The Criterion Collection

[jkoffman]

Originally Posted by regeyer

I agree. Getting multiple opinions is the best way.

I recently upgraded to a 4k UHD screen and I bought Blade Runner (UHD). The only other copy I have is the 2007 HD DVD. I should identify that the HD DVD is excellent. But I expected the 4K UHD to be much better.

I was able to compare them by playing both at the same time, and switch the inputs. I was quite surprised. Yes, the UHD was better, but only slightly.

Some movies clearly show an upgrade. The Ten Commandments, for example, looks much better on 4K UHD than the Blu-Ray. There's no question. But with Blade Runner I was expecting much more.

This website’s review of Blade Runner UHD:

Compared to the dated Blu-ray, Blade Runner's UHD presentation can't help but look better, but it's more than better—it's astonishing.

[SuperFlyHighGuy]

Not to pile on, but I also went straight from the Blade Runner HD-DVD to the UHD and the latter is such a massive improvement, it’s a revelation. I loved that HD-DVD set, watched it probably a dozen times, but the 4K disc is heaven.

I agree though that not every UHD is that big of an upgrade. I have ones that I’ve been disappointed with also, so it’s not just a magic wand.

[regeyer]

Originally Posted by SuperFlyHighGuy

Not to pile on, but I also went straight from the Blade Runner HD-DVD to the UHD and the latter is such a massive improvement, it’s a revelation. I loved that HD-DVD set, watched it probably a dozen times, but the 4K disc is heaven.

I agree though that not every UHD is that big of an upgrade. I have ones that I’ve been disappointed with also, so it’s not just a magic wand.

And I'm happy that you see that. My son and I didn't see a huge improvement. Admittedly, we only watched a few minutes, flipping back and fourth between the inputs. Was there a difference? Yes. But not drastic.

But, like I said before, I saw a huge difference with The Ten Commandments.

[Scottie]

Janus Update

The Executioner (1963, Luis García Berlanga) - 404'd page
https://www.janusfilms.com/films/2053

Forever a Woman (1955, Kinuyo Tanaka)
https://www.janusfilms.com/films/2054

The Moon Has Risen (1955, Kinuyo Tanaka)
https://www.janusfilms.com/films/2055

Love Under the Crucifix (1962, Kinuyo Tanaka)
https://www.janusfilms.com/films/2056

[Vigojean]

Originally Posted by HipsterTrash

So announcements next Tuesday, huh?

Hopefully it’s something good

I don’t know for how long Woody Allen is going to be shunned, but some of his movies really deserve the Criterion treatment, especially Hannah and Her Sisters and Crimes and Misdemeanors. I recently saw Everyone Says I Love You and it’s great

[jw007]

Originally Posted by Vigojean

Hopefully it’s something good

I don’t know for how long Woody Allen is going to be shunned, but some of his movies really deserve the Criterion treatment, especially Hannah and Her Sisters and Crimes and Misdemeanors. I recently saw Everyone Says I Love You and it’s great

Of all the directors least likely to get the blu-ray Criterion treatment, I would put Woody Allen at the top of the list followed by James Cameron and Clint Eastwood. (Side note: Woody Allen's Annie Hall was released on Criterion laserdisc).

Of all the directors who have not yet received the Criterion treatment, I would bet my blu-ray copy of The Third Man that one of these major directors will be in there within the next 5-10 years:

John Carpenter (licensed by Shout Factory)
Hayao Miyazaki (licensed by Studio Ghibli)
Werner Herzog (licensed by Shout Factory)
Bela Tarr (licensed by Luxbox)
King Vidor (licensed by Warner Bros.)
Gaspar Noé (licensed by Arrow?)
Darren Aronofsky (licensed by Paramount?)
F.W. Murnau (licensed by Kino Lorber)
Zhang Yimou (licensed by MGM?)
Denis Villeneuve (licensed by Warner Bros.)
Quentin Tarantino (licensed by Miramax)
William Friedkin (licensed by Paramount?)
Peter Greenaway (licensed by Kino Lorber)
Harmony Korine (licensed by Lionsgate & Warner Bros.)

If anyone here can verify for me if I have the correct distributors for the directors listed above, I'd appreciate it! It took me an hour of researching online.

[ShellOilJunior]

Originally Posted by jw007

Of all the directors least likely to get the blu-ray Criterion treatment, I would put Woody Allen at the top of the list followed by James Cameron and Clint Eastwood. (Side note: Woody Allen's Annie Hall was released on Criterion laserdisc).

Of all the directors who have not yet received the Criterion treatment, I would bet my blu-ray copy of The Third Man that one of these major directors will be in there within the next 5-10 years:

John Carpenter (licensed by Shout Factory)
Hayao Miyazaki (licensed by Studio Ghibli)
Werner Herzog (licensed by Shout Factory)
Bela Tarr (licensed by Luxbox)
King Vidor (licensed by Warner Bros.)
Gaspar Noé (licensed by Arrow?)
Darren Aronofsky (licensed by Paramount?)
F.W. Murnau (licensed by Kino Lorber)
Zhang Yimou (licensed by MGM?)
Denis Villeneuve (licensed by Warner Bros.)
Quentin Tarantino (licensed by Miramax)
William Friedkin (licensed by Paramount?)
Peter Greenaway (licensed by Kino Lorber)
Harmony Korine (licensed by Lionsgate & Warner Bros.)

If anyone here can verify for me if I have the correct distributors for the directors listed above, I'd appreciate it! It took me an hour of researching online.

Of those directors mentioned above, the only rumor I've read is a potential UHD release for Pulp Fiction. I don't know where that rumor comes from but it would be terrific if true.

[koberulz]

Originally Posted by Vigojean

Hopefully it’s something good

I don’t know for how long Woody Allen is going to be shunned, but some of his movies really deserve the Criterion treatment, especially Hannah and Her Sisters and Crimes and Misdemeanors. I recently saw Everyone Says I Love You and it’s great

Allen won't allow special features, and Criterion pride themselves on extras, so none of his films will ever be in the collection.

[yoloswegmaster420]

Originally Posted by ShellOilJunior

Of those directors mentioned above, the only rumor I've read is a potential UHD release for Pulp Fiction. I don't know where that rumor comes from but it would be terrific if true.

That rumor came from Linguini, and they were already exposed as being a troll.

[ShellOilJunior]

Originally Posted by yoloswegmaster420

That rumor came from Linguini, and they were already exposed as being a troll.

I should've known Rigatoni was behind it. Curses!

[Mushi Minion]

Originally Posted by koberulz

Allen won't allow special features, and Criterion pride themselves on extras, so none of his films will ever be in the collection.

Did he get beat-up by a Behind-the-Scenes Featurette as a child?

[Gacivory]

Originally Posted by Mushi Minion

Did he get beat-up by a Behind-the-Scenes Featurette as a child?

Have you seen him? Who hasn’t beaten up that nerd! But really, he thinks the movie should speak for itself.

[jshaide]

Lynch is sorta similar, no, in that he doesn’t allow scholarly features?

[Gacivory]

Originally Posted by jshaide

Lynch is sorta similar, no, in that he doesn’t allow scholarly features?

Looking at the Criterion releases, there are still features allowed and deleted scenes. So I don’t know what scholarly he would vet, but it still seems like Lynch is fine with Extras included.

[MifuneFan]

Originally Posted by Gacivory

Looking at the Criterion releases, there are still features allowed and deleted scenes. So I don’t know what scholarly he would vet, but it still seems like Lynch is fine with Extras included.

Bring up chapters to him on the other hand and he'll blow his top. His hair was actually normal before someone brought it up in fact.

David Lynch gets mad once again - YouTube

[jshaide]

Originally Posted by Gacivory

Looking at the Criterion releases, there are still features allowed and deleted scenes. So I don’t know what scholarly he would vet, but it still seems like Lynch is fine with Extras included.

“Sorta similar” followed by a restriction. I’m talking about visual essays, historian commentaries, etc etc. I think Lynch is put off by anything that offers a potentially “go to” interpretation.

[dvining]

Originally Posted by jshaide

“Sorta similar” followed by a restriction. I’m talking about visual essays, historian commentaries, etc etc. I think Lynch is put off by anything that offers a potentially “go to” interpretation.

I think his problem with commentaries is similar to chapter breaks.

When watching the movie, you watch the movie much like you don't skip around to different parts. You don't listen to someone else or watch it out of order.

[cgpublic]

Originally Posted by regeyer

One of my favorite Criterion releases is The Red Shoes. I own the Blu-Ray and have been considering the new 4K UHD release. But after watching the below video on YouTube I am seriously wondering whether the upgrade would be worth it. The video shows very little, if any, difference between the two. And, for the record, I am watching this YouTube video on my Sony A80J 65" OLED.

So, who here has seen the new 4K release? Is this YouTube video accurate? Or does the 4K release look much better than the Blu-Ray?

Originally Posted by Lordy

The upgrade decision from Criterion Blu-rays to Criterion 4K is a much tougher sell. The Red Shoes comparison you posted is a good case in point. A minimal gain from Blu to 4K from what I can see and just isn't worth the added expense. I think this will be the case most of the time especially in much older films such as The Red Shoes. There's only so much that can be done with films this old that weren't shot with more modern equipment. That's why I've decided to be very selective with these Criterion 4K upgrades. Additionally, the initial Blu purchase would never be watched again since the upgrade copy comes with a Blu-ray copy in addition to the 4K. To my way of thinking that's a waste of money also. And then there's the issue of shelf space.

I've already decided to pass on the Red Shoes upgrade as well as A Hard Day's Night, but Le Cercle Rouge may be a different story. The only exception I've made so far is Mulholland Dr. On releases such as The Piano I'll shell out the extra cash for the 4K/Blu-ray combo edition if they are new to the Criterion roster.

Well, who didn't see that coming? Five years of endless whining about Criterion not releasing UHD, and a few weeks into the game posters are already questioning the value of double/triple-dipping.

Originally Posted by koberulz

STOP LOOKING AT SDR YOUTUBE VIDEOS TO DETERMINE HOW WORTHY A 4K HDR UPGRADE IS. We've been over this, people.

A full decade of posters circling static screenshots while barking like a pack of dogs chasing their own tails, and someone has the audacity to suggest that YT videos, in motion no less, are not representative of the actual viewing experience and related value of upgrading. Good for you.

Originally Posted by jw007

I'm only intending to upgrade my blu-rays to UHD blu-rays for very select titles (or films I absolutely adore). Triple dipping isn't something I'm proud of doing, but since I started buying Criterions around the time when they started releasing the films on blu-ray (between 2009-2011), I haven't had to upgrade too many of the dvds I bought of theirs fortunately (unless some of their upgrades happen to be for films I originally had on dvd). I can see myself owning a dozen or less 4k UHD blu-rays from Criterion out of the 300 blu-rays I have from Criterion in my collection today.

A likely sentiment shared by most Criterion collectors I would gather, and even more once the novelty wears off.

Originally Posted by regeyer

And I'm happy that you see that. My son and I didn't see a huge improvement. Admittedly, we only watched a few minutes, flipping back and fourth between the inputs. Was there a difference? Yes. But not drastic. But, like I said before, I saw a huge difference with The Ten Commandments.

Truth be told, if the source is the same for both formats, the overall impression should be fairly consistent from Blu to UHD.

It should be a question of degrees, never a wide chasm.

The only real value of upgrading with the same source but new format in my experience is the anticipation of watching a favorite film and the opportunity to glean a new impression. After the first few minutes, the technical benefits really don't move the needle much beyond the acknowledgment and related pleasure that the film looks as good as possible given the source.

[jkoffman]

Originally Posted by koberulz

Allen won't allow special features, and Criterion pride themselves on extras, so none of his films will ever be in the collection.

For all the reasons, his films are not likely to show up there again. At this point, I'd be surprised that the tables haven't turned, with him potentially wanting a Criterion release and them passing. But never say never ever ever because as already mentioned, this release with no extras already happened:

[Show spoiler]

[jshaide]

Originally Posted by dvining

I think his problem with commentaries is similar to chapter breaks.

When watching the movie, you watch the movie much like you don't skip around to different parts. You don't listen to someone else or watch it out of order.

Didn’t stop me from fast forwarding like ninety minutes on my Mulholland Drive DVD when I was like 14. Or 27, whatever.