decades - but clocking in at over four hours, his was the first to finally adapt the entire play, rather than an abridgement.  However, the BBC came pretty close to doing it first with their 1980 television version starring Derek Jacobi (at three and a half hours, it did cut out a little).  And it may be a nod to this that Jacobi co-stars here as Hamlet's nemesis uncle king.
But of course, even if the BBC had managed to present the complete play, there's no way they could have managed anything as grand - dare I say ostentatious - than Branagh has.  From it's massive sets to not just great RSC actors but Branagh's first case of major stunt casting.  Besides Branagh himself in the lead and the aforementioned Jacobi, we see no less than Judi Dench, Kate Winslet, Jack Lemon, Robin Williams, Charlton Heston, John Gielguld, Billy Crystal, Rufus Sewell, Timothy Spall, the great Brian Blessed, Julie Christie, Richard Attenborough, John Mills and even Gérard Depardieu.  It's like he picked up an issue of Entertainment Weekly and commanded, bring me all of them!  But in the interests of bringing Shakespeare to a wider, mainstream audience, I daresay it was as commendable as it was impressive a feat.  Is it a little showy?  Oh yes, but it's still the definitive Hamlet to view to this day (sorry, Mel Gibson).
It took Warner Bros a while to release Hamlet on DVD.  We had to hold onto our laserdiscs until 2007, when they finally issued it as a pretty impressive 2-disc special edition.  It was just a couple years, then, until they issued it on blu in 2010, as a fancy mediabook edition.  You might've noticed, though, by the ugly green ratings icon up there, that I have their German edition, which comes in just a traditional amary case.  The discs are the same.  The only reason I imported is because Hamlet's gone out of print here in the states, and gotten a little pricey.  So if you're looking for a way to save a little, Warners has released the same disc, just with different packaging, all around the world.
2007 WB DVD top; 2010 WB BD bottom.
2010's pretty old for a blu-ray, and it does show.  Especially with squeezing a four-hour film and a bunch of extras on a single disc, the encode's a little rough in a soft "where's the grain?" kind of way.  And it's clearly taken from the same master as the DVD, with identical color timing, etc.  Still, the AR does shift slightly from 2.18:1 to 2.21, with the blu revealing slightly more around the edges.  Yes, 2.20 is apparently the correct aspect ratio, despite it being unusual.  Hamlet is one of those rare 70mm films, which partially explains the smaller and thus harder to render grain, meaning it would be a great candidate for 4k (hint, hint, Warner Bros!).  But even as old as it is, the blu-ray is a distinct improvement on the DVD, being noticeably sharper, and revealing detail like Jacobi's eyeballs, which are blurred out on the DVD in the first set of shots.  So, while it could definitely look better, at least we've got it in HD, which is more than we can say for some of the following films.

WB's DVD includes the original, and rather impressive, 5.1 track with optional English, Spanish and French subtitles.  The blu-ray bumps that track up to DTS-HD and a whole slew of additional foreign dubs and subs.  Nothing to complain about there.
And Warner Bros supplies a very satisfying collection of special features.  Both the DVD and BD include a fully engaged audio commentary by Branagh, along with a Shakespeare scholar, who manage to stay informative and enthusiastic for the entire four hours.  There's also a brief introduction by Branagh, a nice behind-the-scenes making of featurette that lasts for almost half an hour, a shorter promo featurette and the original trailer.  The DVD also includes a bunch of bonus trailers for other Shakespeare adaptations from Warners, and the US blu (though not the German) includes a 38-page booklet with notes and an interview with Branagh.
Now, let's take it back to Branagh's first ever Shakespeare film adaptation, although technically one he didn't direct.  It's a British television production of his stage production (which he did direct) of Twelfth Night from 1988.  He went right from this in '88 to the impressive Henry V film production in '89, then soon to Much Ado and Hamlet - an amazing trajectory.  And so yes, in terms of scale, this is quite small.  It's all filmed on one tiny set, though it is shot like a proper film, with close-ups, editing and moving cameras.  But it looks like the play, not a fleshed out, realistic movie.
And we don't have the big, movie star cast we've come to expect from Branagh either.  But it's no less an impressive work once you sit down and let yourself get absorbed.  It may take a little while, admittedly, but that's more to do with Shakespeare's writing than Branagh's direction.  This is a comedy with an awful lot of set-up that doesn't really get rollicking until the pins start to fall down.  Twelfth Night requires a bit of pay-off, but it's impressive that Shakespeare's comedy still works just as well as any modern work once you're properly invested.
Branagh's said that there are generally two ways to view and present Twelfth Night, ultimately melancholy or comic.  Branagh goes for the melancholy, which is not to say the humor is lost.  Ultimately, the contrast makes some of the scenes all the funnier.  But you can see the difference if you compare this to Trevor Nunn's 1996 film, which adds full cinematic production (they really do up the ship wreck in the opening!), movie stars including Helena Bonham Carter, Richard E Grant and Ben Kingsley and the carefree, light-hearted tone.  I absolutely recommend both; they compliment each other and together give you a better appreciation of the source material than either could on their own.  Some performances are better in one, some in the other.  Even the final song, sung by the fool, are fascinatingly different, despite of course, the same lyrics.  Here, Branagh definitely has an edge, both for the more soulful take of his actor and the fact that none other than Paul McCartney created the melody for this version.
Twelfth Night originally only came out in the UK, which is why I have the barebones 2004 Fremantle DVD.  But when it A&E put it out a year later in the US, I had to double-dip, because it includes an exclusive interview with Kenneth Branagh.  But is the presentation any better on one disc or the other?  Honestly, I'm about to learn that right now along with you guys.
2004 Fremantle DVD top; 2005 A&E DVD bottom.
Nope, for all intents and purposes, they're identical.  Not that anyone would've expected a different master or anything, but even down to the interlacing, it's the same.  Surprisingly, there's not even an NTSC/ PAL speed difference.  Both are full-frame (naturally, for 1980s television) at 1.30:1.  The only technical difference is that Fremantle very slightly windowboxed their picture, by about 3-4 pixels wide around in the overscan area.

Both just have your basic Dolby stereo audio tracks and neither provide subtitles of any kind.
Again, the one thing that sets the two discs apart is the extra.  Fremantle has nothing and A&E has just the one: a twenty+ minute interview with Kenneth Branagh.  There's not a lot of info out there about this one, so the interview is very helpful, and he has a lot of keen insight into the play and his own production of it, so it's absolutely worth getting the US disc for rather than the UK.
So now let's roll into one of Branagh's most popular productions, especially today as modern viewers seem to keep rediscovering it, 1993's Much Ado About Nothing.  This reunites (then) married couple Branagh and Emma Thompson, who got to conclude Henry V, but now have the entire film focused on their romance.  It's the film that proved Denzel Washington was born for Shakespeare and that Keanu Reeves... is popular.
It's another packed cast.  Besides everyone I just named, there's Kate Beckinsale, Imelda Staunton, Robert Sean Leonard, Michael Keaton and Brian Blessed yet again stealing every scene he's in.  This film works so well because most of the cast is great, and those who aren't are still charming enough to bleed into the flight of fancy romance of this free-spirited endeavor.  Is Leonard wooden?  So what?  They just embrace it and make it part of the pretty artifice!  Is Reeves unconvincing?  So what?  We all knew his villainous plotting was bound for failure from the very beginning.  Everyone's running around throwing flowers into the air and singing "hey, nonny nonny!"  All our male leads pump their fists in unison as they ride their horses towards camera set to a lavish orchestra.  Sure, it can get a little eye-rollingly cringey, but come on, it's a joyous celebration of life and love that's endured over five hundred years.  You just have to go in with the right temperament.  It's practically Bollywood.
MGM picked this title up from Columbia Tri-Star/ Sony.  So Columbia first put out a flipper disc in 1998, then MGM reissued it in 2003 with an additional little making of featurette and ditching the fullscreen version.  And in 2011, they released it on blu.
2003 MGM DVD top; 2011 MGM BD bottom.
This is the most obviously improved of the lot.  Yes, both discs are anamorphic widescreen, but the AR is corrected from 1.81:1 to 1.84:1, and the colors are greatly improved, with distinct separation and removing the light pink hue cast over the DVD.  The DVD also features some unpleasant edge enhancement, which the BD thankfully gets rid of while also sharpening the image and resolving better detail.  Even the film grain is pretty thoroughly rendered for an older 2011 BD.  I'm not saying I wouldn't like to see a UHD of this some day, but it's not screaming upgrade like every other Branagh Shakespeare is.

MGM's DVD offered a nice Dolby Stereo Surround track with optional English subtitles, as well as French and Spanish dubs and subs.  The blu is the same, but bumps the audio up to DTS-HD and throws in several more dub and sub translations as well.
Now, did I say "little" featurette?  Yes, both the DVD and BD have the same extras, which just consist of the one promo featurette and the trailer.  And it's nice to get, but it's just six minutes long including multiple clips from the film.  So it's more like an expanded trailer with on-set soundbites from the cast.  I'd rather have it than not, but if there's one area this film could use an upgrade in, it's the extras.
And finally we come to a film that has sadly yet to be discovered, Branagh's final Shakespeare film to date, 2006's As You Like It, which was released as a TV movie here in the US on HBO.  Once again, Branagh rather defiantly opts to tackle one of the lesser known Shakespeare plays (I mean, I'm not saying it's super obscure, but it's not exactly King Lear or Macbeth, with a more mainstream draw).  And this time he makes the potentially vaguely offensive choice to set it in Japan.  Of course, setting Shakespeare in alternate milieu is a tradition almost as popular as setting it where it was originally intended.  But the possible offense coming from keeping it an English story with an almost entirely English cast, and just the trappings of traditional Japanese culture.  He does throw one or two bones to Japanese actors in minor supporting roles, but that almost makes it worse, like he's not even doing this out of a genuine commitment to an alternate history take.
But if you can lay that aside, this is another intelligent, beautifully crafted production with another all-star cast.  We've got Bryce Dallas Howard (who's actually not bad), David Oyelowo, Kevin Kline, Alfred Molina, Adrian Lester and Brian Blessed in two roles!  It's also the only one that Branagh doesn't take a role for himself, except for a brief voice over.  It's more separated twins and lovers wooing others in cross-dressed disguise, welcome to Shakespeare comedy, folks.  But Branagh is able to pull it off in the 2000s with great costumes, music and production design.

There's just the one 2007 DVD from HBO, although it was reissued by Warner Archives in 2013, so at least it's super easy to obtain.
2007 HBO DVD.
For a DVD-only release, at least it's a fine one.  Anamorphic widescreen 2.32:1 ("2.35:1" on the back of the case), non-interlaced and relatively problem free.  The slightly dim, brownish look is surely an intentional design choice on the part of the filmmakers.  It is soft and would obviously benefit from an HD disc - there appears to be some edge enhancement which could be removed in the process - but what do want from a DVD?

It's got a clean 5.1 mix and optional English subtitles, as well as a Spanish dub and Spanish and French subtitles.
And it's even got an extra.  It's actually even shorter than Much Ado About Nothing's, but it's still better than nothing.  It's a making of featurette with your standard mix of B-roll and on set interview soundbites, but it has less film clips, so it's at least worth the very short amount of time it takes to watch it.  Obviously, more would've been appreciated.
So there you have it: we've now covered six Kenneth Branagh Shakespeare adaptations to date.  And since it's been sixteen years now, possibly all six ever.  I guess he struggles to find the financing for these like he used to, so he's moved on to other things, which is a shame, since they're generally his best work.  Pretty much all of them could stand an upgrade, to varying degrees of desperation.  We'll probably never see a nice boxed set, since they're all owned by different studios.  Admittedly, he might have better luck if he tried more of a crowd-pleaser like Richard III; but it's going to take a big change in motion picture audiences before we see him get the chance to make glorious Shakespearian epics like he was able to in the 90s.  And I can live with that; there are so many other great films of the bard's work out there already.  I'll be happy just to get all the best ones in HD with a couple bonus features.  Let's work towards that.

Three Handfuls of Dust

Here's one I've been obsessing over for a while: Evelyn Waugh's A Handful of Dust from 1988, based of course on the 1934 novel of the same name.  I've always had just the crappy, old barebones and fullframe DVD of this film, until relatively recently, when I decided to investigate to see if there was anything better out there that might better live up to this highly underrated (I mean, it was nominated for an Oscar and a couple BAFTAs in its day) dark dramedy.  And... there kind of is.  I'm at least happy to say I've come up with something to show for my quest, even if it still isn't remotely satisfactory.
A Handful of Dust stars Kristin Scott Thomas and James Wilby as an extremely British, aristocratic couple whose marriage is just a little short on romance.  If you're worried this is going to be some stuffy, English screed that plays like a homework assignment, though, you don't know your Waugh.   It's another of his grand, globe-trotting plots full of colorful characters and more of his usual satiric edge than you would've found in more famous but atypical Brideshead Revisited.  It's directed/ adapted by Charles Sturridge and Derek Granger, who did the original Brideshead series, so you know they're capable of tackling the subject matter.  And if Scott and Wilby appear a little milquetoast, how about this supporting cast?  Rupert Graves, Anjelica Huston, Judi Dench (who won a BAFTA for this), Alec Guinness and a small part perfect role for Stephen Fry.  This is one of those stories where you might think you know where it's all headed, but I guarantee you do not.
I've always loved this movie and wish more people appreciated it, but one of the things holding it back in that regard is probably its life on home video.  Dust was first released on DVD by HBO Video here in the USA in 2004, which self describes it self as "14:9 letterboxed inside a 4:3 frame.  That was quickly followed by a UK release from Prism Leisure in 2005, that also identifies as "14x9 non-anamorphic."  Back in the US, it was reissued by Acorn Media, included in a 2010 boxed set called The Evelyn Waugh Collection.  The case for that one just says it's "4:3 letterboxed."  That sounds like all the same stats re-phrased, but these discs are not in fact all the same, and actually the distinctions get pretty significant.  So let's dive in.
1) 2004 US HBO DVD; 2) 2005 UK Prism DVD; 3) 2010 US Acorn DVD.
So the first thing you'll likely notice is that the UK disc is wider than the others.  Well, no, actually, the first thing is probably that they're all non-anamorphic, which is a real bummer, since I left the negative space around the first set of shots.  But we knew that from reading the back of their cases, as I wrote above.  And they're all kinda 14x9 like they claim.  The US discs are both 1.52:1, or 14x9.24, and the UK disc is 1.66:1, or 14x8.44.  The US discs aren't exactly identical, but in terms of framing, it's the difference of a handful (see what I did there?) of pixels.  But the UK disc is definitely matting the bottom of the frame a lot tighter.  Whether that's a good thing is a little more complicated.  Doing a little online research confirms that this film should be 1.85:1, and the UK's 1.66 is closer to that than the US's 1.52, purely by the numbers.  But, eh, let's put a pin in that.

Other differences include the US discs being interlaced, though the UK is not, which is a big mark in its favor.  And, just for the record, I'll also point out that the interlacing between the two US discs is slightly different, not that it will matter much to anyone, but you can really see it in the second set of shots.  I was also surprised by the lack of NTSC/ PAL time difference between the US and UK discs.  They all play at the same speed, which leads me to guess that the US discs are interlaced because they're PAL-sourced on NTSC discs.  Anyway, something funny is going on there.  The US discs also have warmer color timing, which I think I prefer and does appear to be more accurate judging by Shout's HD source.  Yes, let's find that pin now.
4) 2023 ShoutTV streaming.
In an incredibly frustrating turn of events, A Handful of Dust is available to stream in 1080, despite us only having non-anamorphic SD versions on disc.  A grabbed a screenshot from ShoutTV, since it's free, and ahhh... why can't they give us this on blu?  It's 1.78:1, showing even more on the bottom of the frame (suggesting the US's framing was at least slightly more accurate in leaving that on-screen) and considerably more on the sides.  It's certainly not interlaced, and just looks considerably higher quality.  And bear in mind, this is just a screenshot I took of the stream in motion; not even the downloaded file.  So it would probably look even crisper on disc.  I don't usually bother comparing screenshots from streaming services, because it's not relevant to the physical media in discussion here at DVDExotica, but I've done it here to show what we're being denied (and to better judge the US/ UK framing).  How annoying.
Anyway, getting back to the discs.  The HBO DVD has mono audio in Dolby Digital with optional English subtitles (IN ALL CAPS).  The Prism DVD has both the original Dolby stereo track and a 5.1 remix, but no subs.  Acorn just has the stereo track and brings back the subtitles (now in proper sentence case).

Before you pick a favorite, though, there's another big difference between the discs.  The HBO DVD is completely barebones, and the Acorn DVD isn't really any better with just a couple ads for other Acorn releases.  Well, that is unless you count the fact that The Evelyn Waugh Collection also includes a whole second film on a second disc.  It's 1987's excellent made-for-British-television (A Handful of Dust, to be clear, was a proper theatrical release) Scoop, based on the 1938 novel, with Denholm Elliott, Michael Hordern, Chief Inspector Charles Dreyfus himself Herbert Lom and Donald Pleasence.  For the record, that disc is properly 4:3 but also interlaced.  The collection consists of two amary cases in a nice slipbox.
Prism's trailer.
But, in terms of proper extras, only the UK disc has our backs with a proper audio commentary by Sturridge, who has a lot to say and isn't exactly dishing dirt, but he's not afraid to be forthcoming either.  It's a good one.  At one point he expresses supreme confidence at being able to make audiences like an on-the-surface unlikable character, which he certainly pulled off for me here; but when you read criticisms of this film, that's usually where people get stuck.  Anyway, Prism also has some bonus trailers and a properly anamorphic theatrical trailer for the film itself, perhaps just to rub it in our faces.  Sure, Shout's still looks better, but why couldn't the rest of Prism's disc at least look like this?
So, at the end of the day, I'd give the slight edge to the Acorn DVD in terms of just the picture, and getting the Collection is a nice bonus if you don't already have Scoop.  Although if you have the HBO disc, it's hardly worth replacing it.  And you might very well consider opting for the UK disc instead because of the progressive transfer and commentary.  Or even buying that in addition to a US disc, since the good news about these DVDs is that they can all be had very cheap nowadays.  But man oh man, if Shout Factory is sitting on the home video rights to this film along with that HD transfer, I'm pleading with them to release A Handful of Dust on blu.  Preferably with the commentary.

Going Fully Gray: Assembling the Complete Works of Spalding Gray

Okay, so pictured above is what you need to put together a definitive Spalding Gray collection.  We're going to be looking at even more discs in this article, but that line-up above nets you the best of absolutely everything.  At least to date, because as you can probably gather by the fact that one of the releases above is a VHS tape, there are still some deficits in terms of what's available.  Oh, and I should also point out that I'm talking about his famous monologue pieces, which he writes and performs.  Gray, of course, is also an actor, who's been in tons of TV shows and films from Spenser For Hire to the Redman and Method Man vehicle How High.  That would be a much more unwieldy and presumably less desirable collection.
We start out with Swimming To Cambodia, his first widely released theatrical monologue: the one that introduced him to the world and which is still probably his best.  Strictly speaking, it's not actually his first filmed monologue, but we'll come back to that.  In this one, Gray recounts the large tale of his small role in the exceptional film, The Killing Fields.  The making of largely takes a backseat, however, to his very personal voyage of discovery in the foreign land.  And if you're not completely familiar, yes, these movies consist of Spalding Gray sitting in a chair and talking directly to the audience for the entirety of the running time.  These monologues are performances he honed on stage and then eventually captured on film for theatrical release, typically directed by some rather notable directors, I might add.
Swimming To Cambodia was directed by Jonathan Demme in 1987.  It's fun to track what each director brings to the film, because they definitely didn't all take the same approach.  Demme makes a lot of dramatic cuts, editing together multiple performances if not even takes specifically for the film... this looks more like a recreated performance rather than a strictly documented one.  The camera never leaves Spalding except for a handful of very short clips of The Killing Fields.  But he certainly adds a dramatic score, as well as sound effects and a complex lighting scheme (we hear the sound of helicopters as he talks about them, and see the effect of their blades chopping the light on his face).  He even starts the film with Spalding walking through the streets on his way to the theater, reminiscent of My Dinner With Andre.
For a long time, this was only available on DVD in Canada from Seville Pictures.  Unfortunately, I sold it off long before I started this site, so I can't provide proper screenshot comparisons.  But I used to own it, so I can tell you it was a decent anamorphic widescreen, but completely barebones disc.  That came out in 2002, and we never got anything else until Shout Factory put it out in the US in 2015.
2015 US Shout Factory DVD.
Again, I can't compare screenshots to say for certain, but I'm pretty sure Shout's still using the same master as Seville.  That would explain why Shout would release the film on DVD only this far into the age of blu-ray, and why else would a 2015 release still be interlaced?  It's a little disappointing.  I've left the matting on the first screenshot because, further down the page, variant matting becomes relevant.  But for Swimming, I'm just showing it in the name of consistency.  The film's been slightly matted to 1.82:1.  This film really kinda needed a new master, but I have the feeling Shout didn't want to spring for it.  But if you can ignore the interlacing, it's not too bad for SD.

We get a strong and clear Dolby Stereo mix and no subtitles.  Again, it just feels like the budget was kept low here because they figured it would never be a big seller, which is a shame.
But Shout did add something besides a direct port of the Seville disc - a brand new interview with Demme.  It's about 17 minutes long and quite good.  It's well edited and he addresses most of the things you've probably always wondered about the filming of this movie and how it came together.  Unfortunately, that's it, though.  Not even a trailer.  The interview puts the Shout disc clearly over the top as the one to own, since everything else is pretty much perfectly equal, but if you have the Canadian DVD already, it's hard to recommend double-dipping for a single interview.  But then again, I did, because it's this film was in desperate need of supporting features.
Of course, if we're going to talk "desperate need," we have to move on to Gray's next film, Terrors Of Pleasure, his only film not even available on DVD anywhere in the world.  It was an HBO television exclusive when it debuted, so it's not that surprising; but this is still the second Spalding monologue film and we really shouldn't allow it to be lost in the sands of time.  Terrors was shot right on the heels of Swimming To Cambodia, and aired the very same year, in December of 1987 (online sources all tend to date the film as 1988, but that's just not correct), when the iron was quite hot.  It's the story of Spalding struggling to live the idealic American dream by buying a house and land in the Catskills with his girlfriend.  This is probably the most comedic of Gray's pieces, as he essentially lived through his own, rural Money Pit.
Terrors was directed Thomas Schlamme, whose name may not be quite as recognizable as Gray's other directors; but he's certainly not a nobody.  He's directed, and continues to direct, a ton of television stuff, including plenty of comedy specials and performances, which make him an obvious choice for a Spalding endeavor.  Plus, he has directed a few features, including So I Married an Axe Murderer and Miss Firecracker.  He takes a bit of an unexpected approach, though, not only filming Gray performing his monologue to a very large audience, but also filming dramatic (or comedic) scenes with Gray and other actors on location.  We never hear any audio from those scenes, which only act as visuals for Gray's monologue, which becomes narration whenever they play.  They only make up about 10-15% of the film, though; with almost all of the movie still being just Gray sitting at his desk with his glass of water.  And unlike Demme, he doesn't add music (except for the opening and closing credits), add sound effects or play with the lighting.  The camera moves, but it's more more like a naturalistic recording of a single performance than Swimming, which really dramatizes it.
1988 US HBO Video VHS.
So HBO Video put out this VHS tape back in 1988, and that's basically been it.  An audio-only version of it was issued on tape and CD a few years later, in 1993, though it's actually a different performance of the same material, as that was recorded in 1991.  So as far as Schlamme's film, this VHS release is all there is.  It's fullscreen, measuring in at the standard 1.33:1, which is presumably the correct OAR, as this was filmed to air on 80s television.  I would guess, however, especially since they went out and shot scenes on location and so on, that this was shot on film rather than video.  And if that's true, it would benefit a lot from a format upgrade.  I remember when Criterion was gathering up a lot of his older material (more on that further below), I was really hoping Terrors of Pleasure would be included then.  But alas, it was not.
Now we advance a few years to 1992 and his next film, Monster In a Box.  Ostensibly, it's about his struggles to write his first and only novel, Impossible Vacation.  I read Impossible Vacation, by the way - it was pretty good, but not as compelling as his monologues.  Anyway, Monster is naturally about a lot more than writing a novel... the book is a very personal account of his religious upbringing and mother's suicide, and struggling to complete what turned out into a massive tome nearly threatened to turn into a massive midlife crisis.  In some ways, it feels like his best and most "puke your guts out on stage" work, but on the other hand, it's also less focused, reaching out in a lot of directions at once, going into his experiences in Hollywood, traveling to Russia to screen Swimming To Cambodia etc.  There's a sense of The Big One here, where Gray is like Michael Moore in between Roger & Me and Bowling for Columbine, throwing what he's got on screen before he zeroes in on his next honed project.  There's some great material to be found in there; but it's a bit of a mess.
Monster In a Box is directed by the highly successful British documentary director Nick Broomfield.  Even if you don't recognize the name, you've probably seen a couple of his celebrity docs on people like Heidi Fleiss, Kurt Cobain, Michael Jackson, Biggie & Tupac, Sarah Palin or Whitney Houston, as well as some of his "sexier" docs that always air on cable TV, like Chicken Ranch, Sex and Fetishes.  He's that guy.  I can't say I'm a huge fan, but he's definitely had a massive influence on the genre, advancing tabloid-style documentaries, and he did bring some undeniably compelling qualities to the table, including doing a lot of Roger & Me-style shooting, making his own efforts to document the subject a part of the film.  Incorporating the frame into the picture, as they say.
But this, of course, is one of his more restrained projects.  In fact, he explains in the DVD liner notes, "I basically borrowed the approach used by Jonathan Demme."  So again, the camera pushes in dramatically and cuts to close-ups and profiles.  The background scrim changes color, there are sound effects and he even brings back Swimming's composer, Laurie Anderson.  Apart from a very dramatic opening shot, however, this film is a little less dramatized than Swimming.  The scrim changes color, but not really the whole lighting scheme.  There's no dramatic effects like the helicopter blades, let alone film clips from The Killing Fields to cut to.  Broomfield has basically imitated Demme, but also toned him down.
Monster In a Box took its time finding its way onto DVD.  In fact, it came out first in the UK, only because Nick Broomfield was releasing massive, definitive collections of his work.  So in 2006, Monster first appeared exclusively in the Metrodome's Nick Broomfield: The Early Years boxed set, packaged along with his first seven other films.  Shortly after, however, Image finally released it on DVD in the states, a disc was has long since gone out of print and now sells for crazy amounts of money used online.  Image reissued it briefly in 2007 as a 3-picture collection, along with the completely unrelated films Waterland and Mrs. Parker and the Vicious Circle, which is also out of print and rather pricey.  But it's usually cheaper than the stand-alone disc, and a smart option if you're trying to find a copy of Monster In a Box without taking out a second mortage.
2006 UK Metrodome DVD top; 2006 US Image DVD bottom.
So, as you can see, despite coming out in the same year, these two discs are very different.  Starting with the most obvious, the UK disc is fullframe and the US disc is widescreen.  Specifically, the UK disc is 1.33:1, while the US disc is 1.67:1, and we're not talking about open/ closed mattes here.  The UK disc just chops off the sides.  Next, the color timing is remarkably different.  The background scrims in the first set of shots almost look like they're taken from two different sections of the film, but no, those are actually matching frames.  I had to go back and double-check myself, though.  There's also one more issue with the UK disc.  You might not notice in the shots above (though it's there if you look closely), but let's advance a frame or two and you'll really see the issue:
2006 UK Metrodome DVD.
...It's interlaced!  And badly interlaced.  Usually, interlacing occurs when the framerate is off (common in PAL/ NTSC conversions), so two frames are merged together with an ugly combing effect, which if you're lucky, your player may smoosh together into a smoother, ghostly look.  But if you look at his left elbow (his left, our right), you'll notice he has three elbows, meaning the interlacing is extra off.  At least, with Gray sitting relatively still in a chair for 98% of the film, you don't notice it so much, but that's some really screwy interlacing.

Both discs feature Dolby Digital stereo mixes, and neither include subtitles.
So, if the UK disc is so clearly inferior, why is it included on the photo at the top of the definitive collection?  Well, if you'll notice both Monster In a Boxes are there, and the Image disc is definitely there because it's by far the best presentation of the film.  And honestly, that's all most Spalding fans should probably bother with.  But if you're a real die-hard, there's a reason to get the UK box, too: extras.  Or an extra, at least.  The US disc is completely barebones, not even a crappy bonus trailer, though it does include a nice 4-page insert with notes by Robert Foster.  But yeah, the disc itself is barren.  But let's talk about the Broomfield box.  Well, first of all, obviously, it contains a bunch of other Broomfield films.  And even if you're not such a fan, some of his earlier works, before he settled into the filmmaker he is today, are actually quite good.  Like, I'd recommend his Juvenile Liason films to anybody at all who appreciates documentaries (really the first one is great and the second is more like a follow-up that doesn't stand on its own, but is quite interesting for anyone who's seen the original), and Driving Me Crazy is a fun, curiosity piece where you can see him taking his first steps into his contemporary style.

For Monster In a Box, though?  Well, every film in this set includes a new video introduction by the director himself, and yes that includes Monster.  It's short - just a couple minutes - but it's the only special feature Monster In a Box has ever had, and he does talk about how he came to the project and his approach.  I wish it was longer, but I'm glad to have it over nothing.  There's also a retrospective documentary on his early films, called a "History Reel" on the box; but it skips right over Monster In a Box, presumably because (based on the aforementioned interview), he seemed to take Monster as a "for hire" job rather than a passion project he developed on his own.  Still, lame either way.  And, similarly, there's a "Trailer Reel" for Broomfield's docs, but they don't even include the Monster trailer.  So, in a way, it's just a question of would you get the Broomfield box just for a super short interview.  But again, I do have to seriously recommend some of the other films in that set, outside of Gray interest.
So if Swimming To Cambodia was Roger & Me and Monster In a Box was The Big One, what's our Bowling for Columbine in this tortured Michael Moore analogy?  Gray's Anatomy!  Admittedly, Monster wasn't quite as lost in the woods as The Big One, but still, when you come to 1996's Anatomy, you really do feel the return to singular direction and purpose.  Gray talks about how his medical issues lead him on a spiritual journey through alternative medicine and a reconciliation with his Christian Science past.  There are certainly some crazy anecdotes and funny moments, but the material takes a darker, less comedic tone.  Gray is more clearly troubled by his own mortality, so it's all a bit heavier, and it's incredibly unfortunate that this turned out to be his last film, because it's so good.
A lot of people take issue with this film, though, and I can see why... I'm not even sure I don't wholly agree with them.  See, this one was directed by Steven Soderbergh, and expertly so.  The drama is really enhanced here, taking it further even than Demme, putting Gray in various elaborate sets with a colorful score.  The audience is completely removed, doing away with the conceit that this is a live performance being captured rather than a proper movie.  It's terrifically done, and that's not the part anybody has a problem with.  The thing is, Soderbergh takes it further, filming new material outside of Gray's monologue.  And he goes a lot further than Schlamme.  These aren't just new images to illustrate Gray's words, they're entirely distinct man-on-the-street style interviews.  So, essentially, when Gray talks about going to a spirit healer, Soderbergh cuts away and asks ordinary people if they would ever go see a spirit healer.  I guess to balance out Gray, who after all, is pretty eccentric in his adventures.  Their ordinary takes ground Gray's extraordinary tales.  Gray's shot in glorious, extreme color and they're all in black and white.  But fans argue, and again I kind of agree, Gray's expert, artistic monologue doesn't really need enhancing, especially by interviews with people who don't have very much interesting to add and mostly just continually express the same, one-note sentiment ("a spiritual sweat-lodge? No, that sounds too weird for me!").
They might be there for a more practical purpose, though.  In fact, there's no "might be" about it, because Soderbergh's interviews confirm it.  Gray's monologue is a tight hour, and they're trying to make something that can play in mainstream theaters nationwide.  So the film simply had to be padded out with something.  And they're not really a problem.  They're all kind of charmingly affable, and their bits are short.  And he did manage to find one woman with a disturbing and wild anecdote about accidentally putting superglue in her eye because she thought it was eye drops.  So yes, they still do distract from the thrust of the film and Gray in particular.  But they're attractively shot and though the film might genuinely be better off without them, I think people are being a bit melodramatic when they express being heavily bothered by those sections.
Gray's Anatomy was actually Gray's first film on DVD, coming out from Fox Lorber in 1999.  As you can imagine with a disc that hold, though, it doesn't really hold up.  It's non-anamorphic, misframed, and barebones.  It's all we had, though, until 2012, when Criterion came and decked it out with sweet DVD and blu-ray editions.  They were sold separately, but I've got my hands on both for this article.
1999 US Fox Lorber DVD top; 2012 US Criterion DVD mid;
2012 US Criterion DVD blu bottom.
So, being non-anamorphic, the 1999 DVD is floating in a sea of black on a widescreen television.  On top of that, despite being presented in an almost correct ratio of 1.82:1, it's clearly mis-framed, missing a little bit of picture on the right and a lot along the bottom.  The Criterion discs fix this, and matte to the film to an exactly correct 1.85:1.  The old DVD is also very smeary and lacking in detail compared to Criterion's restored HD digital transfer taken from the 35mm interpositive.  Grain is very distinct and natural on the blu.  It's a very big jump in quality and a welcome opportunity to toss out our old discs.

Criterion also remastered the audio in 5.1, in DTS-HD on the blu.  They also added English subtitles, which the DVD had neglected.
And the special features!  Even if you're a person who doesn't care about extras, the features here are essential.  I mean, not on the Fox Lorber DVD.  That only had the trailer.  But Criterion, well, let's ramp up.  First of all, it has about 17 minutes of graphic footage of Gray's eye surgery, which is... weird.  Gray talks about getting the surgery in his monologue, sure; but it's really going several extra miles to include the footage of it on the DVD.  I mean, who would want to watch that?  Anyway, what you'll be more likely to want to watch are the excellent on-camera interviews with Soderbergh and Gray's collaborator Renee Shafransky (yes, she's that Renee).  Plus, the trailer's on here, and there's an attractive booklet with an essay by Amy Taubin.

But what's so essential?  A Personal History of the American Theater - a previously unreleased Gray monologue from 1982!  Yes, an entire other feature-length monologue.  In fact, it's longer than Gray's Anatomy.  Now, it's not as dramatically directed as his feature films... this time it really does feel like just a single, filmed performance.  The camera does move, though, reframing for closer shots, etc, throughout.  And as fun as some of Demme and Soderbergh's theatrics are; at their core, all of Gray's films are really just about his delivery of his material.  And that's exactly what we get.  A lost film.  And interestingly, by the way, Criterion puts it on a separate, second disc for the DVD release, but fits it all on a single disc for the blu.  Anyway, now you see why this new edition is so essential, even besides the massive upgrade it already gives over the 1999 disc.
And that's the last of his films, so you might think we're done here, but not quite.  Because I've also got to include And Everything Is Going Fine, the 2010 documentary.  Now, this isn't a film by Gray, but a documentary about him, directed after his passing by Steven Soderbergh.  But it's a very unusual documentary, created specifically in the style of Gray's monologues... essentially it is just one long monologue by Gray.  Soderbergh lovingly edited all of Gray's filmed monologue films as well as various interviews into one, coherent piece where Gray tells the story of his own life. We see some of his childhood home movies during the closing credits, but otherwise that's it.  There's no narration, no other interviews, just Gray edited into one last monologue, from his earliest films (yes, including A Personal History) to rare, new interviews after he moved to Ireland.
It's pretty great, though with a pretty big concession.  If you own all his films, so much is taken from them that it gets pretty redundant.  Like, if you watch And Everything right after viewing his other movies, it can feel like a real grind watching all the same footage twice in a row.  You'll feel a little starved waiting for some footage from a television interview or anything new.  And there's a good chance you will have watched at least some of his films right beforehand, because Criterion released this documentary (again in separate DVD and blu-ray editions) in conjunction with their Gray's Anatomy/ Personal History set in 2012.
2012 US Criterion DVD top; 2012 US Criterion DVD blu bottom.
So this film is compiled entirely of old footage, and like the shots above show, it's almost all low quality video footage massaged to look as good as they could make it.  Rather than shifting the aspect ratios, they make the unusual choice to box it all into a standard 1.33:1 full frame.  And it carries over all the flaws of the materials Soderbergh had to work with, so sections are interlaced or over compressed.  I mean, that's typical for docs, but there's really basically nothing here that benefits from HD.  So what I'm sorta saying is, if you want to take an opportunity to save a couple bucks, Criterion's blu rarely if ever looks better than their DVD edition, so you might just want to cop that.

Both versions just feature a simple mono audio track, though in LPCM on the blu, with optional English subtitles.
So maybe you're thinking you don't need this release.  You might be less interested in a doc about Gray than one of his actual films, especially if so much of the footage from the doc is lifted from the films you already have.  But let's talk extras.  First of all, there's a 21-minute making of doc with Soderbergh, producer Kathleen Russo and editor Susan Littenberg.  It's not bad, and we get the trailer and a nice booklet with an essay by Nell Casey, who edited The Journals of Spalding Gray

But nope, it's another essential release, because Criterion has uncovered and included another lost Spalding Gray monologue!  This time it's Sex and Death To the Age 14 (I used to have a copy of this one in paperback... in fact, I probably still do), recorded in the same year (1982) and location as A Personal History.  And like that one, it's a more simply recorded performance; but for Gray fans, even if you could take or leave And Everything Is Going Fine, you've got to get this release.  All together, it gives us a total of seven Gray films - the complete collection.  Of course, if you no longer have a VCR, you may need to start a letter writing campaign to HBO to not be stuck at six.  You'll have my support.