The Criterion Collection

[Monty70]

Originally Posted by ROclockCK

Island of Lost Souls is probably the finest example so far of the law of diminishing returns that sets in when the source content is in dodgy shape as a result of indifferent preservation, and reconstruction is necessary from a mosaic of mis-matched elements. Of course, it was great to see this forgotten classic once again in some semblance of its original form, but Criterion achieved nothing unique with it in the Blu-ray format. Bet it looks just dandy on DVD.

I am not so sure about that.

I would always want a classic film available in the HD format, even if the improvement between a DVD and BD is small. (and especially in the hands of a company such as Criterion)

[ROclockCK]

Originally Posted by Monty70

I am not so sure about that.

I would always want a classic film available in the HD format, even if the improvement between a DVD and BD is small. (and especially in the hands of a company such as Criterion)

The operative word there was "unique" Monty70. Criterion's Island of Lost Souls Blu-ray was impressive perhaps, especially considering the pastiche of sources used for its reconstruction, but hardly set a new high water mark for the format.

In any case, my larger point was that the Criterion DVD of IOLS probably looks good too...as a by-product of all the work done for the Blu-ray. I haven't seen the DVD version of IOLS, but when I compare my Robinson Crusoe on Mars Blu-ray with the DVD, it's obvious they are just different rez outputs from exactly the same master. For a fan of this movie and high definition home video, yes, the Blu-ray is superior, but not wildly so...their DVD was no pooch either.

All of this was in the context of Joe Dalek's point about why more DVD owners have not yet migrated their collections to Blu-ray.

[Monty70]

Originally Posted by ROclockCK

The operative word there was "unique" Monty70. Criterion's Island of Lost Souls Blu-ray was impressive perhaps, especially considering the pastiche of sources used for its reconstruction, but hardly set a new high water mark for the format.

In any case, my larger point was that the Criterion DVD of IOLS probably looks good too...as a by-product of all the work done for the Blu-ray. I haven't seen the DVD version of IOLS, but when I compare my Robinson Crusoe on Mars Blu-ray with the DVD, it's obvious they are just different rez outputs from exactly the same master. For a fan of this movie and high definition home video, yes, the Blu-ray is superior, but not wildly so...their DVD was no pooch either.

All of this was in the context of Joe Dalek's point about why more DVD owners have not yet migrated their collections to Blu-ray.

I agree that the BD for IoLS is obviously not what people call "reference" grade. My intent was to point out that minor improvements are still improvements. I guess we could argue about what makes something unique. (but that would be tiresome and boring )

From what I have observed, two reasons keep most people from upgrading to Blu-ray. The first is monetary. (people feel that it is cost prohibitive to upgrade their collections/equipment) The second, and biggest reason, is certain people's inability to appreciate higher definition. For example, my mother honestly claims that she can't tell any difference between SD and HD. (she has average eye sight)

[zoran]

may lord save us from 3d criterion

Btw Any hope shall KING AND I might get criterion bluray?

[P@t_Mtl]

Originally Posted by zoran

may lord save us from 3d criterion

Btw Any hope shall KING AND I might get criterion bluray?

Criterion 3D?

As for The King & I, I doubt 20th Century Fox would let anyone else release it, it's not exactly a very obscure movie

[drbikeshorts]

I for one have been very happy with the Eclipse DVD sets. They weren't hiding - there's a prominent link on Criterion's home page.
There's a lot speculation about Criterion's choices and the economics of production, but let's not forget where these DVDs get finally seen.
I'm watching on a 50" plasma, where blu-rays look great and well done DVDs looks pretty damn good. My wife can't tell the difference. (That's a topic for another day )
What is everyone else watching on? I'm guessing most people who've gone to HD viewing are looking at a screen between 40" & 65" and not a 150" projector screen, which really would make a difference.
I personally think the best reason for wanting an upgrade is because the DVD was lacking, such as the Seijun Suzuki films.
I have Le Samourai on DVD and didn't think it needed to be upgraded over films that don't have a decent DVD.
Having said that, I'd buy an upgrade of In The Mood For Love on day one

[P@t_Mtl]

I have the Eclipse Silent Ozu set and while it's not HD it does look pretty good compared to other silent movie set I have seen.

What I enjoy about the Eclipse set is the fact that in most cases these movies (which most people outside of this thread don't even know) would have about zero chances of being release for home viewing.

[AgentOrange]

Originally Posted by Joe Dalek

As would I, if only to prove my suspicions.

It's absolutely not because as I stated, it's not just about "a $5 Echo Bridge BD costs the same to produce as a $5 Criterion BD." The physical disc may cost the same to manufacture, but you are ignoring every other aspect of the production, which for Criterion is much higher, even for relatively no-frills Eclipse sets.

source: "A Matter of Price," Criterion.com (7/22/2010)

I'm not so sure of that. Assuming they were to do "barebones" 1080P transfers on a blu-ray, exactly what production cost would there be compared to an Echo Bridge title or some other company with similar barebones treatment? I'm sure they do some number crunching (and just having to deal with HD files on a computer is more expensive than dealing with SD files, the discs themselves might really be pennies difference at this point, certainly less than $1 per disc). In the end, even if after crunching numbers I really don't think cost is prohibitive at this point for these barebones releases as far as DVD vs blu-ray. Someone even mentioned licensing costs, but really do we think the Eclipse sets have extraordinarily high licensing costs compared to anything else? Considering that these are films that might otherwise get no release at all that just doesn't make sense to me. What rights holder is holding out for higher fees in that scenario?

Anyway I'm not one to expect they should be $5 per, but I do think the Eclipse sets should be making the transition to blu-ray. My theory is actually that these sell in such low numbers compared to their own "normal" Criterion releases, that they just can't/won't do production on both formats simultaneously. So if they are to just do one format, DVD continues to be their logical choice (especially factoring in they might not all be HD sources anyway). As someone else said, they might still be doing DVD for no other reason than that's what has been working on these sets from the beginning. I think if there was REALLY a demand for it, that they could change formats on a dime and start producing Eclipse sets as barebones blu-rays with 1080P transfers without effecting their pricing much. I hope they make that change sooner rather than later as even on a mediocre source I think it would be much better to get a native 1080P encoding. I am not sure they will ever revisit their back catalog of Eclipse titles though, at least not until a number of years go by (possibly after the blu-ray/physical media format is dea).

I wouldn't really care about format, other than I feel like they should be 1080p wherever possible since that is the current standard. When they release a new set that is probably something that will *NEVER* be on blu-ray, and will forever be stuck in SD land.

[dag]

Originally Posted by jacobsever

Just out of curiosity, how many people in this thread have studied film at a collegiate level? Majored?

And what did you go on to do with the degree?

Never took a film course. I have a Master's degree in American history (years later, how I wish I had pursued something like Asian Studies). But I did write reviews for the student paper. I would give copies of the paper to my parents, and my father would bring them into his office. Those were good days - more than half a lifetime ago now.

[dag]

With all the talk of the Eclipse series, I just finished watching all three films of the newly released Sabu! set.

Certainly, none could be said to be great films. The Technicolor could certainly benefit from a BD upgrade, but I understand that won't ever happen.

The films themselves were very much of their time: simple tales that could best be described as adventure yarns. Entertaining, certainly, but - thematically they're not very sophisticated.

There are at least a few Eclipse sets I'll definitely watch some time early next year (when the video store I rent from moves these from the "newly released" to just being "catalogue"; the Sabu! set I was able to watch in a day).

I fully understand and respect Criterion's decisions with their Eclipse sets. I'm glad for having the opportunity of seeing these movies.

[Darkcritic]

Originally Posted by P@t_Mtl

Criterion 3D?

Pina ?

[JonMoisan]

Originally Posted by zoran

may lord save us from 3d criterion

Btw Any hope shall KING AND I might get criterion bluray?

Actually, I wouldn't mind a Criterion release (or any release for that matter) of "Dial M For Murder" with the 3D version on the disc. Maybe that's just me though...

[blujazz]

Originally Posted by zoran

may lord save us from 3d criterion

Pina? Cave of Forgotten Dreams?

[blujazz]

Originally Posted by Joe Dalek

Did anyone here see Cave of Forgotten Dreams in 3D? .

I have. And I thought it was wonderful. The creation of the cave paintings integrated the arcs and curves of the cave itself so seeing it in 3D, I thought, was necessary to document it.

[ikms]

Originally Posted by Joe Dalek

That quote is a bit out of date, by the way:

When Criterion moved to BD, they hardly doubled the market for their original product. They can only realistically hope to sell the same number of copies, now spread between two SKUs, as they did when production costs were limited to a single product line. Keeping the cost higher on BD to offset this expense - since presumably the cost will be justified by most collectors (hint, hint) - even if the cost of DVDs drop makes sense. It is hard not to be cynical here, because it is has been clear for over a decade that 2-disc special DVD editions can be priced at $20 and still overcome production-line expenses to be massively profitable. Just not if they have a Criterion tax.

Originally Posted by octagon

You kinda lost me. Is that a yes? A no?

If it meant 1080p, and critically AVC, I would certainly take eclipse on BD as opposed to DVD. It means getting closer to the production source print, and that is all that I would ask for in a bare-bones set. It wouldn't look worse... not if "information theory" is worth studying

Originally Posted by tenia

This is a so borderline argument that I can't not react even if I'm not a Criterion integrist.

Well, I think that Criterion is so brand conscious - the fact that we are even having this discussion in a 2000+ page thread dedicated to their company might point in that direction - that they HAD to create a separate line to "justify" a cheaper/faster/dirtier product. They couldn't just slap a number on the disc and price them at $10 and expect that to fly with (thanks for the term) "integrists."

Originally Posted by tenia

It is written 3 times on each cover, 1 time on each disc, and again 3 times on the boxset.
Also, if you look closely, you will see that at the bottom of each boxset and cover, the Criterion logo is here.

Yes, if you look closely. I am really happy with the Eclipse line, having so many great overlooked films tied up by Janus with no sign of a digital release for years had me rather "anti-criterion" in my outlook. Pricing them this way, and getting them out to the fans, did a lot to ease my dissatisfaction... and with BD I am back fully on board.

Originally Posted by tenia

Yeah, it's not like they have released almost 30 sets already, meaning about 100 movies.

I have about 1/2 of them... but I only discovered them in the last year through these forums. I had moved on to HD media in the last five years, so I was pretty oblivious to recent developments in DVD.

Originally Posted by AgentOrange

My theory is actually that these sell in such low numbers compared to their own "normal" Criterion releases, that they just can't/won't do production on both formats simultaneously. So if they are to just do one format, DVD continues to be their logical choice (especially factoring in they might not all be HD sources anyway).

I am pretty sure this is the answer. Outside of a few notable examples, their sources are mostly HD, certainly all the widescreen releases (being anamorphic) weren't transferred with a 720x480 16:9-capable Sony DV handicam sitting in the back office... The day Criterion went to anamorphic DVDs is the day their HD production line became de-facto.

Originally Posted by Joe Dalek

I don't know, maybe higher-priced Eclipse sets would balance out against better selling cheapo discs. I think the whole idea is like octagon perfectly summed it up, "a solution looking for a problem."

I think the film fans collecting Eclipse are deep enough into collecting that BD, and a slight price bump (if that is really necessary) would be acceptable. They could lose sales to DVD-stalwarts, then again there might be enough "snobs" who have passed over the set (or those of us who have moved on, myself included, who weren't aware it existed) on HD principle who would be convinced to indulge.

Originally Posted by Joe Dalek

My favorite Eclipse set is probably the Chantal Akerman one, and with the possible exception of Les Rendez-Vous d'Anna, I can't image those films on BD would look any better than the DVD does. So in most cases, "why bother"

Nikkatsu noir here... and having seen several of those films on Japanese TV in stunning HD (presuming the same transfer, unless Japan keeps them to itself) all you need to do is look at Pale Flower to see the difference. It is a shame we didn't get closer to the source.

[blujazz]

Anybody has an extra criterion case that I can buy? The website doesn't ship overseas so a bit on a tight spot. :\

[AgentOrange]

Originally Posted by Joe Dalek

Licensing (Kurosawa films or Sacha Guitry films or whatever cost more to license than one Mega This vs Giant That)

Scanning and producing 1080p transfers (other posters are saying just splat whatever transfer has been made onto a BD -- upscale, basically -- which would be less expensive)

Commissioned essays (probably not a big expense)

A professional art department (to be fair I haven't seen any Echo Bridge releases so perhaps they have nice menu designs...)

I don't know, maybe higher-priced Eclipse sets would balance out against better selling cheapo discs. I think the whole idea is like octagon perfectly summed it up, "a solution looking for a problem."

My favorite Eclipse set is probably the Chantal Akerman one, and with the possible exception of Les Rendez-Vous d'Anna, I can't image those films on BD would look any better than the DVD does. So in most cases, "why bother"

I feel like a broken record.

Anyway I recommend all you BD "snobs" jump on the forthcoming DVD nostalgia bandwagon before all the seats get taken by the streaming generation. Buy Eclipse!

As to the licensing, they've already paid for the licensing. So that shouldn't be a factor on a DVD vs blu-ray decision. I realize that sometimes there is only an agreement for one or the other, and need re-negotations to do HD releases depending on the contract. But for these older, more obsure titles I just don't see how it can come down to the actual difference in licensing cost, especially if they are just starting negotiations they should be going in with potential HD releases in mind. Besides I actually suspect that on *some* of their Eclipse sets, the licensing is probably very cheap. Maybe on the same order of Mega Octopus vs Giant Crabs

Likewise when talking about Eclipse sets, all the stuff on essays, art design, etc goes out the window. It's just a barebones release, and the only issue is FORMAT.

I do agree with your "why bother". That probably is their stance, and I don't really disagree with them that heartily. However if given the choice, now that prices on BD production has dramatically come down from 5 years ago, I'd say they "might as well" start pushing them onto blu-ray. I do hope for that. Even if the sources weren't pristine, just having them in 1080p codec would be a better representation. It would be very much a case-by-case basis as to which of the films would benefit, if at all. Some would more than others, i'm sure.

[Harrylimetheme]

I would love to see Criterion box set blu-rays of the British "new wave" films of the late fifties / early sixties: "Room at the top" and and its lesser (but still very good) sequel "Life at the top". These were superbly written and acted films, which have never had a clean DVD release in North America.

[BohemianGraham]

For what it's worth, I thought the Island of Lost Souls transfer was pretty decent, compared to the copy I watched a few months ago. Although it's not reference material, Criterion did a pretty decent job with what they had to work with.

Of course, I'm also one of the few who would rather have the film to watch for enjoyment, rather than have it sit on a shelf to collect dust and/or because the picture looks pretty. I PVR a ton of stuff from the SD version of TCM, because I'd rather spend the extra 13 a month I'd pay to watch TCM in HD towards buying a new BD, a decent pair of heels, or more important things like food and rent.

I still buy DVDs, and I'm not going to bother to upgrade a lot of the ones I have, as there's too many, some are good, but not worthy of a BD upgrade, and others will probably never see a BD upgrade because half of my DVDs are OOP, and were OOP when I bought them (yes, I paid 25 bucks for The World of Henry Orient in 2008, but it's a fantastic film).

[SlickDamian]

Watched Island of Lost Souls for the first time yesterday. A little disapointed. The film was well-made and did a half-decent job of building suspense and tension. It just seems very outdated and more of a "museum piece". Almost all Criterions I've seen, even the oldies from the '30s and '40s, are entertaining films that still hold up very well and are entertaining and/or insightful. But IOLS, I thought, was outdated and not overly compelling in a modern sense. Something I would expect from Kino (whose releases I don't buy). Just a thought.