MovieChat Forums > Days of Wine and Roses (1963) Discussion > Disappointing audio commentary

Disappointing audio commentary

posted 9 years ago by DC1977
7 replies | jump to latest

There isn't much insight and there are long pauses in the commentary.

The reason given by Blake Edwards was that he hadn't seen the film since 1962 and wanted to watch the film and listen to the dialogue.

Then watch the film again before doing the commentary if you're so eager to follow the story. Duh!

But then again Blake Edwards doesn't come across as the sharpest tool in the box.

It takes him several minutes to realise the film is in black and white!!!

And someone has to explain to him how audio commentaries work. He doesn't have the common sense to realise that people watch the film first and listen to the audio commentary later.

Jeez....

[–] DJMan-51 8 years ago

Edwards certainly could have invested some time in preparation. I hope they didn't pay him for that commentary.

[–] pjmcgill142 8 years ago

William Friedkin's commentary on The Exorcist is still sets the standard for me. He simply describes what is on the screen... for the whole movie.

[–] bradford-1 8 years ago

Just watched the film with Edwards' commentary. I was appalled. Why didn't anyone tell him he was supposed to rewatch the film BEFORE commenting? Made me appreciate a guy like Scorsese, who would've inundated the viewers with anecdotes, backstories and analysis!

May I bone your kipper, Mademoiselle?

[–] DJMan-51 8 years ago

Friedkin did a decent commentary for an earlier Exorcist DVD release.

The lousy one was for the "Version-You-Never-Saw" reconstruction. I suspect that Friedkin was annoyed that this one, largely W.P. Blatty's preferred cut, was better than his (except for the silly CGI faces that had been added).

[–] pjmcgill142 8 years ago

Hey, thanks for that information. I can see what's going on, but I don't know why someone would cut their own nose off... Just don't do the commentary! Friedkin's commentary was soporific. I was so disappointed with what he had to offer. I'll have a look for an earlier version.

Speaking of commentaries, there's the Goonies, which isn't too bad. Corey Feldman (literally) walking out half way through the movie was surprising...

[–] IsoldeJaneHolland 8 years ago

pjmcgill142
» Fri Apr 15 2016 06:03:48
IMDb member since May 2014
William Friedkin's commentary on The Exorcist is still sets the standard for me. He simply describes what is on the screen... for the whole movie.

I'd like to hear that, but first I have to summon up the courage to watch the bloody thing again!!







[–] pjmcgill142 8 years ago

Hey, if it's that close, don't do it! Like any pedant who tells you some particular issue 'ruined the movie for me'. This will ruin the movie for you.