The Criterion Collection

[Reddington]

Originally Posted by Kaiju no Kami

To be fair, they're going to say that. All retail employees are not allowed to tell you when something is going on sale even if they do know because the company sees it as hurting the sale of the items right then and there.

Also, it is possible they don't know about it right now. Often stores do not learn about a sale until the week before it happens. When I worked at Best Buy we would not know something was going on sale until our ads for the following week arrived the Tuesday beforehand. The only exception was Black Friday, but only managers were allowed to see the BF ad in advanced.

I can only relay what I was told after witnessing the associates in three stores check with management and on their "system."

I hope as much as anyone that it does go ahead.

[jayembee]

One more thing about the UHD business. Consider the market. Not just the market for UHD vs BD in general. The market that Criterion has carved out for itself.

Whatever success the UHD format, for the most part, has enjoyed has been because of the kinds of movies that have appeared in the format. Typically, it's been the SF/fantasy/action blockbusters. It's been the market that the major studio labels typically reserve for themselves. Now, some of the older catalog films that have been released on UHD are films that have actually been in the Criterion catalog before, particularly their LD catalog: Ghostbusters, Blade Runner, The Wizard of Oz, 2001: A Space Odyssey, and more recently Lawrence of Arabia and Dr. Strangelove.

But generally speaking, those are the kinds of titles that the major labels like to keep for themselves, and -- again, generally speaking -- a title that Criterion licenses from a studio label is unlikely to be the kind of film that tends to get released on UHD. The Elephant Man is a good example of the first. Why couldn't they license the UHD master from Studio Canal? Well, the big reason is that the US rights are owned by Paramount, and not Studio Canal, so Criterion would have to license it from Paramount.

So, yeah, OK. You can get a UHD of The Elephant Man or Don't Look Now or Parasite or Dr. Strangelove from someone other than Criterion. So do it. Criterion isn't going to lose enough sales because of this to make any difference to their business plan. Also consider that Criterion has direct (meaning, sell some of the same titles) competitors outside the US, like Eureka or BFI, and people who are region free can decide to buy an edition from one of them instead of Criterion if the UK editions have a better encoding or better extras.

I love Criterion, and have ever since the laserdisc days. But I don't buy everything they put out. And probably most (if not all) of you are the same. In the overall scheme of things, what difference does it make to Criterion if you decide not to buy Movie A from them on BD because you can get it from somewhere else on UHD, or decide not to buy it because you can get a better BD from elsewhere, or decide not to buy it simply because you don't care for the movie?

[joy-division]

Originally Posted by Kaiju no Kami

So I have to ask, since Criterion seems to refuse to do 4kUHD releases, do you think they are becoming obsolete? Don't get me wrong, they still do phenomenal releases, but what's the point of remastering movies in 4K if they aren't going to properly release them with 4K discs? And why would anyone want to buy a Criterion release that is only 1080P if there is a 4K version available? Take Parasite for example. My wife wanted to Criterion release, but now that we have a 4KTV, she's wonder if she should still get the Criterion release or just get the 4K disc that is out.

For the extras

[Reddington]

I also think Criterion's "Mission Statement" can be misinterpreted (and therefore misquoted) in support of the demand for UHD releases.

"Since 1984, the Criterion Collection has been dedicated to publishing important classic and contemporary films from around the world in editions that offer the highest technical quality...."

Maybe semantics. But I take that to mean for the format the edition is released in, not the most recent format itself.

[peschi]

I like Criterion, heck Im buying discs from them since the nineties, and they are always special releases. That being said, I think they could be a bit better with the supplements.

They tend these days to just focus on supplements made themselves, and skipping other archival pieces. For example, the new release of Portrait of a Lady on Fire, the UK (non criterion, orginally from the French release of the disc) disc gets a very informative commentary track by the director and actors. The US Criterion release doesnt bother with it, and only has a few filler interviews. Frankly for a label as Criterion its inexcusable.

[jshaide]

Originally Posted by peschi

I like Criterion, heck Im buying discs from them since the nineties, and they are always special releases. That being said, I think they could be a bit better with the supplements.

They tend these days to just focus on supplements made themselves, and skipping other archival pieces. For example, the new release of Portrait of a Lady on Fire, the UK (non criterion, orginally from the French release of the disc) disc gets a very informative commentary track by the director and actors. The US Criterion release doesnt bother with it, and only has a few filler interviews. Frankly for a label as Criterion its inexcusable.

It could possibly be their arrangement with Neon, though.

[peschi]

Originally Posted by jshaide

It could possibly be their arrangement with Neon, though.

Highly doubtful, its released in a different market (region B locked discs), so its not competing with the Neon releases.

[jayembee]

Originally Posted by peschi

They tend these days to just focus on supplements made themselves, and skipping other archival pieces. For example, the new release of Portrait of a Lady on Fire, the UK (non criterion, orginally from the French release of the disc) disc gets a very informative commentary track by the director and actors. The US Criterion release doesnt bother with it, and only has a few filler interviews. Frankly for a label as Criterion its inexcusable.

It could well be a simple economic decision. I've seen any number of instances of labels not getting a commentary, for example, because the people who would be involved want more money than the label is willing to pay.

[joy-division]

Originally Posted by peschi

I like Criterion, heck Im buying discs from them since the nineties, and they are always special releases. That being said, I think they could be a bit better with the supplements.

They tend these days to just focus on supplements made themselves, and skipping other archival pieces. For example, the new release of Portrait of a Lady on Fire, the UK (non criterion, orginally from the French release of the disc) disc gets a very informative commentary track by the director and actors. The US Criterion release doesnt bother with it, and only has a few filler interviews. Frankly for a label as Criterion its inexcusable.

Well, a portait of a lady on fire(2019) commentary is isn't exactly "archival" so bad example

Same reason why Arrow/Masters of Cinema releases can't carry all criterion extras onto their releases of films that Criterion have also made.

Does the MoC release of Kwaidan have the Criterion commentary track? No. But is it still a great release? Yes, but good luck getting hold of one now

[DaBargainHunta]

Quick question: Is there a way to give someone a referral link to The Criterion Channel so I get something for it as well? I know that used to be a thing with Hulu.

[DimitriL]

Originally Posted by jayembee

It could well be a simple economic decision. I've seen any number of instances of labels not getting a commentary, for example, because the people who would be involved want more money than the label is willing to pay.

Peter Becker and others have also talked about the issue of commentaries. One thing Criterion has really focused on in its last decade and a half is its supplements being less of a "kitchen sink" effort, and more to try and tell a specific story about a film, where they bring something very focused to the table.

Something they've also said many times in recent years is that commentaries simply aren't the priority they used to be. First, they believe people's viewing habits have changed and they're not as likely to sit down for a movie-length lecture. If there's something special, they'll do it, but it's not their first line of attack. (Also, I think that most commentaries from filmmakers and talent tended to be a letdown, more often than not.)

Also, when they started putting commentaries on laserdiscs, there was no internet. Commentaries on their discs were one of the first ways to bring film scholarship to a fairly wide audience, beyond film students and critics and dedicated cinephiles. Spending two hours with Howard Suber was like sitting in on a very cool film studies class. Now, you're a click away from multiple scholarly takes for any given film. The purpose they served isn't quite as vital - even if, like me, you find them deeply enjoyable and wish they'd do more.

[jw007]

Originally Posted by BigBoxBlu

once cassavetes films go to 4k, that’s when i buy a 4k player.

just finished husbands, cassavetes is my favorite director and while this isn’t my favorite film of his, i enjoy taking the exhausting ride every now and then and i think the transfer looks great. harmony korine said you don’t watch husbands you live it and i feel that’s the best way to sum it up. here’s hoping they get minnie at some point.

Yes, seeing his films in 4K would be a revelation. I need to dust me off some Cassavetes one of these days again.

Originally Posted by film11

BenQ 3D/4K projectors seem to get high marks for around a $1500 price point.

DLP gives the rainbow effect, though that player by BenQ is pretty top notch, however I'm leaning towards 3LCD lamp projectors from Epson such as the 5050. This thing is a dream (but not cheap... but at that price point, one of the best): https://www.amazon.com/Epson-Home-Ci.../dp/B07P7Y3D6G

The UST (ultra short throw) laser projectors are still evolving but that IS the future I believe. VAVA 4K is a good one but lack of color/contrast adjustments.

[jw007]

My 2 cents on the recent discussion on why or if Criterion hasn't made UHD discs is aligned with jayembee's thoughts. To me, I buy Criterions because I trust everything they put out there. I value Criterions more than other video distributors because of their high quality transfers, consistent branding, and always unique supplements, that supersedes whether or not the video quality is the sharpest format possible. I am on the EDGE of possibly upgrading to 4K however (with my aforementioned post on 4K projectors), and the one title that has done it for me (or maybe has done it for me) is the Color Out of Space UHD disc that came out 4 months ago. When we start seeing super indie filmmaker Richard Stanley's movies coming to 4K, that's when I start taking notice of the format.

[jw007]

Originally Posted by yarulbcool

Ehh, I think you’re reaching at this point. I love Criterion, but their quality would greatly improve with a transition to 4k. People in denial either sound like folks moaning about the shift from DVD to Blu-ray or watch all their films on a 42” TV. I get it—you like the extras on the criterion disc (and the scanovo case). But that doesn’t mean it is unreasonable of us who want the superior version of the, you know, actual film. There are so many quality discs that put Blu-ray to shame.

I'm definitely not in denial. I welcome their decision to start releasing UHDs. I expect they certainly will sometime within the next year or two.

I think its also a matter of "beauty is in the eye of the beholder" when it comes to formats. Some people, believe it or not, are happy with plain good ol' DVDs still. Maybe they just aren't videophiles and care about needing to have the most advanced format there is.

You're preaching to the choir though. I'm one of those people who need to have the latest and greatest when it comes to cinema. Perhaps I just haven't made the full plunge yet because I still am buying 1080p blu-rays and am watching them on a 13 year old HDTV and a 10 year old blu-ray player that I want to upgrade soon... like very soon.

Blu-ray is still my format of choice (and don't forget, UHD is still technically blu-ray, just an enhanced variant of it).

[Gerby]

Originally Posted by jw007

Yes, seeing his films in 4K would be a revelation. I need to dust me off some Cassavetes one of these days again.



DLP gives the rainbow effect, though that player by BenQ is pretty top notch, however I'm leaning towards 3LCD lamp projectors from Epson such as the 5050. This thing is a dream (but not cheap... but at that price point, one of the best): https://www.amazon.com/Epson-Home-Ci.../dp/B07P7Y3D6G

The UST (ultra short throw) laser projectors are still evolving but that IS the future I believe. VAVA 4K is a good one but lack of color/contrast adjustments.

My 1st projector was an Epson LCD & i had no end of issues with dust getting inside the machine & settling on the LCD panels as they don't have a sealed light path. Results in big ugly dust blobs showing up on the projected image. Wish i could afford a JVC DLA but i love my Sony SXRD that i have now.

[Bates_Motel]

Originally Posted by jayembee

The Elephant Man is a good example of the first. Why couldn't they license the UHD master from Studio Canal? Well, the big reason is that the US rights are owned by Paramount, and not Studio Canal, so Criterion would have to license it from Paramount.

Yet they DID license the rights from Paramount for their release, and it’s from the same master as the UHD. So...

[jayembee]

Originally Posted by Bates_Motel

Yet they DID license the rights from Paramount for their release, and it’s from the same master as the UHD. So...

But were they able to license UHD rights, or just BD rights?

[ravenus]

I think one of the side effects of having a rabid core fanbase is that every thing you do is dissected minutely. Let's say for instance that Criterion announced a 4K UHD option of Parasite. Everyone's happy (although you could get the same by paying 20$ for the studio 4K release and 20$ for Criterion's supplement-laden BD set, which is probably less than what they would charge for a UHD+BD set).

But what happens next is that for every subsequent film they release, they are continuously going to be questioned by the 4K capable fraction of this same rabid fanbase "Is there going to be a 4K release I should wait for?" "Why does X movie get only a 2K restoration / BD only release?"

A bunch of people are immediately going to put up posts on forums or badger them with emails with a list of the films they want to see immediately upgraded to 4K. Obviously even when they will release 4K's it's not going to include a large proportion of their catalog that don't generate sufficient sales to make worthwhile the input in negotiating fresh licenses (for region free UHD releases) and remastering and all that.

Let us suppose they release UHD's only for future restoration projects, they still have a problem with the business model. Thus far, Criterion has not entered the limited edition market where they say, "OK, we're press 1000 copies of this, and it's first come first served", so they are in the delicate position of having to figure out how much they need to make to have adequate stock but not wasted inventory for a very niche product. Remember Criterion are the only major boutique label that totally dropped the ball on dual format releases. No one else - Eureka, BFI, Arrow - had issues with dual format SKU's. But in the name of consistency and having to appeal to price conscious DVD-only customers, these guys made a muck of it. So yeah, I wouldn't be holding my breath on how soon they're going to be doing UHD's.

Maybe some of you guys should band together and approach them with a crowdfunded project to fund disc authoring and making glass masters, which I understand represent the biggest expense, and then maybe they can be persuaded to do some 4K's.

[Reddington]

Originally Posted by yarulbcool

There are so many quality discs that put Blu-ray to shame.

Yes, and there are also UHD releases that get underwhelming reviews - either for inherent issues, or for offering only a "marginal" improvement.

I'd be more than happy for you should Criterion start releasing UHD titles, but they are unlikely to be swayed into doing so by the "superior format" argument. It has to make economic sense for them.

[FragnitoM]

Originally Posted by Reddington

Yes, and there are also UHD releases that get underwhelming reviews - either for inherent issues, or for offering only a "marginal" improvement.

I'd be more than happy for you should Criterion start releasing UHD titles, but they are unlikely to be swayed into doing so by the "superior format" argument. It has to make economic sense for them.

Criterion makes an estimated 18 million in annual revenue with only about 100 employees with a swanky park avenue office in NYC and they already have years worth of 4K scans ready to go. I think they’re fine economically and releasing UHD discs isn’t a huge gamble. People who want UHD will buy it and people who still want to watch DVDs can do that too