The Criterion Collection

[AaronJ]

Originally Posted by pro-bassoonist

Aaron,

I would like to mention something to you. There is a large number of these discs that have imposed French subtitles. Apparently there is a small run where they can be turned off as well, but the first print -- which came via the box set (see below) -- has the imposed subtitles.

If you absolutely have to have this film now, see if you can confirm 100% what you get and then look for a sale. But my advise is to wait for a U.S. release. The film will be released on Blu-ray here. It might take some time, but we will get a local release.

[Show spoiler]

If there is interest, we could do some reviews.

Pro-B

Thank you for the info. I guess I need to wait.

But it sucks to wait for Sofia.

[mja345]

There has to be a distinction between money grabs and films that will sell well simply on their own merits or own fanbase. I mean, "McCabe and Mrs. Miller" will sell well because anyone who is a fan of that film will pick up the CC edition because the DVD is so shit and it's been needing a great release for so long. Or "The Graduate" probably sold really well because the previous BD was lacking. Money grabs, to me, would be releasing films way below their customary standards to simply move a lot of copies. I mean, I'm not a huge Wes Anderson fan, but his films aren't objectively bad. A lot of younger film fans, who haven't been exposed to as much, view him as this great filmmaker. Doesn't really bother me.

Criterion releases a lot of obscure stuff that has little chance of selling many copies, so you can't fault them in trying to balance it out. Their more mainstream stuff almost always consists of quality films.

[captveg]

In regards to Criterion releasing a lot of samurai films - Criterion was built on the bread-and-butter of Hollywood classics and the art house international cinema of France, Italy and Japan. They will always fall back on these no matter how many titles they release or how many diversions into other areas of film they pursue.

[Alex82]

All this talk about what Criterion "should" release and what not, and I think there's something that often gets overlooked: their Laserdisc era.

Back in those days, home video was, what, like 97% tape rentals and the rest were the odd guys buying $99 VHS tapes or ultra-niche Laserdiscs. Studios were testing the digital waters and Criterion had a wide selection of titles to pick and get licenses.

I think that's the "real" Criterion.

You had your big Hollywood classics... Citizen Kane, High Noon, It's a Wonderful Life, The Wizard of Oz, Casablanca, Lawrence of Arabia...

International Cinema "Greatest Hits"... The Seventh Seal, Grand Illusion, Seven Samurai, 8 1/2, Breathless, The 400 Blows...

At the same time, they also had huge crowd pleasers... Ghostbusters, Close Encounters of the Third Kind, Coppola's Dracula, RoboCop, Pulp Fiction, The Rock...

When the studios adopted the DVD format, they handled their own titles and Criterion had to modify their mission / statement /selection / whatever, and their output changed to what we have since the DVD era, a combination of foreign classics, some licensed big studio titles, some indie films, some lesser know movies from big directors.

Judging from their Laserdisc catalogue, I'm pretty sure that if Criterion could release the Spider-man, Harry Potter, Lord of the Rings movies, they would.

When they release an already-available title on Blu-ray, OK, there's room for criticism. When they release "genre" films (not that popular, by the way), I don't think they deserve criticism for that, I don't think there's such thing as a "Criterion seal of approval for great cinema".

They are film buffs releasing movies for film buffs, not art cinema buffs. there's overlapping, but film buffs want to see their Kurosawas, their Hitchcocks and their big summer popcorn flick. Why stick with just one kind of flavor?

[xxnomad]

arguing over which films belong in the collection or which are released as money grabs or what have you is just as pointless as arguing over which bands belong or don't belong in the rock and roll hall of fame.

as much as believe in the mission statement of criterion (releasing the kurosawas, bergmans, and other art house gems into the world), if they need to release dog poop to line their coffers a bit in order to grab more little seen titles (like a naruse or something) then by all means.

i guess i'm in the minority with this line of thinking.

forgot to add...of course complaining or offering a different opinion is completely in anyone's right as a supporter of the brand.

[MifuneFan]

Bob Dylan Criterion sold out!

[shadedpain4]

Originally Posted by xxnomad

i guess i'm in the minority with this line of thinking.

My guess is that you're actually in the majority, but the minority is just very vocal.

And *anything* that gets more legitimate English friendly Naruse releases out is worthwhile in my book.

[Feiereisel]

Originally Posted by xxnomad

arguing over which films belong in the collection or which are released as money grabs or what have you is just as pointless as arguing over which bands belong or don't belong in the rock and roll hall of fame.

as much as believe in the mission statement of criterion (releasing the kurosawas, bergmans, and other art house gems into the world), if they need to release dog poop to line their coffers a bit in order to grab more little seen titles (like a naruse or something) then by all means.

i guess i'm in the minority with this line of thinking.

forgot to add...of course complaining or offering a different opinion is completely in anyone's right as a supporter of the brand.

Not as far as I'm concerned. I prefer it when my favorite companies stay in business.

Originally Posted by MifuneFan

Bob Dylan Criterion sold out!

Ha! RoboCop - Spine #23; Armageddon - Spine #40

[JJJ225]

Release something they haven't heard of: Yawn! Boring month!

Release something that many people have heard of: Wow. Sell outs.

[bwdowiak]

Originally Posted by mja345

There has to be a distinction between money grabs and films that will sell well simply on their own merits or own fanbase.

yes. these titles sell well because of their fan base - not necessarily because they are good films.

here is their mission statement. when conversations like this come up, people always make the same argument and people refer to their mission statement.

[Show spoiler]
Since 1984, the Criterion Collection, a continuing series of important classic and contemporary films, has been dedicated to gathering the greatest films from around the world and publishing them in editions that offer the highest technical quality and award-winning, original supplements. Over the years, as we moved from laserdisc to DVD, Blu-ray disc, and online streaming, we’ve seen a lot of things change, but one thing has remained constant: our commitment to publishing the defining moments of cinema for a wider and wider audience. The foundation of the collection is the work of such masters of cinema as Renoir, Godard, Kurosawa, Cocteau, Fellini, Bergman, Tarkovsky, Hitchcock, Fuller, Lean, Kubrick, Lang, Sturges, Dreyer, Eisenstein, Ozu, Sirk, Buñuel, Powell and Pressburger. Each film is presented uncut, in its original aspect ratio, as its maker intended it to be seen. Every time we start work on a film, we track down the best available film elements in the world, use state-of-the-art telecine equipment and a select few colorists capable of meeting our rigorous standards, then take time during the film-to-video digital transfer to create the most pristine possible image and sound. Whenever possible, we work with directors and cinematographers to ensure that the look of our releases does justice to their intentions. Our supplements enable viewers to appreciate Criterion films in context, through audio commentaries by filmmakers and scholars, restored director’s cuts, deleted scenes, documentaries, shooting scripts, early shorts, and storyboards. To date, more than 150 filmmakers have made our library of Director Approved DVDs, Blu-ray discs, and laserdiscs the most significant archive of contemporary filmmaking available to the home viewer.

sure, they can define important, but their statement also uses the terms "greatest" and "defining moments of cinema." they even list Bunuel and Tarkovsky who haven't had films released on Blu-ray for several years. we can talk all we want about what does or doesn't fit, but as per their mission statement, I don't think it is an unreasonable stretch to say some of these films might not fit.

I didn't intend to upset anyone. if you enjoy samurai flicks, then like I said, "have fun." I just don't see these films as any "greatest" anything. obviously, I don't know the genre very well, but they don't seem genre defining either.

[SkyAntoine]

I actually have not seen any of these. I'm most excited about

[Show spoiler]Dreams

and to see what they do with the packaging for

[Show spoiler]Lone Wolf and Cub

.
Not sure if any month will ever give me goose pimples like the announcement of Pan's last month.

[bwdowiak]

Originally Posted by shadedpain4

My guess is that you're actually in the majority, but the minority is just very vocal.

And *anything* that gets more legitimate English friendly Naruse releases out is worthwhile in my book.

is the minority more vocal? or is it just that when someone expresses an opinion that is contrary to popular opinion, people get on the defensive?

just for the record, I'm not part of that minority. I accept the fact that we need money makers in order to have nice things. I've gone on record here before saying as much.

[Dragun]

Originally Posted by xxnomad

as much as believe in the mission statement of criterion (releasing the kurosawas, bergmans, and other art house gems into the world), if they need to release dog poop to line their coffers a bit in order to grab more little seen titles (like a naruse or something) then by all means.

i guess i'm in the minority with this line of thinking.

Even their "dog poop" can't be considered outright bad films. I might not be interested in certain films they release, and I might even dislike some, but I almost never see their a Criterion title and think, "really, THIS is what they chose to release???" Okay, I probably did that when they released The Rock and Armageddon on DVD. But they haven't released titles like those in a long time. Their most mainstream titles these days are the ones by Wes Anderson.

[xxnomad]

Originally Posted by bwdowiak

is the minority more vocal? or is it just that when someone expresses an opinion that is contrary to popular opinion, people get on the defensive?

just for the record, I'm not part of that minority. I accept the fact that we need money makers in order to have nice things. I've gone on record here before saying as much.

DIFFERENT ISSUE but somewhat similar (kind of?) i think the minority was way more vocal during the whole dual format era. sometimes we can't have nice things.

but then again i probably live in a bubble.

[jedidarrick]

Originally Posted by xxnomad

DIFFERENT ISSUE but somewhat similar (kind of?) i think the minority was way more vocal during the whole dual format era. sometimes we can't have nice things.

but then again i probably live in a bubble.

He's like some sort of non-giving-up film guy!

[cicada88]

Originally Posted by bwdowiak

How many pulpy samurai movies do we need in the collection?

As many as Criterion can get their grubby little mitts on

[Gusto-Guus]

I very excited about Punch-Drunk Love. Was watching this past weekend and hoping someone would pick it up -there's no blu ray release for it. Very glad it's Criterion.

Now, if only someone would pick up Little Children.....

[bwdowiak]

Originally Posted by cicada88

As many as Criterion can get their grubby little mitts on

nearly 20 people (no exaggeration - count them) have liked this same comment posted 3 times.

...and you guys are trying to make a point that these are not popular films?

[MifuneFan]

Originally Posted by bwdowiak

nearly 20 people (no exaggeration - count them) have liked this same comment posted 3 times.

...and you guys are trying to make a point that these are not popular films?

Where are people arguing that?

[senseabove]

I've no dog in the pro/anti-samurai film fight, but didn't Criterion explicitly say that samurai films as a genre are their biggest money-makers?