The Criterion Collection

[Shane Rollins]

Originally Posted by jw007

I agree pretty much as well. I probably should revisit it again but I won't be purchasing this film. The only movie in the Criterion Collection that I might be repulsed by more than this is Eating Raoul. I literally had to sell this film because putting it on my shelf made me feel dirty and every time I saw the spine, I had to take a shower.

Just kidding (about the showering).

Admittedly haven't seen it, only googled it, but that seems like one of the most gonzo movies ever. It seems like even though it wouldn't be funny, it would be so crazy that I'd laugh at the craziness of it.

I don't know the ownership of it though. Fox did the original theatrical run and at least the first three home video runs, Arrow did a UK DVD in 2001 (didn't know they were that old), and Columbia did a DVD in the US in 2004. Assuming Columbia has it, there's a pretty good chance a 4K will happen. If Fox has it, pretty good chance it won't. If it's independently owned, then it's really up in the air.

[dwk]

Eating Raoul is licensed to Janus FIlms by Mercury Film, Inc.

For the future, if anyone wants to know who licensed a title to Criterion, go to criterionforum.org (not the forum page, but the main page) and search for the title and click on the result for the release (like this one for Eating Raoul) and it is listed in the info just under the streaming options.

[Shane Rollins]

Originally Posted by ravenus

The release cycles of 2 labels can be vastly different for reasons of their own. Eureka put out Onibaba in 2013, while Criterion released it in 2021...with the same master, and an arguably worse encode.

Originally Posted by M A

Strangely enough, the Criterion blu-ray of Onibaba is actually an older master than the Eureka, despite releasing 8 years later

Between the two...

Black levels and white levels: Criterion manages both better, even though they're less dynamic and there's more gray than black and white; Eureka has more black and white, but the whites are frequently blown out and the blacks are frequently crushed, in ways not endemic to the original stylized photography

DNR: Criterion has mild DNR but nothing deal-breaking; Eureka has none

Encode: The Eureka is way better than the Criterion. Not even close.

The actual transfers look very similar to me, but they each had different tweaks done to them.

Special features: Most features are the same. The commentary from 2001 with director Kaneto Shindo and actors Kei Sato and Jitsuko Yoshimura, the Super-8 footage by Kel Sato, and the trailer are on both discs. The Criterion has a 22-minute interview with Shindo that the Eureka disc doesn't have. The Eureka has a 7-minute introduction by Alex Cox that the Criterion disc doesn't have. Both books are different.

Overall: Draw. The pluses and minuses of both discs effectively even the discs out. Ideally a new 4K master would be done and made available worldwide.

Oh right, Toho owns this film.

Originally Posted by DukeTogo84

I'm hoping the relationship with Criterion and Toho has gotten somewhat better. Seven Samurai on 4K for sure will be happening. November might be too soon after the screenings, but if not November, then May-June I would say.

I just wish Toho would be open to more labels to be able to license from them. It seems like BFI in the UK made some sort of headway over there.

Originally Posted by DimitriL

It feels like they grudgingly pick one label in a particular region, one that they either have long history with, or has a fairly elevated reputation like BFI. I always had the sense that Toho would just not release anything outside of Japan if they could get away with it.

I don't know what got Toho's balls so twisted regarding Criterion. If it was the Seven Samurai thing after all, that's really petty 25 years after the fact. And honestly, the "before" wasn't as bad as I was expecting, and the "after" wasn't as revelatory as I was expecting. It looks like Criterion fixed some issues and left others intact, likely because they didn't want to mess up the film. While Toho thought Criterion was making them look bad and almost accusing them of negligence with their own films, what Criterion was doing was showing what a film looked like before it was restored after decades of simply existing, and what it looked like after those efforts.

Criterion did it on laserdisc for years. Many of Criterion's other DVDs of the era had these features. I've seen it done for tons of other movies between the late 70s and late 90s, well over a hundred of them actually. I've never heard anyone knock the studio and say "how can you let the film get this bad". I've always heard people say "it's great that they're able to do this now".

If that's what ruffled Toho's feathers, it's ridiculous.

Nowadays, they have the majority of Japan's classics that we want. Not just Shondo's Onibaba, but thousands of other films too. In what I can only describe as insulting, they have many negatives and intermediary elements that they publicly claim are lost, plus several dozen 4K masters they claim to Criterion don't exist, while Criterion is usually given a weak 2K transfer of a fine grain that Toho prepares in-house.

Take Seven Samurai for example. Aside from the DNR, which is bad but nothing on the scale of James Cameron, the 4K master is way better than the 2K master we have here in the US. This 4K master is not new. It's been out for at least a year. They should've instantly lined something up with people around the world. Instead, we've been stuck with an inferior 2010 Blu-ray that's only a minor improvement on the 2006 DVD, which itself is only a minor improvement on the 1998 and 1999 DVDs. This transfer needs to come out already. November, when we'll all be slamming B&N, would be a golden opportunity. And frankly I'm as mad at Criterion for their slow-as-molasses releasing schedule as I am at Toho for being dickish about their elements, transfers, and relationships.

Originally Posted by DukeTogo84

Will be curious to see what happens next with Criterion and Japanese cinema. I'm almost positive their next Japanese releases will either be Kenji Misumi's sword trilogy or Seven Samurai 4K. I really do hope we get some surprises or a boxset at some point. Would be nice if we get some Kurosawa upgrades that didn't even have Blu-rays in the US like The Bad Sleep Well, Red Beard, Stray Dog, etc.

I'm 99% sure that Seven Samurai is getting a 4K in November. That's probably the only shoo-in title for the month. Hopefully this will lead to more Japanese cinema on Blu-ray and 4K, preferably from quality elements and quality transfers. It would also be nice if Criterion/Toho/the other Japanese studios began working together to upgrade every title with a laserdisc, Criterion DVD, Eclipse DVD, or weak Blu-ray to a quality Blu-ray or a 4K. At this point I have a "Day One on principle" policy when it comes to Japanese films, and I believe I'm not the only one who operates like that.

A dream release, but I have doubts it would occur, would be if the AK 100 box set finally got bumped to 4K mastered Blu-ray at the least, UHD at the most:

[Show spoiler]FILMS IN THIS SET
Sanshiro Sugata (1943)
The Most Beautiful (1944)
Sanshiro Sugata, Part Two (1945)
The Men Who Tread on the Tiger’s Tail (1945)
No Regrets for Our Youth (1946)
One Wonderful Sunday (1947)
Drunken Angel (1948)
Stray Dog (1949)
Scandal (1950)
Rashomon (1950)
The Idiot (1951)
Ikiru (1952)
Seven Samurai (1954)
I Live in Fear (1955)
Throne of Blood (1957)
The Lower Depths (1957)
The Hidden Fortress (1958)
The Bad Sleep Well (1960)
Yojimbo (1961)
Sanjuro (1962)
High and Low (1963)
Red Beard (1965)
Dodes’ka-den (1970)
Kagemusha (1980)
Madadayo (1993)

SPECIAL FEATURES
This deluxe, linen-bound collector’s set includes twenty-five films and an illustrated book featuring an introduction and notes on each of the films by Stephen Prince (The Warrior’s Camera: The Cinema of Akira Kurosawa) and a remembrance by Donald Richie (The Films of Akira Kurosawa).

The 25-DVD set originally retailed for $400 on the Criterion website ($200 during Flash Sales, unsure of the full price and sale price at B&N). So a 25-disc Blu-ray set, or a 50-disc 4K+Blu-ray set, would easily make Criterion a metric ton of money. I'd probably bounce my entire sale list just to buy that.

This could happen, it should happen, and Criterion and Toho need to work all their shit out so it can happen.

[Shane Rollins]

Originally Posted by jw007

Gacivory has answered this already but yes, it's Black Moon. I find that film to be very futuristic (and "ahead of its time") in some weird way too. Telepathic animals, biological warfare, and gender wars? Sounds like a future possibility. Louis Malle is one of my favorite directors and though this film is (to many) a clunker of his, I still find it pretty original. I used to have an avatar of Orson Welles from A Safe Place but it got old after a while. It might be time to update my avatar though, so thank you for reminding me.

Originally Posted by Axl Rose

I would love to see it get a 4k upgrade. The current blu is so dated.

Originally Posted by Röckzilla

I'm not sure how this happened but I wasn't even aware that Black Moon (1975) was even released on Blu-ray until today, let alone from The Criterion Collection. Now I'm conflicted: do I grab the Blu-ray now OR wait to see if there will be a 4K UHD sometime soon...

Originally Posted by Flex_MythoMass

If you buy the blu ray then the rest of us can pick up the 4K a lot quicker.

Originally Posted by saltburn

when it was released on blu-ray it doesn't say it was a 4k scan, so the likelihood of a 4k release any time soon is not likely.

So there's actually three Blu-rays with two transfers. The American Blu-ray is by Criterion, where as there's two in Europe, a French standalone disc by Gaumont, and a UK disc by Curzon Artificial Eye in a 10-disc Louis Malle box set.

Picture: The Gaumont transfer has way better picture. Likely sourced from a 4K scan/restoration/master of an OCN. The Criterion was likely either 2K or "high definition" (whatever that is) off an IP.

Color timing: The Criterion disc has the original color timing, the Gaumont transfer has very modern color timing.

EE: The Criterion disc has an almost Mill Creek level of EE. Really it should be criminal. The Gaumont disc has none.

Natural sharpness: Gaumont

DNR: I found no instances of DNR on either transfer.

Special Features: The Criterion has a 13-minute excerpt from the French TV show Pour le cinema with Malle, a stills gallery, a trailer, and a booklet. The Curzon Artificial Eye disc has nothing, but the box set as a whole may have something. I can't determine if anything is on the French Gaumont disc.

Overall: One's a bad transfer with good color timing, the other's a good transfer with bad color timing. The odds of another remaster are almost nil. Pick your poison. The Criterion disc wins the special features battle though.

[Shane Rollins]

Originally Posted by Scottie

I have a feeling that The Master, Magnolia, and maybe Boogie Nights will get 4K releases at some point.

I was planning on throwing out The Master for my November guesses.

Originally Posted by DrasticHandprint

Supposedly Boogie Nights is getting a release this year, but maybe just a rumor. Would love Magnola too. I keep holding off buying these two standard releases on hopes they’ll be upgraded soon.

Magnolia seems more like a Criterion title than Boogie Nights, but Boogie Nights is a much bigger title and was a Criterion laserdisc.

Those two are going to have 4Ks, if not from Criterion than from WHV.

What's holding them up is that PTA is very involved with his transfers, and wants to be involved with the HDR and DV too. When Punch-Drunk Love got announced, they made an effort to draw attention to his level of involvement:

PUNCH-DRUNK LOVE

Winner of the Best Director Prize at the 2002 Cannes Film Festival, this misfit love story of disconnected people trying to find one another in an antagonistic world is a comedy of discomfort and rage that turns unexpectedly sweet and pure. Adam Sandler gives an amazing and unusual performance as Barry Egan, a socially impaired owner of a small novelty business, who is dominated by seven sisters and is unlikely to find love unless it finds him. When a mysterious woman comes into his life, his emotions go haywire, fluctuating between uncontrollable rage, lust and self-doubt. From the writer/director of Boogie Nights and Magnolia, PUNCH-DRUNK LOVE is a dark, lovely and unique film experience.

4K BLU-RAY
Feature presented in 4K resolution with Dolby Vision, approved by director Paul Thomas Anderson
Dolby Atmos English audio, approved by director Paul Thomas Anderson
5.1 DTS-HD Master Audio
BLU-RAY
Feature presented in high definition, sourced from the 4K master
5.1 DTS-HD Master Audio
Special Features:
2 Deleted Scenes
Mattress Man Commercial
Blossoms and Blood
12 Scopitones
Jon Brion Featurette
Recording Session
Theatrical Trailers

PTA was rumored for years to be a director that hates 4K, and this not only disproved those rumors, but explained why it takes eons for his titles to drop. This year being the 25th anniversary of Magnolia, and 2027 being the 30th for Boogie Nights, they could respectively drop in 2024 and 2027, but that's just a guess. PTA takes his time with these discs, and all avenues for getting his films out on 4K run through him.

In his defense though, he doesn't tend to dick off with his restorations like some other notable directors do.

[Shane Rollins]

Originally Posted by Areyakiddin

The Thief Of Baghdad (1940) is owned by ITV.

Good. At least that's one film out from under Goldwyn's ass. They just let everything rot.

Who does ITV have contracts with, so we know who has a chance of releasing it?

[stvn1974]

Just picked up Straw Dogs so expect a 4K announcement soon. You're welcome.

[Shane Rollins]

Originally Posted by jshaide

Gallo also gave what Ebert joked was the "cancer curse" when he was diagnosed, and following Gallo calling him fat he responded "I may be fat, but one day I may be thin. But you will always be the director of The Brown Bunny".

Even funnier, after Gallo "cursed" Ebert's colon with cancer (he didn't have colon cancer but I guess that's irrelevant), Ebert retorted with a claim that watching a video of his own colonoscopy was more entertaining than The Brown Bunny.

As much as I loathe Gallo, I would've loved to hear them verbally spar. That might've been even better than Ebert's occasional battles with Siskel.

Edit: Apparently Gallo has a cameo in Goodfellas. It comes as Jimmy gets the news that Tommy is going to be made. I'll have to find and check my copy to see if it's true.

[Areyakiddin]

Originally Posted by Shane Rollins

Good. At least that's one film out from under Goldwyn's ass. They just let everything rot.

Who does ITV have contracts with, so we know who has a chance of releasing it?

They definitely have made deals with Criterion in the past. All the British Hitchcocks that Criterion have released are owned by ITV.

I'm sure that Criterion licensed the BD rights years ago and have been sitting on it like many of their DVD titles.

Network released a BD of The Thief of Baghdad (1940) in the UK.

[Member-682067]

Originally Posted by Shane Rollins

Porky's for me wasn't really a T&A show, even though it could easily be taken as such. It did strike me as a coming-of-age film, albeit a rather ribald one. The jokes were pretty funny, the crazy things they went through (getting chased out of a house naked, getting grabbed through a peephole, getting unceremoniously booted from a strip club) were entertaining, and their revenge was a great ending. Even when the girls stood up for them in the end, they weren't really standing up for the same boys who'd peeped at them and gawked at them for all these years, they were standing up against all the assh*les one county over who needed to be put in their place.

The movie has a plot, not an endearing or heartwarming plot, but a plot nonetheless. If you go there for the comedy you'll be entertained. If you go there for anything else you'll be disappointed.

'There's a moral disjunction to Porky's'(including it's sequels and the other films like it, notably teen sex comedies), that makes it distasteful.

All the male characters wanted to do the girls in those movies(and these type of movies in general) was peep at, ogle and harass.

Laughter accompanies most of the movie’s pranks, many of which are at the girls’ expense.

Consider, Ms. Balbricker, who, in one the scene illustrates the point, asks the principal to open an investigation into a shower room peephole. She’s sure she can ID the penis she caught poking through the wall.

As she makes her case, all of her fellow teachers start cracking up, and then finally the principal, which leads to her storming out. Lame attempt at comedy, because it's hoping the laughter is contagious and the audience will laugh with them.

They(the characters) don't realize the moral gravity of the situation or acknowledge the sex crisis going on at the school. We are supposed to laugh at her with them, but it's unpleasant and off. I'm laughing at them, they're laughing at her.

The movie ends with her charging from the bushes and tackling Tommy, determined to expose him as the owner of that peephole penis. It doesn't feel like 'justice', it feels like another joke. The boys have just gleefully demolished Porky’s business, yet it’s Ms. Balbricker whom the cops haul off. Tommy turns to the camera and says, “Jeez.” But the boys don’t admit to anything or reflect on why it happened, or realize again, the moral gravity of the situation. They just laugh.

A movie called Zapped' was even worse. Most of the behavior of the one character, played by Willie Ames, is that of a sex offender. One girl loses her entire outfit toward the end, in a mass stripping, and the laughter is supposed to come from us.

These movies had women as the joke, and men were their tormentors.

[Member-682067]

Originally Posted by SoulTaker3000

So many instances browsing this thread recently where I was to jump to defend Gummo. But it's such a subjective experience that I completely understand why some wouldn't dig it. I love introducing it to friends and film enthusiasts in general, and before I push play I explain that, to me, this isn't a film you watch for "enjoyment" (even though technically I do, but not in that same way I would watch something like "Back to the Future") but more just to experience something different, and discuss the response to it.

When I first saw it, it didn't totally click with me. I could have easily chosen to be annoyed or frustrated by it. But I chose to try to understand it better, and wanted to listen to Harmony's thoughts on it. A lot of times when I don't understand a film I search for interviews with the director regarding it. I'd say before I fell in love with the actual film, I fell in love with Harmony's description of it, and it helped click it in to place for me.

I am a very positive, philosophical person. I typically favor films that inspire positive emotions. However, and I've come to realize this truly is a CASE-BY-CASE basis, there are a good handful of films that are often described as disturbing, nihilistic, and down right painful to give attention to, that are my all time favorites. And some movies that have those qualities that I, too, would say I cannot sit through, I do not understand the praise they receive, but art is art and I am completely against censorship.

Gummo presents images in a way that speak to me. I do see meaning, I do see magical metaphors, and most importantly, I do see beauty. I get it if others don't. Really I'd be fine if I was the only person that saw the beauty it. But I know I'm not, and I don't have to be so defensive of the film because Hey, it's getting a GD Criterion edition.

If there is any meaning to 'Gummo', it's cynical and meretricious. Why does he(Korine) have such a smug view on Middle America and these people? What are we to take away from them? Where's it's point of view? Where's the film coming from? What's Korine's angle? Where are the pathos that makes these characters living, breathing creations(like in 'Kids'), and not mere cartoons?

[Shane Rollins]

Originally Posted by stvn1974

Just picked up Straw Dogs so expect a 4K announcement soon. You're welcome.

Nope.

Licensed from Disney, who bought Fox. We're not getting that one any time soon.

I love Disney, because they gave us so many amazing films, but I also hate Disney just as much, because now they're doing everything they can to tear those films away from us.

[Shane Rollins]

Originally Posted by TV2693

'There's a moral disjunction to Porky's'(including it's sequels and the other films like it, notably teen sex comedies), that makes it distasteful.

All the male characters wanted to do the girls in those movies(and these type of movies in general) was peep at, ogle and harass.

Laughter accompanies most of the movie’s pranks, many of which are at the girls’ expense.

Consider, Ms. Balbricker, who, in one the scene illustrates the point, asks the principal to open an investigation into a shower room peephole. She’s sure she can ID the penis she caught poking through the wall.

As she makes her case, all of her fellow teachers start cracking up, and then finally the principal, which leads to her storming out. Lame attempt at comedy, because it's hoping the laughter is contagious and the audience will laugh with them.

They(the characters) don't realize the moral gravity of the situation or acknowledge the sex crisis going on at the school. We are supposed to laugh at her with them, but it's unpleasant and off. I'm laughing at them, they're laughing at her.

The movie ends with her charging from the bushes and tackling Tommy, determined to expose him as the owner of that peephole penis. It doesn't feel like 'justice', it feels like another joke. The boys have just gleefully demolished Porky’s business, yet it’s Ms. Balbricker whom the cops haul off. Tommy turns to the camera and says, “Jeez.” But the boys don’t admit to anything or reflect on why it happened, or realize again, the moral gravity of the situation. They just laugh.

A movie called Zapped' was even worse. Most of the behavior of the one character, played by Willie Ames, is that of a sex offender. One girl loses her entire outfit toward the end, in a mass stripping, and the laughter is supposed to come from us.

These movies had women as the joke, and men were their tormentors.

Yeah? Well, you know, that's just like uh, your opinion, man. - YouTube

[Shane Rollins]

Originally Posted by Areyakiddin

They definitely have made deals with Criterion in the past. All the British Hitchcocks that Criterion have released are owned by ITV.

I'm sure that Criterion licensed the BD rights years ago and have been sitting on it like many of their DVD titles.

Network released a BD of The Thief of Baghdad (1940) in the UK.

They very well could be sitting on it. They did a DVD ages ago, so it's not like the title is out of the question.

[Mike0284]

[NeoNical]

Originally Posted by Mike0284

have no clue what's going on right now but yum i love spam

[jw007]

Originally Posted by TV2693

I can back 'Gummo' for it's visual look(the photography), I can't back it for anything else.

There's always going to be the one audience who likes seeing extreme cynicism and people doing nasty things with no point. I couldn't imagine repeated viewings of 'Gummo', that'd be peculiar to say the least.

'Kids' was graphic as well, but it had a clear point of view and there were pathos and thoughtful metaphors along the way that made it a quality film.

I haven't seen Korine's other movies. 'Julien Donkey Boy' got a recommendation by Roger Ebert and 'The Beach Bum' got a lot of favorable reviews as well.

I highly recommend checking out The Beach Bum. It's a riot! I saw the film in the theater twice, and the second time I had the pleasure of seeing Will Oldham (aka Bonnie Prince Billy) introduce the film at a small arthouse theater here in Pittsburgh, PA. I even asked him a question from the audience but now I forget what I actually said. Lol.

[jw007]

Originally Posted by Shane Rollins

Admittedly haven't seen it, only googled it, but that seems like one of the most gonzo movies ever. It seems like even though it wouldn't be funny, it would be so crazy that I'd laugh at the craziness of it.

Eating Raoul is indeed a gonzo movie, and it's time I revisit the film again with a fresh perspective. It's an oddity of a movie much like Gummo in its own way too. I love these obscure arthouse independent films and that's why I like Criterion for bringing these films to life with their blu-ray releases.

[CuckterionCollection]

I like when people express more than praise for whatever Criterion releases. It'd be a false reality otherwise. If Criterion is picky about what is worthy to them, then likewise we have the right to be picky as well.

[StarDestroyer52]

Grabbed the following in a last order: