The Criterion Collection

[gbm82]

Originally Posted by jw007

I always view Criterion's choices of releasing certain films as needing to be "politically correct" for the current state of American society. Roman Polanski as a person has been demonized along with Woody Allen, but I still love his films. The Pianist is one movie that I've been waiting to see come out as a Region A blu-ray release, but I doubt it will happen anytime soon.

I think Criterion is hypocritical though, if they are indeed "trying" to be politically correct, because they still have yet to release more than a handful of films directed by African American directors (I'm alluding to the original NY Times article from last year - https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/...americans.html)

If Roman Polanski no longer has a place in the Criterion Collection, that's their decision of course. Although they are still hypocritical if that's the case since there are already 6 films of his in the library. Perhaps The Pianist has licensing issues, and that's why it isn't able to get released on blu-ray anywhere in the U.S.

If criterion was concerned with being "PC" they never would have released any Polanski films. He was arrested way back in 1977...

[Professor Echo]

Originally Posted by dwk

Claudine, being a Fox title, would have been licensed a number of years ago. So it's release had nothing to do with that article (also, I think the film was directed by a white guy.)

You're right, but it might have been fast tracked to release because of current events. Although that doesn't negate your contention that it was likely in their holdings for awhile given that it's Fox. I'm guessing that they were interested in it because the director had been a victim of the blacklist. Though directed by a white man it's still possible that they viewed a quick release of a film with this particular subject matter as a kind of scrambling appeasement.

I tend to be a very cynical person, especially when it comes to marketing and elements of public relations, but your points are well taken and I hasten to add that I do like the movie very much. I've posted before that I would not mind at all if Criterion took more occasional chances on middle of the road movies just to shake things up a bit.

[dkelly26666]

Originally Posted by gbm82

If criterion was concerned with being "PC" they never would have released any Polanski films. He was arrested way back in 1977...

Actually, no, that only highlights their hypocrisy.

There is a new wave of political correctness sweeping everywhere just the past few years (primarily since 2016), and companies are suddenly expected to adhere to these newest demands.

Obviously, Criterion has known of Polanski's charges since 1977, Woody Allen's accusations since the early 90s, Lars von Trier's difficult reputation with women since forever, and Bertolucci/Brando's behavior since "Last Tango" was new, etc. etc. .... They also haven't had many black filmmakers in the Collection , etc. etc. .... Yet, they had Polanski films, von Trier films, etc. in the Collection, yes.

Now, they won't touch anything from these guys. They obviously didn't have a problem with them before. Just like the Academy, giving Polanski an Oscar and a standing ovation, 25 years after his crime. But with the new wave of PC, now he's been kicked out of the Academy membership, and Criterion passed on "The Tenant", a film they'd been trying to get for decades before this.

This clearly illustrates that their sudden attack of 'conscience' isn't anything other than a commercial-driven decision to appease their critics. Can't have a bunch of other Manhattan rich kid hipsters thinking that this group of rich kid Manhattan hipsters isn't 'woke' enough.

[Professor Echo]

Originally Posted by gbm82

If criterion was concerned with being "PC" they never would have released any Polanski films. He was arrested way back in 1977...

No, not a valid argument because Polanski was pretty much given a free pass for years after the incident. It's only been newer generations and concurrent incidents that have brought about reevaluations of such past transgressions. While there have always been justifiable scorn for Polanski in some quarters, the film industry on the whole chose to ignore it. This started to change slightly in the 90's and has built up momentum ever since. In our current state I doubt very much Criterion will release anymore Polanski films.

With the few Polanski films I actually like, I am able to separate the art from the artist. With other artists, for example John Landis, I can no longer differentiate the two and I choose to boycott anything they are involved in. As for Woody Allen, I don't think any of us know exactly what the truth is and probably never will, but for the most part I gave up on him a long time ago simply because I got tired of the world view in his films.

Back on point, as I posted before, I too don't think Criterion has been all that PC over the years, but as far the future goes, not just for them, but so many aspects of our culture, I'm adopting a wait and see attitude. If we get to a point where Criterion will no longer release a film like STAGECOACH for its negative portrayal of native Americans, then I will get worried.

[koberulz]

Originally Posted by dkelly26666

Actually, no, that only highlights their hypocrisy.

Realising you have previously been wrong is not hypocrisy, it's maturity.

[dkelly26666]

But, what timing to 'mature', right?

AFTER Page Six does a cover story on you. And in this current climate of the past couple of years. Please.

That's not realizing anything. That's saying, "I don't care until it starts to hurt my business interests."

In most cases, I really haven't a problem with separating art from the artist. Many of the artists of eras past were insane or monstrous. They still created great art.

That's what I see Criterion as having done in the past. I don't see them releasing "Rosemary's Baby" as being supportive of underage rape. I think that the people of Criterion would likely be appalled by that real life action by the man. But, they released the film, because that's their business and it's a GREAT film.

What they're doing now, however, reeks of disingenuous compliance. And perhaps a bit of typical liberal self-aggrandizing.

They would at least seem more sincere if they weren't associating their company with those troubled artists, in the first place. But they DID, for a very long time.

Now, I don't see them as becoming 'woke',to use the hipster term, so much as I see them trying to make themselves look good and trendy.

[MifuneFan]

Originally Posted by dwk

Claudine, being a Fox title, would have been licensed a number of years ago. So it's release had nothing to do with that article (also, I think the film was directed by a white guy.)

Also, it should be pointed out that Claudine was announced July 15th. The NY Times article in question was published on August 20th.

[gbm82]

Criterion hasn't released a Truffaut film in a few years, I wonder what political reason is behind that?!!?

[DukeTogo84]

If Criterion has the Pianist, I hope they pass it along another label like Shout. The Pianist is a pretty important film and the "woke" culture should not be able to block such an amazing film from finding a new audience.

[DukeTogo84]

Originally Posted by dkelly26666

I'm telling you, if you go down this road, there's going to be a lot of films, art, books, music, etc. that will simply become impossible to come by, down the line.

We're one step away from building the bonfires.

Yeah, Burn needs a release as well. Personally, the whole "woke" culture has gotten to the point of insanity. Comics can't make fun of anything anymore without having a label thrown at them.

Actually, I'm going to stop my rant because some good has come of the recent culture, but when it comes to the point where we can't watch films because they were products of their time, it's a pretty sad thing.

As for the Pianist, I can only hope it gets a release.

[gbm82]

Originally Posted by dkelly26666

Nope. Not relevant.

Because I'm talking about films by people that they used to release lots of things by, that they are now flatly rejecting works by. They didn't mind those people's issues, before.

It's all a bunch of conjecture, you don't know why certain movies haven't been released.... but whatever...

[Rayjg]

Originally Posted by dkelly26666

Well, they also have Gillo Pontecorvo's "Burn!" ("Queimada!"). They've HAD it for years, and a new restoration was completed some time ago.

But, they've been sitting on that one, too. Not because of anything to do with that film except that it has Marlon Brando in it.

They've been proceeding very cautiously with him. They released "A Dry White Season" a year and a half after the whole 'Brando was a rapist' thing got going, and they didn't mention his being in the film in the synopsis, artwork, or marketing for that release, really playing it down, even though he's the best thing about that film, and received an Academy Award nomination for it. Then, they last year upgraded "The Fugitive Kind", a title they'd already had in release from a long time ago. So, it's kind of been a 'toes in the water' type of approach. But, I do hope that they'll release "Burn!", eventually. Kino Lorber and Shout have both confirmed that Criterion has had that title for quite some time. I had hoped for years that they'd release "Last Tango in Paris", LOL, and now that's DEFINITELY never happening. Thank goodness I still have the MGM release.

When Bertolucci was still alive, he'd confirmed that he'd been working with them on releases for "Before the Revolution" and "The Sheltering Sky". I'm guessing those won't happen , now, either.

And they'd tried for years to get "The Tenant" and Paramount wasn't giving it up, then. Now, Paramount was ready to give it up, Criterion passed on it.

They also previously had a good relationship with Zentropa and Lars, but have passed on a couple of his titles, now.

I'm telling you, if you go down this road, there's going to be a lot of films, art, books, music, etc. that will simply become impossible to come by, down the line.

We're one step away from building the bonfires.

First time I’ve heard that about Brando. I did read that he slept with Richard Pryor

[dvining]

The other side of this whole thing is sales.

What would sell better? The Pianist or Chop Shop?

They obviously aren't driven purely by sales, providing room in their overall budget to put out smaller films that their producers may be more passionate about but can't guarantee a great return. That, however, has to be balanced out by film releases that do sell well.

Maybe the box sets are selling well enough that they can just fill the calendar up with passion projects, but I kind of doubt that they would sell well enough to completely prop up the company as a whole like that. They're still going to need sellers on the individual title side as well.

Criterion could receive bad press from outlets that Criterion cares about, along with Twitter yelling from a handful of people, for releasing The Pianist, but would it sell?

[Cholly]

Considering Criterion is still putting Polanski and Woody Allen movies (and many other films starring or made by people with accusations about them) onto the Criterion Channel, I would say all of this is speculation at best. The younger more outspoken types from their audience would definitely be much more inclined to be signed to the channel than collecting on disk, so you would imagine if they were so worried about that that they would avoid uploading their stuff to the channel.

[Gacivory]

This conversation seems a bit pointless. Everyone is speculating about Criterion’s opinions and no one has any definitive information. I don’t know that might just be me. Also these boards don’t seem the most suited to a nuanced discussion.

[Dubstar]

Originally Posted by jjhunsecker

I still suspect that criterion has the rights to "The Defiant Ones" and "West Side Story" (probably tying that last one to the release of the Spielberg remake).

And please please please release "The Last Picture Show" as a standalone BD. I don't need that BBS set, but i DO need "Picture Show"

as much as it'd be nice to have a deluxe bluray of 'West Side Story' from Criterion - I'm hoping for a physical 4K UHD edition since it's Dolby Vision on Vudu.

[dkelly26666]

OK, switching gears...


I just completed watching "The Irishman" for the TWELFTH time, LOL.

Thanks, Criterion!

[RCRochester]

Originally Posted by dkelly26666

Well, they also have Gillo Pontecorvo's "Burn!" ("Queimada!"). They've HAD it for years, and a new restoration was completed some time ago.

But, they've been sitting on that one, too. Not because of anything to do with that film except that it has Marlon Brando in it.

They've been proceeding very cautiously with him. They released "A Dry White Season" a year and a half after the whole 'Brando was a rapist' thing got going, and they didn't mention his being in the film in the synopsis, artwork, or marketing for that release, really playing it down, even though he's the best thing about that film, and received an Academy Award nomination for it. Then, they last year upgraded "The Fugitive Kind", a title they'd already had in release from a long time ago. So, it's kind of been a 'toes in the water' type of approach. But, I do hope that they'll release "Burn!", eventually.

Uhm, that's a bit spurious. You claim they haven't released Burn because of Brando, then actually cite two recent Criterion releases of films in which he appears then go on to downplay those releases as a "toes in the water" type approach.

I mean, it's possible that they aren't releasing certain things because of the controversies of certain people involved, or it could just be purely coincidental. It took them years to get around to releasing Leave Her To Heaven and there was no controversy involved with that. Sometimes things just work out that way.

[Dailyan]

Originally Posted by Dubstar

as much as it'd be nice to have a deluxe bluray of 'West Side Story' from Criterion - I'm hoping for a physical 4K UHD edition since it's Dolby Vision on Vudu.

I’d be fine with either as long as the opening credits are fixed, keep the four track stereo from the MGM Blu, and have the inclusion of the 6 track mix that wasn’t put on the MGM Blu.

[Rayjg]

I saw Burn! at the Film Forum Morricone program 13-14 years ago and really enjoyed it. I can’t remember if it was the english version. It was fascinating to see Brando play the antagonist. Maybe they can add a trigger warning to the beginning of the film like Gone with the Wind but the film itself is quite woke from what I remember.