The Criterion Collection

[theater dreamer]

It's the year 2017, isn't it? Did somebody turn my Ford into a time machine when I wasn't looking???

I love it when big time executives feel it necessary to impose their own morality on the consumer. The PC police are everywhere now, and it's sickening.

I'm glad I just bought my copy of The Birth of a Nation. Won't be long before somebody is raising a bigger stink than ever before about its portrayal of African Americans, and the romanticizing of the KKK--then pushing to have it outlawed. Think it can't happen? How many Civil War-era statues are being taken down? We're white-washing history because the reality of our past is too uncomfortable for some. What these overzealous nitwits don't understand is that without evidence of past mistakes, we are condemned to repeat those mistakes.

It is a shocking film to watch, even a century after Griffith shot it. That doesn't change the fact that it's an historically significant film that is, and absolutely should be studied in film school. Technically, it pushed the art form forward in leaps and bounds. And, incidentally, it also inspired countless African Americans to go into film as a career.

Originally Posted by 20th Century Boy

Such an utterly ridiculous reason, and unfortunately a very believable one.

Originally Posted by mja345

I believe Guillermo del Toro has mentioned that "The Devils" is being buried by some powerful execs at WB. He has some pretty interesting comments about it.

[Poya]

Birth of a Nation is Griffith’s greatest film. I have no reservations saying that. Without it, film would be a drastically different medium. It angers me how much disrespect it gets nowadays.

[duggie walker]

Originally Posted by theater dreamer

I'm glad I just bought my copy of The Birth of a Nation. Won't be long before somebody is raising a bigger stink than ever before about its portrayal of African Americans, and the romanticizing of the KKK--then pushing to have it outlawed. Think it can't happen? How many Civil War-era statues are being taken down? We're white-washing history because the reality of our past is too uncomfortable for some. What these overzealous nitwits don't understand is that without evidence of past mistakes, we are condemned to repeat those mistakes.

And, incidentally, it also inspired countless African Americans to go into film as a career.

Come on - the statues controversy isn't analogous: BIRTH OF A NATION isn't being shown every night on Network TV. It's freely available but every edition includes material that puts it in context.

The sensible argument, made by most, is that Civil War statues should be moved to museums that can place them in similar context, rather than having them on public display which tends to be reserved for that which we wish to celebrate.

I'm caucasian and I suspect you are too. I don't know that we get to decide how offended African-Americans should be by seeing statues that seem to celebrate men who enslaved and killed their (not so distant) relatives.

And your last point is pretty dubious too: BIRTH OF A NATION is undoubtedly important in terms of technique but a) I doubt it inspired any more African Americans than any other great film and I doubt that you could prove that it did and b) the whole point is that there aren't COUNTLESS African Americans with film careers; there's proportionately very few and that's a situation that's only begun to change in the last couple of decades. The racist ethos at the heart of BIRTH OF A NATION has held back far more people than its technical mastery has ever inspired.

edit: By the way, that story about the rampant Catholic in WB blocking THE DEVILS' release has been around for over a decade now. Studios have a revolving door when it comes to execs and I seriously doubt this is still true, if it ever was.

[ravenus]

Originally Posted by CineSicko

The word is that one of the guys who runs the show at Warner is a devout Catholic who finds THE DEVILS to be an attack on Catholicism that should be buried forever. BFI must have offered a lot of money to get the rights for their DVD release several years ago. I guess the only hope for the film is if the Warner exec who is blocking THE DEVILS becomes an atheist. A shame, because it really is a great film, and in my opinion is Ken Russell's magnum opus.

Rumor has it that the BFI put it out on DVD only because they were refused access by Warner to the uncut version of the film (or the other way round, Warner gave them the complete film but insisted on a DVD release, but that makes less sense). I would assume that Criterion would not be interested in releasing the film unless they had access to the Director's Cut.

[theater dreamer]

The statues weren't being shown on the network news every night until somebody decided to make their place in history a focal point. There are two up in Denton, near the campus of my college, and I walked right by them every day to class-I never paid any attention to them. Somehow, they survived the Civil Rights Movement of the 50s and 60s, but it's only now, more than a half a century later, that these are being taken down. It's hardly a stretch to believe that someone could start pointing to films that display overt racism. It's already started, in fact. Example? A Memphis theater has cancelled its annual showing of Gone With the Wind because of concerns that the film is insensitive.

And yes, The Birth of a Nation did influence African Americans. Per the back of the blu-ray case from Kino:

"The film also inspired African Americans to move into film making as a way to offer alternative images and stories."

I've also read other articles which seems to support the blurb on the back of the blu-ray release. One such example, from a Films in Review article about Kino's Pioneers of African American Cinema:

"The most famous African American filmmaker of the pre World War II era was author/homesteader Oscar Micheaux. Only three of his twenty-two silent films survive. Micheaux often made his films as an African American answer to popular white films. In Griffith’s Birth of a Nation, a mulatto (a person with mixed race parents) is the immoral villain. In Micheaux’s Within Our Gates (1920), which survives and is in this collection, a mulatto woman is the strong-minded heroine."

Was it the only film of the era to inspire African Americans to explore working in the medium as a career? Of course not. But it would stand to reason that as a benchmark movie in the history of cinema, and one of the most controversial films ever made, it would invigorate nascent African Americans directors.

Originally Posted by duggie walker

Come on - the statues controversy isn't analogous: BIRTH OF A NATION isn't being shown every night on Network TV. It's freely available but every edition includes material that puts it in context.

The sensible argument, made by most, is that Civil War statues should be moved to museums that can place them in similar context, rather than having them on public display which tends to be reserved for that which we wish to celebrate.

I'm caucasian and I suspect you are too. I don't know that we get to decide how offended African-Americans should be by seeing statues that seem to celebrate men who enslaved and killed their (not so distant) relatives.

And your last point is pretty dubious too: BIRTH OF A NATION is undoubtedly important in terms of technique but a) I doubt it inspired any more African Americans than any other great film and I doubt that you could prove that it did and b) the whole point is that there aren't COUNTLESS African Americans with film careers; there's proportionately very few and that's a situation that's only begun to change in the last couple of decades. The racist ethos at the heart of BIRTH OF A NATION has held back far more people than its technical mastery has ever inspired.

edit: By the way, that story about the rampant Catholic in WB blocking THE DEVILS' release has been around for over a decade now. Studios have a revolving door when it comes to execs and I seriously doubt this is still true, if it ever was.

[20th Century Boy]

Originally Posted by theater dreamer

It's the year 2017, isn't it? Did somebody turn my Ford into a time machine when I wasn't looking???

I love it when big time executives feel it necessary to impose their own morality on the consumer. The PC police are everywhere now, and it's sickening.

I'm glad I just bought my copy of The Birth of a Nation. Won't be long before somebody is raising a bigger stink than ever before about its portrayal of African Americans, and the romanticizing of the KKK--then pushing to have it outlawed. Think it can't happen? How many Civil War-era statues are being taken down? We're white-washing history because the reality of our past is too uncomfortable for some. What these overzealous nitwits don't understand is that without evidence of past mistakes, we are condemned to repeat those mistakes.

It is a shocking film to watch, even a century after Griffith shot it. That doesn't change the fact that it's an historically significant film that is, and absolutely should be studied in film school. Technically, it pushed the art form forward in leaps and bounds. And, incidentally, it also inspired countless African Americans to go into film as a career.

Point taken, but my lament is more about how the personal grudges of powerful producers can bury good art.

[Scottie]

Yeah we're not going to have this conversation. Thanks.

[CineSicko]

I wonder if Criterion has any interest in doing more post-BLOWUP Antonioni movies (e.g. ZABRISKIE POINT and THE PASSENGER). A BD of THE PASSENGER was announced years ago but was cancelled. HD presentations of both films (or either of them) would be nice.

[DeyoreW]

Anyone know when Criterion's next FLASH SALE will be? It's usually on a Tuesday towards the end of September / Early October beginning at noon.

Obviously not today now, but maybe next week?

[Scottie]

Not sure if it's been mentioned yet, but the Janus website lists Night of the Living Dead, The Other Side of Hope, and The Passion of Joan of Arc under "Latest Releases".

All three should be announced for Blu-ray in the coming months.

[llj]

Originally Posted by CineSicko

I wonder if Criterion has any interest in doing more post-BLOWUP Antonioni movies (e.g. ZABRISKIE POINT and THE PASSENGER). A BD of THE PASSENGER was announced years ago but was cancelled. HD presentations of both films (or either of them) would be nice.

Jack Nicholson still holds the rights to The Passenger I think? He's very stingy and protective of it I heard. It took forever and much hesitation on his part to agree to the DVD release.

I'd love love Zabriskie Point on BD. The DVD came out at the beginning of the BD era so I held off on it in hopes that it would be released later on BD. Still hasn't happened.

[C.mcbraggins]

Originally Posted by llj

Jack Nicholson still holds the rights to The Passenger I think? He's very stingy and protective of it I heard. It took forever and much hesitation on his part to agree to the DVD release.

I'd love love Zabriskie Point on BD. The DVD came out at the beginning of the BD era so I held off on it in hopes that it would be released later on BD. Still hasn't happened.

Sony Pictures Classics owns US distribution rights to The Passenger, but Nicholson supposedly has the final say. I believe what happened a few years ago was Criterion tried to get it, but Sony and Nicholson already were in talks with giving it to another label (probably one that starts with two Ts) and their decision was final.

I do see Zabriskie Point coming from Criterion, since Warner doesn't really think much about that title, given its obscurity. I could also see Criterion bringing out Tropic Of Cancer (owned by Paramount), another bizarre film like Zabriskie that came out the same year and was never even released on DVD.

[CineSicko]

Originally Posted by C.mcbraggins

I could also see Criterion bringing out Tropic Of Cancer (owned by Paramount), another bizarre film like Zabriskie that came out the same year and was never even released on DVD.

Actually, there's a very nice DVD from Olive Films. I love the movie (and believe it to be director Joseph Strick's finest effort), and would greedily buy a Blu-Ray of it, but I can't imagine Criterion touching it. I'd be ecstatic if they did, but it might be just a bit too potentially offensive for them. That dialogue is pretty rough!

[C.mcbraggins]

Originally Posted by CineSicko

Actually, there's a very nice DVD from Olive Films. I love the movie (and believe it to be director Joseph Strick's finest effort), and would greedily buy a Blu-Ray of it, but I can't imagine Criterion touching it. I'd be ecstatic if they did, but it might be just a bit too potentially offensive for them. That dialogue is pretty rough!

Had no idea Olive put it out on DVD, and i've never seen it anywhere but then I only saw bits and pieces of TOC on TubiTV.

EDIT: That DVD came out in 2010 (no BD though) and I see prices of $13 and 40 average, so it could be well OOP like Ticks (but that one was due to a rights issue on Paramount's end) and chances are Criterion is working on a new HD transfer as Olive's release was DVD only because Paramount's element was no less SD.

[RCRochester]

Originally Posted by C.mcbraggins

Sony Pictures Classics owns US distribution rights to The Passenger, but Nicholson supposedly has the final say. I believe what happened a few years ago was Criterion tried to get it, but Sony and Nicholson already were in talks with giving it to another label (probably one that starts with two Ts) and their decision was final.

I do see Zabriskie Point coming from Criterion, since Warner doesn't really think much about that title, given its obscurity. I could also see Criterion bringing out Tropic Of Cancer (owned by Paramount), another bizarre film like Zabriskie that came out the same year and was never even released on DVD.

I wonder why that other label, whoever it actually was, hasn't released it yet.

[C.mcbraggins]

Originally Posted by RCRochester

I wonder why that other label, whoever it actually was, hasn't released it yet.

It's probably Twilight Time and they're waiting for a better HD master to come from Sony, as the one made for the DVD was ether SD only or TT wants a 4k transfer so ppl won't endlessly ***** about the PQ. But then Sony needs to get Jack Nicholson involved with approving things in order for a new transfer and a BD licence at all, which is probably gonna take a while given the difficulties with getting Nicholson to approve the DVD release.

[CineSicko]

Originally Posted by C.mcbraggins

Had no idea Olive put it out on DVD, and i've never seen it anywhere but then I only saw bits and pieces of TOC on TubiTV.

EDIT: That DVD came out in 2010 (no BD though) and I see prices of $13 and 40 average, so it could be well OOP like Ticks (but that one was due to a rights issue on Paramount's end) and chances are Criterion is working on a new HD transfer as Olive's release was DVD only because Paramount's element was no less SD.

I think I've seen TROPIC OF CANCER about twenty times. I bought it when it finally hit VHS in '94 (thanks, Paramount... Better late than never) and showed it to everyone I knew. That DVD is a major upgrade from the tape (as one would imagine), and it wouldn't surprise me if it were struck from an HD master of some kind.

Again, it would have to be a very cold day in hell for Criterion to touch that movie (or any Strick film, for that matter), but if Olive has an old 1080 master and decided to throw that onto a mediocre BD, I'd be thrilled beyond words.

By the way, if you're interested, some other Strick-directed winners worth mentioning are: THE BALCONY (1963), the horribly underrated ULYSSES (1967), ROAD MOVIE (1974) and A PORTRAIT OF THE ARTIST AS A YOUNG MAN (1977).

[Cremildo]

Originally Posted by C.mcbraggins

It's probably Twilight Time and they're waiting for a better HD master to come from Sony, as the one made for the DVD was ether SD only or TT wants a 4k transfer so ppl won't endlessly ***** about the PQ.

Yeah, those damn "people" and their *****ing! How dare they demand a decent picture quality in exchange for their money!

[C.mcbraggins]

Originally Posted by CineSicko

I think I've seen TROPIC OF CANCER about twenty times. I bought it when it finally hit VHS in '94 (thanks, Paramount... Better late than never) and showed it to everyone I knew. That DVD is a major upgrade from the tape (as one would imagine), and it wouldn't surprise me if it were struck from an HD master of some kind.

Again, it would have to be a very cold day in hell for Criterion to touch that movie (or any Strick film, for that matter), but if Olive has an old 1080 master and decided to throw that onto a mediocre BD, I'd be thrilled beyond words.

From what I saw on TubiTV, the "HD" looked like an upconverted SD master made for the DVD glory days but never saw the light from Paramount, which is why Olive released it DVD only if the master was indeed SD only.

[CinemaBlu]

Originally Posted by belcherman

Speaking of Scorcese, what are the chances of Criterion getting The Age of Innocence?

Originally Posted by MifuneFan

I could have sworn I read rumors of them getting it, but I couldn't find it when I just searched. Next year is the film's 25th anniversary, so I think odds are better for it to come out then, either directly from Sony, or a boutique label like CC, or Twilight Time.

There are several region free releases from Sony that have been out for a couple years:

https://www.blu-ray.com/search/?quic...n=bluraymovies

I also remember hearing rumors when it was restored a few years ago.

I think TCM is showing the film this weekend (along with the earlier adaptation.) I'm hoping this means that Criterion has licensed it as well.