The Criterion Collection

[MifuneFan]

[Areyakiddin]

Originally Posted by The_Iceflash

Ok, how about the Criterion 4K or non-4K releases that already have 4K or non-4K blu-ray releases and use the same transfer, and have almost identical bonus features or is missing some? About as pointless of a release as you can get.

Or like War or the Worlds which got a Criterion blu-ray in 2020 but 2 years later gets a non-4K release making the Criterion release worthless. Criterion releases are supposed to be above the rest, not behind or redundant.

How was Criterion supposed to know Paramount would become interested in doing a 4k release 2 years after their release, when Paramount never released it on Blu-ray?

[MifuneFan]

Originally Posted by Areyakiddin

How was Criterion supposed to know Paramount would become interested in doing a 4k release 2 years after their release, when Paramount never released it on Blu-ray?

Time machines of course

[NeoNical]

Seems like Criterion finally got Missing back in stock. That title has been "Currently Unavailable" for SO LONG that I genuinely thought it was going to be like that forever. Might get this one next flash sale IF it's still in stock (I'm praying on my knees that this won't go "Currently Unavailable" again). On a side note, hoping Criterion will bring back Sam Fuller's White Dog, which also is "Currently Unavailable" and is going for high prices in the market (Not that high compared to some of Criterion's OOP titles though).

Just picked up The Confession from the library and have yet to give this one a spin. As far as I know, this is probably the shortest time that a Blu-ray has been in print by Criterion (Within 2 years I believe). This and Z are practically impossible to own a physical copy of and I'm really hoping Criterion will get on with releasing these, especially with Z having a 4K restoration.

Speaking about The Confession, does anyone know why it went out of print in the first place and why it's still available to stream via Amazon Prime? Does the distributor want revenue through streaming instead but have no interest in letting them continue distributing physical copies? Really weird why this one was pulled out.

[noirjunkie]

Originally Posted by jw007

I have several streaming services (Hulu & Live TV - $85 a month, Apple TV+ - $7 a month, Netflix - $16 a month, HBO Max - $15 a month, and Amazon Prime - $9 a month), and it sure adds up!

Just the Hulu + Live TV costs you over $1000 per year. Do you find the benefits justify the expense?

[jw007]

Originally Posted by noirjunkie

Just the Hulu + Live TV costs you over $1000 per year. Do you find the benefits justify the expense?

I love live television (especially for sporting events and breaking news), but I'd say the expense slightly outweighs the benefits. With that being said, I remember when I had cable TV and the Comcast bill was like $300 a month. Or at least it felt that way (it was probably more like $125 a month with the full package included).

If I could just live with cinema and imagine television doesn't exist, I'd be one happy man.

[lemonski]

Originally Posted by flyry

would it be possible for them to ever release Nine Queens? It's on the channel and was on Filmstruck before.

I think it's with Sony Pictures Classics. Someone - anyone - needs to release it along with Bielinsky's final film, The Aura. Not sure if it's still with IFC but both films seem to have fallen into the gap between DVD and Blu-ray and were never upgraded.

Originally Posted by flyry

the lack of latin american movies in the collection is pahetic. the NYT should write a profile on it...

There's a post on Criterion's web site dated February 2015:

"Our release of the spellbinding La Ciénaga marks not only the brilliant Lucrecia Martel’s entrance into the Criterion Collection but also our first title from the New Argentine Cinema."

Almost 8 years later and.....crickets. Pathetic about sums it up.

[mande2013]

Originally Posted by flyry

would it be possible for them to ever release Nine Queens? It's on the channel and was on Filmstruck before.

the lack of latin american movies in the collection is pahetic. the NYT should write a profile on it...

To put it in futbol terms, for a second I thought La Cienaga was the only film in the collection from a CONMEBOL member, but then remembered the WCP sets do have some Brazilian films.

P.S. Criterion Channel, HBOMax, and Spotify Premium (for music) are the only streaming services for which I'm currently paying. I canceled Apple TV+ and Prime, since I wasn't using them enough to justify the cost. For Netflix, I just use my mother's password. For Mubi, I'll do a month here or a month there, and it's the same for HBOMax in fact.

Well, I also pay for NordVPN in order to use HBOMax.

[Member-222782]

Originally Posted by jw007

If I could just live with cinema and imagine television doesn't exist, I'd be one happy man.

I've already done that and I can guarantee it WILL make you happy - and richer. Cutting the cord was one of the best decisions I've ever made and I should've done it much sooner. I stopped watching broadcast television sometime in the early 2000's and Cable a few years after. TV Programming is now built around commercials and not the other way around like it used to be (or supposed to be). It's awful. I have now foregone all of that nonsense and just watch movies. No ads, logos or censorship.

[MifuneFan]

Originally Posted by flyry

the lack of latin american movies in the collection is pahetic. the NYT should write a profile on it...

Originally Posted by lemonski

There's a post on Criterion's web site dated February 2015:

"Our release of the spellbinding La Ciénaga marks not only the brilliant Lucrecia Martel’s entrance into the Criterion Collection but also our first title from the New Argentine Cinema."

Almost 8 years later and.....crickets. Pathetic about sums it up.

There have been several others from Latin America since:

Prisioneros de la Tierra (1939) - Argentina (WCF Vol. 4)
La Llorona (2019) - Guatemala
Memories of Underdevelopment (1968) - Cuba
Lucia (1968) - Cuba (WCF Vol. 3)
Pixote (1980) - Brazil (WCF Vol. 3)
Limite (1931) - Brazil (WCF Vol. 2)

Of course it would be great to have more, especially outside of WCF sets, but you can argue the same about many other countries/languages too. Outside of Ray, there's a huge lack of Indian movies for instance, or S. Korea, and many others. In some cases, it comes down to licensing too. It is curious that you complain about the lack of any other Argentine/Latin America films since La Cienaga, yet you don't actually own La Cienaga, or any of the WCF sets where many other films of the region can be found. I mean, like any other company in the business, Criterion also factors what they license on what actually sells well, so what message does it send them when you're so fervent to criticize their lack of such titles, when you haven't even supported the ones they've actually released?

[Rayjg]

The biases of Criterion stagger the mind.

[lemonski]

Originally Posted by MifuneFan

There have been several others from Latin America since:

Prisioneros de la Tierra (1939) - Argentina (WCF Vol. 4)
La Llorona (2019) - Guatemala
Memories of Underdevelopment (1968) - Cuba
Lucia (1968) - Cuba (WCF Vol. 3)
Pixote (1980) - Brazil (WCF Vol. 3)
Limite (1931) - Brazil (WCF Vol. 2)

8 films in 8 years is hardly a great record, and half of them are presumably only there due to Martin Scorsese. As far as I can see, outside of Mexico, 8 films is the extent of Criterion's Latin American releases in the entire collection. I realise they can't include the same numbers of films from some countries as they do the U.S, Japan, France and Italy - they're a business and that's fair enough. But then don't tell me you somehow have your finger on the pulse of New Argentine Cinema on your website and imply more will follow, when it clearly isn't true.

Originally Posted by MifuneFan

It is curious that you complain about the lack of any other Argentine/Latin America films since La Cienaga, yet you don't actually own La Cienaga or any of the WCF sets where many other films of the region can be found. I mean, like any other company in the business, Criterion also factors what they license on what actually sells well, so what message does it send them when you're so fervent to criticize their lack of such titles, when you haven't even supported the ones they've actually released?

I don't own La Ciénaga because I didn't like it much. And I'm not into importing what ends up a $150 box set by the time I ship it here, just to blind buy one or two movies. Am I supposed to buy movies that I don't like in the hope that more from the same country will follow?

[MifuneFan]

Originally Posted by lemonski

8 films in 8 years is hardly a great record, and half of them are presumably only there due to Martin Scorsese. As far as I can see, outside of Mexico, 8 films is the extent of Criterion's Latin American releases in the entire collection. I realise they can't include the same numbers of films from some countries as they do the U.S, Japan, France and Italy - they're a business and that's fair enough. But then don't tell me you somehow have your finger on the pulse of New Argentine Cinema on your website and imply more will follow, when it clearly isn't true.

I don't own La Ciénaga because I didn't like it much. And I'm not into importing what ends up a $150 box set by the time I ship it here, just to blind buy one or two movies. Am I supposed to buy movies that I don't like in the hope that more from the same country will follow?

By that same token, should Criterion release more titles from said countries, when the ones they released have been poor sellers? La Cienaga did not sell well at all, nor have others I listed like Memories of Underdevelopment, so there's really not a lot of financial incentive for Criterion to start seeking out more Latin American films, when the demand for them is seemingly not that strong. As they are a business, this obviously has to factor in to their decisions. It's entirely possible they planned more releases from the New Argentine Cinema movement, but looked at the numbers, and either cancelled those plans, or put them on the back-burner.

It's not like this is simply a problem with Criterion. I mean, how many Latin American films are Kino, Arrow, Flicker Alley, Indicator, Eureka, BFI, etc.. putting out? Criterion doesn't have the monopoly on international films, certainly not anymore. This is part of a bigger problem with world cinema. It has highlighted some countries like Japan, Italy, and France way more than others that are arguably just as deserving. As I stated, someone could easily make the same argument for Indian cinema, or Czech, or Hungary, or Polish, or any number of countries.

And yes, 8 films in 8 years sounds very low, but how many should they have released? 15? 20? Okay, then how many Iranian films should they have released during that time? 15? 20? And how many from Spain? Italy? Hungary? Romania? Do you see where I'm going with this. Criterion has a ton of countries and regions that they not only want to explore, but also people like yourself who want them to release more from X country, and it's not necessarily Argentina, or any other Latin American country. And world cinema is just one of the factors that goes into what gets released. They've obviously started to address their blind spot of black directors in the library, and they also are now releasing 4K titles, which are highly unlikely to be a niche foreign film, so that has also reduced the amount of available slots for films that you might want them to release.

I compiled this list of 2022 releases by country before, but take a look:

Angola - 1
Argentina - 1
Austria - 3
Cameroon - 1
Canada - 1
Czechoslovakia - 1
Denmark - 1
Ethiopia - 1
France - 3
Guatemala - 1
Hong Kong - 5
Hungary - 2
India - 1
Iran -1
Italy - 1
Japan: 3
New Zealand - 2
Nigeria: 1
Norway - 1
S. Korea - 1
Sweden - 3
UK - 1
United States - 30

Obviously it's inevitable that there's going to be a heavier focus on American films, but considering there's around 60-70 slots in any given year, I'd say they still did a pretty good job of releasing films from a large number of different countries. No doubt Criterion, like most boutique labels, have huge blind spots when it comes to curating films from some countries over others, and I'm sure if money wasn't a factor, they'd all release a lot more.

[Edward R. Meow]

Originally Posted by jw007

I love live television (especially for sporting events and breaking news), but I'd say the expense slightly outweighs the benefits. With that being said, I remember when I had cable TV and the Comcast bill was like $300 a month. Or at least it felt that way (it was probably more like $125 a month with the full package included).

If I could just live with cinema and imagine television doesn't exist, I'd be one happy man.

Ever tried something like Pluto TV? I find it’s live channels to be a nice substitute for cable. Obviously nowhere near the selection, but I enjoy it for casual viewing.

[jw007]

Originally Posted by Edward R. Meow

Ever tried something like Pluto TV? I find it’s live channels to be a nice substitute for cable. Obviously nowhere near the selection, but I enjoy it for casual viewing.

I saw the channel on my Roku TV but never explored it. I just popped in and took a look and its not bad for free programming. It reminds me of PLEX TV as well with the free live news I can access. The same goes with TUBI too. And I guess the ROKU channel (with live programming). And of course there's the free version of SLING too with the live options.

Here's an article that compares all these free streaming platforms if you're interested: https://www.cnet.com/tech/services-a...ming-services/

[dvining]

Originally Posted by jw007

I saw the channel on my Roku TV but never explored it. I just popped in and took a look and its not bad for free programming. It reminds me of PLEX TV as well with the free live news I can access. The same goes with TUBI too. And I guess the ROKU channel (with live programming). And of course there's the free version of SLING too with the live options.

Here's an article that compares all these free streaming platforms if you're interested: https://www.cnet.com/tech/services-a...ming-services/

There's also being more mercenary about which streaming services you subscribe to and for how long. One month on Netflix: watch everything, drop it. One month on HBO Max: watch everything, drop it. One month with Prime: watch everything, drop it.

Just go in a cycle, one at a time.

[DukeTogo84]

So far Japan is 0 for 2023. If they give me one release from Japan and it's Hunter in the Dark, I will NEVER say a bad thing about Criterion again for the rest of my life. Scouts honor. Still, the possibility of them releasing it seems like it's 0.001 percent right now with their stockpile, so I don't have to worry about that vow.

[flyry]

Originally Posted by MifuneFan

There have been several others from Latin America since:

Prisioneros de la Tierra (1939) - Argentina (WCF Vol. 4)
La Llorona (2019) - Guatemala
Memories of Underdevelopment (1968) - Cuba
Lucia (1968) - Cuba (WCF Vol. 3)
Pixote (1980) - Brazil (WCF Vol. 3)
Limite (1931) - Brazil (WCF Vol. 2)

Of course it would be great to have more, especially outside of WCF sets, but you can argue the same about many other countries/languages too. Outside of Ray, there's a huge lack of Indian movies for instance, or S. Korea, and many others. In some cases, it comes down to licensing too. It is curious that you complain about the lack of any other Argentine/Latin America films since La Cienaga, yet you don't actually own La Cienaga, or any of the WCF sets where many other films of the region can be found. I mean, like any other company in the business, Criterion also factors what they license on what actually sells well, so what message does it send them when you're so fervent to criticize their lack of such titles, when you haven't even supported the ones they've actually released?

i get what you're saying and it may seem hypocritical, but they should find a way to release higher profile films that i'm positive would sell well.

Where's City of God? Central Station? Nine Queens (as mentioned). there's more to LatAm than just almodovar del toro and inarritu

[Cremildo]

Originally Posted by flyry

i get what you're saying and it may seem hypocritical, but they should find a way to release higher profile films that i'm positive would sell well.

Where's City of God? Central Station? Nine Queens (as mentioned). there's more to LatAm than just almodovar del toro and inarritu

Kino got our backs when it comes to Brazilian cinema. Bacurau, Private Desert, Neon Bull, the complete works of Joaquim Pedro de Andrade, the upcoming Glauber Rocha collection...

[exzachary]

Originally Posted by flyry

i get what you're saying and it may seem hypocritical, but they should find a way to release higher profile films that i'm positive would sell well.

Where's City of God? Central Station? Nine Queens (as mentioned). there's more to LatAm than just almodovar del toro and inarritu

They can't just release whatever they want. Licensing plays a large part in this. City of God is a big title for Lionsgate, which is why they released it themselves. Nine Queens is with Disney, which doesn't license stuff out.