The Criterion Collection

[koberulz]

Originally Posted by Cinema84

Even as a child, commercials use to irritate me and whenever I complained my parents would always say "they pay the bills". That was poppycock.

It isn't, though.

[RCRochester]

Originally Posted by Cinema84

Even as a child, commercials use to irritate me and whenever I complained my parents would always say "they pay the bills". That was poppycock. Television today is just an outlet for the advertising industry - actual content/programming is just a footnote. Going to the movies these days is no longer a refuge from the onslaught of commercials, which is part of the reason why I stopped going. How long will it be before they actually break for commercials during theatrical screenings?

I can barely watch programming on American network TV stations, it's just a nightmare with all the ads. There's about five minutes of content, followed by ten minutes of commercials.

[JasonMichael]

Originally Posted by Cinema84

Even as a child, commercials use to irritate me and whenever I complained my parents would always say "they pay the bills". That was poppycock. Television today is just an outlet for the advertising industry - actual content/programming is just a footnote.

That was always the case. The programming is there to drive the ads. In the 50s, the product was often placed in the programming in addition to being advertised during commercial breaks, or the actors in the show would be in the commercials.

[JasonMichael]

Originally Posted by RCRochester

I can barely watch programming on American network TV stations, it's just a nightmare with all the ads. There's about five minutes of content, followed by ten minutes of commercials.

Really? I find ads on Canadian channels far more annoying, and I am pretty sure the CRTC allows more ad minutes than the U.S. does.

[RCRochester]

Originally Posted by JasonMichael

That was always the case. The programming is there to drive the ads. In the 50s, the product was often placed in the programming in addition to being advertised during commercial breaks, or the actors in the show would be in the commercials.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NAExoSozc2c

[JasonMichael]

Originally Posted by RCRochester

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NAExoSozc2c

Exactly! And we all know the sad story of Fred and Barney's health problems down the road...

[The Sovereign]

Originally Posted by RCRochester

[url="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NAExoSozc2c"]

Wilma looks hot. They'd have sold more cigarettes if they'd just had the girls doing it.

[RCRochester]

Originally Posted by The Sovereign

Wilma looks hot. They'd have sold more cigarettes if they'd just had the girls doing it.

Hell yeah they would!

Wait... by that you meant smoking cigarettes, right? Well, that's pretty hot too.

[AaronJ]

These days, I pretty much just watch news and binge shows on HBO, and the like.

But your typical hour-long show has 42 minutes of content and 18 minutes of ads. And I completely disagree with the idea that content drives sales of product. The only two broadcast shows I still really watch (DVR, of course) are "Criminal Minds" and "L&O: SVU" -- one is primarily about often gruesome serial murder and torture, and the other is primarily about sex crimes*, against both adults and children.

I'm not sure exactly what products they're working to sell with those.


* -- Actually, that was the original title that Dick Wolf wanted for the show: "Law & Order: Sex Crimes" and NBC said, "Umm, no."

[octagon]

Originally Posted by koberulz

It isn't, though.

Exactly. If commercials don't pay the bills one has to wonder what exactly does.

It's like when people carp about athletes and mutter 'we pay their damn salaries'. Yeah, that's technically true but we don't do it by buying tickets. We do it by buying Bud Lite and Cialis

[moviegeek1992]

Originally Posted by jcs913

It's ironic (to me) that I was just reading the discussion on Roma. I just watched this last night on Netflix. I had no idea it was exclusive to that platform, but read about it and was interested, just 24 hours ago. Saw no disc release on it, so wondered if it would ever come out on disc, but I was wrong in my assumptions. Anyways, My wife has a friend with Netflix...., blah, blah...... so I was able to watch it. I watched it last night in 4K Dolby Vision, doesn't get better than that, except for in the theater, no? IMO, this is a film that needs to be seen on the big screen. It's visuals are stunning, but cannot be fully enjoyed on my 65" screen. That much I figured out, so frankly, was not that impressed. I believe that the film would benefit more from color in many, many scenes I saw, but that, of course, IMO.. I saw the film as a 'self-portrait' of a time in Cuaron's life and that came across on my set. No need for a big screen on that point, but I felt that he was going for that 'artsy' feel and at times, it did not click on the small screen. Anyways, as for the subject of streaming and exclusivity, it gets a 'NO' vote from me. If it is 10% available in the theater, it is frankly, a tv movie and does not qualify, but that's my opinion.....

I find the whole theater is better debate pretentious. Many people grew up watching movies on the small screen everything from Jaws to The Godfather thanks to VHS and DVD rentals and TV broadcasts. Maybe there are folks who watched films on the big screen, both older classics and new gems, however when you come to rewatching the titles you'll be watching it on your home TV for years to come.

Then there's the fact that more people are likely to watch a film like Roma on Netflix because of the easier access, how many regular moviegoers would have watched Roma on the big screen? Whereas if there's enough hype or good word of mouth, someone would be more inclined to press play on their streaming device from the comfort of their own home.

Regarding physical media copies of Netflix original movies, they'll come, it might take a years, but it'll happen. At the moment these movies and shows are what are driving subscribers towards Netflix, once the movies are old and no longer popular, they'll see a physical release if for no other reason that they can make some extra cash.

[RCRochester]

Originally Posted by octagon

Exactly. If commercials don't pay the bills one has to wonder what exactly does.

It's like when people carp about athletes and mutter 'we pay their damn salaries'. Yeah, that's technically true but we don't do it by buying tickets. We do it by buying Bud Lite and Cialis

It's either watch the damn commercials or put up those periodic PBS funding drives where they air an entire day of Fawlty Towers episodes and offer t-shirts and mugs if you pledge now.

[Scottie]

War and Peace is now listed on Janus's website.

http://www.janusfilms.com/films/1909

[octagon]

Originally Posted by RCRochester

It's either watch the damn commercials or put up those periodic PBS funding drives where they air an entire day of Fawlty Towers episodes and offer t-shirts and mugs if you pledge now.

The best part of those pledge drives is when the goofball hosts try to pretend they're huge fans of whatever show they're using for bait.

They're usually maybe one step above the Spinal Tap superfans who can't remember anything but 'these go to eleven'.

[Bates_Motel]

Originally Posted by moviegeek1992

I find the whole theater is better debate pretentious. Many people grew up watching movies on the small screen everything from Jaws to The Godfather thanks to VHS and DVD rentals and TV broadcasts. Maybe there are folks who watched films on the big screen, both older classics and new gems, however when you come to rewatching the titles you'll be watching it on your home TV for years to come.

Then there's the fact that more people are likely to watch a film like Roma on Netflix because of the easier access, how many regular moviegoers would have watched Roma on the big screen? Whereas if there's enough hype or good word of mouth, someone would be more inclined to press play on their streaming device from the comfort of their own home.

Regarding physical media copies of Netflix original movies, they'll come, it might take a years, but it'll happen. At the moment these movies and shows are what are driving subscribers towards Netflix, once the movies are old and no longer popular, they'll see a physical release if for no other reason that they can make some extra cash.

It’s not necessarily pretentious, but until recently, films were made for the theater (save for TV shows and TV movies). Then, video happened, but films were still made for the theater (even most straight-to-video films were intended originally for the theater first).

But now, films aren’t always made for the theater. And people have theaters in their homes. Times changed, but theater isn’t the only way to see a film anymore like it was until the the video generation.

So it’s perfectly fine, and will only become more and more prevalent as theaters skew more toward ONLY giant franchise films.

[Xtempo]

I am thinking of getting rid of my DVD versions I got on BD.
Are there any special reason like booklets that are not on the BD
for the following:

An Autumn Afternoon
Brazil [3DVD Version]
Late Spring
Naked Lunch
Sansho: The Bailiff
Time Bandits
Tokyo Story

[Gusto-Guus]

I was wondering something and you guys could maybe shed some light on.

Was Roma and most of these modern day, digital movies originally filmed in color and then graded for B&W or, like with film, originally filmed in B&W?

[octagon]

Originally Posted by Bates_Motel

It’s not necessarily pretentious, but until recently, films were made for the theater (save for TV shows and TV movies). Then, video happened, but films were still made for the theater (even most straight-to-video films were intended originally for the theater first).

But now, films aren’t always made for the theater. And people have theaters in their homes. Times changed, but theater isn’t the only way to see a film anymore like it was until the the video generation.

So it’s perfectly fine, and will only become more and more prevalent as theaters skew more toward ONLY giant franchise films.

I don't know how loosely you're defining 'recently' but it's more like two (or maybe even three) video generations now, isn't it?

It doesn't seem like it but video 'happened' about forty years ago now.

And yes, times have changed but I wonder if the real change people are worried about when it comes to movie going is in us.

I almost never go to theaters anymore. I could attribute that to a lot of things but at the end of the day the main factor is I just don't go anywhere as much as I used to

I could chalk some of that up to bigger, cheaper displays and smaller, cheaper projectors and ridiculously affordable HD discs but the truth is I started moving away from theaters when I had a 32" Sony CRT and DVD was king.

[AaronJ]

Originally Posted by octagon

[Show spoiler]I don't know how loosely you're defining 'recently' but it's more like two (or maybe even three) video generations now, isn't it?

It doesn't seem like it but video 'happened' about forty years ago now.

And yes, times have changed but I wonder if the real change people are worried about when it comes to movie going is in us.

I almost never go to theaters anymore. I could attribute that to a lot of things but at the end of the day the main factor is I just don't go anywhere as much as I used to

[Show spoiler]

I could chalk some of that up to bigger, cheaper displays and smaller, cheaper projectors and ridiculously affordable HD discs but the truth is I started moving away from theaters when I had a 32" Sony CRT and DVD was king.

Good lord, can I relate to this.

[obscurelabel]

Originally Posted by Gusto-Guus

I was wondering something and you guys could maybe shed some light on.

Was Roma and most of these modern day, digital movies originally filmed in color and then graded for B&W or, like with film, originally filmed in B&W?

I don't know the answer for digital, but I read this about a fairly recent movie shot on film (think it may have been The Man Who Wasn't There). 1) The financing was contingent on having a color version that could be shown overseas, so it was filmed in color then printed in B&W for the USA and any other relevant markets. 2) At that time, color film was MUCH better at overall image capture than the contemporary B&W stock, so that anyone desiring a B&W film would be crazy not to film on color stock and then print in B&W.

So my guess is that a digital production would be smart to record in full color if for no other reason than to capture as much image information as possible giving maximum flexibility for post-production B&W grading.

BTW this is all supposition, I'm not a cinematographer ...