The Criterion Collection

[blkhrt]

Originally Posted by Blu Titan

I know I am biased, but pro-b knows what he is looking at .

I wasn't disputing that at all! I think he does one of the better jobs of anyone out there. I was just making the point that it is always interesting to see the different opinions that reviewers have about a release.

[Spire]

Watched Cronos the other day. It was ok. I enjoyed the story, very much disliked the score, and some makeup effects kinda detracted from the movie, imo. I still think it was worth a watch though, might watch with commentary later. Annnnd today I picked up Sweet Smell Of Success, The Life and Death of Colonel Blimp, The Devil's Backbone, and Shoah.

[NoirFan]

Really disappointed about Earrings, looks like another Children of Paradise. Two landmark French films, a pity they've been completely botched. Is there a foreign release of Earrings on BD, or would that simply be a port of the Gaumont release anyway?

[Edward J Grug III]

Originally Posted by jw007

Children of Paradise

and

In the Mood for Love

are the only ones I can think of.

I am happy to hear this.

Why? Because I just watched In The Mood For Love and thought it looked incredible. So obviously I am not astute enough to notice and I can buy this Blu Ray without worrying.

[tama]

Originally Posted by Edward J Grug III

I am happy to hear this.

Why? Because I just watched In The Mood For Love and thought it looked incredible. So obviously I am not astute enough to notice and I can buy this Blu Ray without worrying.

In the Mood for Love does not suffer the same denoising problems that COP and Madame De suffer. Actually it shouldn't have even been mentioned in the same sentence as the other two.

[Edward J Grug III]

Originally Posted by tama

In the Mood for Love does not suffer the same denoising problems that COP and Madame De suffer. Actually it shouldn't have even been mentioned in the same sentence as the other two.

Boooo. ;P

[Simon_LDT]

Originally Posted by Sherlock_Jr

It's not really in their hands. They are a company with licenses. They use the prints given to them in certain circumstances. Nothing they can do about it. I'm sure they'd much rather use a restoration master (albeit a bad one) than fork over the money to pay for a brand new restoration. You know how much that costs?? Generally $50,000-$100,000 minimum for a black and white film (potentially more for a 2K or 4K restoration), and that's depending on the condition of the source materials. They'd never make their money back.

That is perfectly understandable. However, surely Criterion could ask for the raw 2k/4k scan/master before any further digital work is done and then do their own tinkering/clean up (if necessary)?

Or if that can't be done, refuse to pay for the license to release it until a suitable master is given to them (there are plenty of other films begging to be released instead). Releasing this poor effort will only damage their reputation.

[Blu Titan]

Originally Posted by blkhrt

I wasn't disputing that at all! I think he does one of the better jobs of anyone out there. I was just making the point that it is always interesting to see the different opinions that reviewers have about a release.

I understand . However, look at the review and the screencaps. It is really not a matter of opinion but knowledge. Not all opinions count, only informed ones. If a reviewer states that this transfer is "gorgeous" the he/she is delusional at best...my opinion of course .

[jayembee]

Originally Posted by JoeBuck

You mean no top tier releases like On The Waterfront? :P

But was On the Waterfront actually produced by Columbia, or just distributed by them? That makes a difference in determining who owns a film. For example, most of Bob Hope's movies from the late 40s onward were owned by Hope's own production company, not by Paramount, who distributed them. A number of Frank Capra's were owned by Capra's production company, not the studios that distributed them. And so on.

[starman15317]

So here's a little question for everyone: when were you introduced to the Criterion Collection? Was it in the Laserdisc days? DVD era? Or were you introduced with Blu-Ray? And what was the first Criterion you saw or bought?

My first Criterion was Chasing Amy (mainstream title, I know). When I was 10 or 11 I was introduced to Kevin Smith (a little young, I know ) so when I first rented Chasing Amy, I rented the Criterion DVD. It was the first Criterion I bought too. I sold the DVD when I bought the Blu-Ray, which was a bad idea. I'll have to buy the DVD again (it's very cheap now). A few years after is when I started to watch a few more Criterions (mainstream stuff, like Dazed and Confused and The Blob). Eventually, I got to where I am today, interested in more diverse films than I would have thought.

[jw007]

Originally Posted by tama

In the Mood for Love does not suffer the same denoising problems that COP and Madame De suffer. Actually it shouldn't have even been mentioned in the same sentence as the other two.

Well, it got 3.5 stars out of 5 on this site for PQ so though its a good transfer, its still not the best. Just sayin'....

[jw007]

Also...

Other films with problematic transfers are: High and Low, Rosetta, Design for Living and The 39 Steps.

[NoirFan]

^
You know that a company is the benchmark for quality when 3.5 stars for video is considered 'problematic' and as bad a rating as one will find for their Blu-ray product. Not that the (relatively minor) issues with those four transfers aren't legitimate - though with Design for Living they are likely inherent in the source material, and probably couldn't be improved upon without an expensive overhaul - it just shows how impressive their overall track record really is. Paradise and Earrings do both look dreadful though.

[UNCMT9]

Originally Posted by Spire

Watched Cronos the other day. It was ok. I enjoyed the story, very much disliked the score, and some makeup effects kinda detracted from the movie, imo. I still think it was worth a watch though, might watch with commentary later. Annnnd today I picked up Sweet Smell Of Success, The Life and Death of Colonel Blimp, The Devil's Backbone, and Shoah.

Cronos is one of my least favorite Del Toro films.

[UNCMT9]

Originally Posted by jw007

Also...

Other films with problematic transfers are: High and Low, Rosetta, Design for Living and The 39 Steps.

You're correct about High and Low. Wasn't 39 Steps more or less a print issue?

[SammyJankis]

I've watched the In the Mood for Love blu twice and it looks just fine. Not on par with their best, for sure, but it still looks damn good.

And there's not much you can do with Rosetta. I imagine that's the best it can look.

[FilmCafe]

Could someone tell me what dates Criterion.com does their sales?

[Scottie]

Originally Posted by FilmCafe

Could someone tell me what dates Criterion.com does their sales?

February and September

[ultlife2013]

Originally Posted by KrugerIndustrial

Naturally I have yet to see this transfer with my own eyes, but I do not understand why Criterion, once again, decides to give the green light to such a subpar release. Why not wait until a better transfer is available, or even better, pay for a new one? Criterion's reputation is based on solid supplements, and that they'll go that extra mile to provide the high-paying customers stellar transfers. The only assumption I can make, is that Children of Paradise sold well enough, so why bother with this one either?

I agree with you but is that high paying customers comment really needed to be part of your statement?

[Sherlock_Jr]

Originally Posted by NoirFan

Really disappointed about Earrings, looks like another Children of Paradise. Two landmark French films, a pity they've been completely botched. Is there a foreign release of Earrings on BD, or would that simply be a port of the Gaumont release anyway?

And the sad thing is that it was two different companies, Pathe and Gaumont, who did the restorations. I could understand if one company repeatedly botched things... but now we have a second? However, Pathe's restoration of Tess was apparently beautiful, so perhaps there was some illogical reasoning behind why both of these films got DNR'd to death.

Originally Posted by Simon_LDT

That is perfectly understandable. However, surely Criterion could ask for the raw 2k/4k scan/master before any further digital work is done and then do their own tinkering/clean up (if necessary)?

Or if that can't be done, refuse to pay for the license to release it until a suitable master is given to them (there are plenty of other films begging to be released instead). Releasing this poor effort will only damage their reputation.

Ask for it from who? The restoration was just finished. The company wouldn't go back and offer an unrestored scan they just spend tens of thousands on. Criterion is stuck releasing whatever prints they are given in many cases, depending on the rights holders. They can't so easily breach contract.