The Criterion Collection

[Azores26]

Originally Posted by Sebbern

I've seen a few people on here expecting a Kurosawa set similar to the Fellini one. Is that confirmed in any way? I want to get more Kurosawas now, but it seems like a waste if there is coming a set later that includes more films that hasn't yet been released (like Red Beard).

I’m in the same boat, I only have “Seven Samurai” on blu-ray. I think that if Criterion is indeed planning to release a new Kurosawa set next year, they’re going to include it among their traditional “New Year’s Clues”, so I’ll probably wait for the clues before buying any Kurosawas.

[blujazz]

Fascinating article on the NY times on the Criterion Collection

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/...americans.html

[BluProofie]

Hoping Criterion can survive this latest cancellation happening on social media. Physical media is in enough danger. I don’t think a huge backlash was the article’s intention, but that’s apparently what a lot of people took from it.

[MifuneFan]

Originally Posted by BluProofie

Hoping Criterion can survive this latest cancellation happening on social media. Physical media is in enough danger.

What is it about?

edit: Found it https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/...americans.html

[BluProofie]

Originally Posted by MifuneFan

What is it about?

The article linked above my post. I don’t think the article is coming from a place of extreme anger, but a lot of posts(even some from filmmakers like Ava Duvernay) are quite harsh. Demanding people be fired, etc.

The article itself also doesn’t really take the realities of licensing and releasing physical media into consideration.

[MifuneFan]

Originally Posted by BluProofie

The article linked above my post. I don’t think the article is coming from a place of extreme anger, but a lot of posts(even some from filmmakers like Ava Duvernay) are quite harsh. Demanding people be fired, etc.

The article itself also doesn’t really take the realities of licensing and releasing physical media into consideration.

Ava Duvernay seems to always gets quoted whenever there's some controversy or cancel culture nonsense somewhere. It gets rather annoying to be honest, and leaves a bad taste in my mouth about her. In general there are fewer black directors out there than white, and fewer still who have critically acclaimed films that would likely fit in the collection. This isn't some intentional segregation or gate-keeping by Criterion, it's more of a reflection of the industry as a whole, which no doubt needs to change (and is slowly). Criterion are simply being scapegoated here, because some just actively look to be offended by everything. Spike Lee is usually as woke as they come, but has a nice relationship with Criterion, so it'll be interesting to see if/how he responds to this.

For their part, Criterion says they can do better, and will. I recall a similar controversy happening with the lack of female directors in the collection, and Criterion having a similar response.

[GeoffOliver]

Originally Posted by BluProofie

The article itself also doesn’t really take the realities of licensing and releasing physical media into consideration.

I think it sorta kinda did. Becker pointed out that he would need to make a deal with Lionsgate to license DuVerney’s film. I didn’t mind the article itself too much. The tone could’ve been a lot worse, and I can’t say I disagree with it’s overall intent. I don’t think Criterion is solely to blame though. The industry as a whole (at least in the US and Europe) treats women and minorities poorly compared to white men, although it’s gotten better somewhat.

Originally Posted by DandyDancing

There is nothing to restore in The Irishman’s case because it’s a digitally shot film so it’s a “digital master”.

Much of the film was shot on 35mm.

[blujazz]

Becker said that the lack of African-American films in the collection is in part a reflection of his personal “blind spots.” These were at play, for example, in his initial reaction to Julie Dash’s “Daughters of the Dust” (1991), the first theatrically released film directed by an African-American woman.

In 1992, Dash, who studied the Criterion Collection as a graduate film student at the AFI Conservatory and the University of California, Los Angeles, sent Becker a copy of “Daughters” via her distributor, Donald Krim of Kino International. The film, praised by critics for its dreamlike, multigenerational portrayal of a Gullah community on Georgia’s St. Simons Island, is often cited as an influence for Beyoncé’s “Lemonade.” But Becker turned it down.

“I didn’t understand what I was looking at,” he said, reflecting on the decision. “I didn’t understand it for what it was. And I wasn’t talking with people who were going to help me.”

I think this quote brings it home to me. The collection is great, but it is pretty jarring how an American company only has a handful of Black directors.

[BluProofie]

Originally Posted by GeoffOliver

I think it sorta kinda did. Becker pointed out that he would need to make a deal with Lionsgate to license DuVerney’s film. I didn’t mind the article itself too much. The tone could’ve been a lot worse, and I can’t say I disagree with it’s overall intent.



Much if the film was shot on 35mm.

Yeah, my issue wasn’t with the article itself(although it really doesn’t take licensing and rights issues into consideration). I agree that the collection should be more diverse. My problem is the social media pile-on.

Originally Posted by MifuneFan

Ava Duvernay seems to always gets quoted whenever there's some controversy or cancel culture nonsense somewhere. It gets rather annoying to be honest, and leaves a bad taste in my mouth about her. In general there are fewer black directors out there than white, and fewer still who have critically acclaimed films that would likely fit in the collection. This isn't some intentional segregation or gate-keeping by Criterion, it's more of a reflection of the industry as a whole, which no doubt needs to change (and is slowly). Criterion are simply being scapegoated here, because some just actively look to be offended by everything. Spike Lee is usually as woke as they come, but has a nice relationship with Criterion, so it'll be interesting to see if/how he responds to this.

For their part, Criterion says they can do better, and will. I recall a similar controversy happening with the lack of female directors in the collection, and Criterion having a similar response.

Agree about Duvernay. I also don’t think she’s a very good director, though I’ve only seen When They See Us, A Wrinkle in Time and Selma from here.

[joy-division]

Originally Posted by Sebbern

I've seen a few people on here expecting a Kurosawa set similar to the Fellini one. Is that confirmed in any way? I want to get more Kurosawas now, but it seems like a waste if there is coming a set later that includes more films that hasn't yet been released (like Red Beard).

Kurosawa fans would have all the films already released by Criterion by you know they would buy it anyway. I don't see the point but then again, I would never purchase it.

They could add stuff like for the first time restoring the eclipse films & upgrading them to blu-ray plus a massive book

How much Kurosawa archive stuff is there that has still to see the light/not on blu-ray yet?

[whiteberry]

Duvernay is worth millions of dollars. If she wanted to, she could start up her own label and release the movies she thinks Criterion is overlooking. But she rather tell Criterion how they should spend their money and not have to risk any of her own money on movies with limited commercial appeal.

[Snicket]

So a label that prides itself on being the Noah’s Ark of cinema gets in the spotlight for its lack of black directed films, the head of said company admits its partially due to his bias and cinematic blind spot and vows to do better and the person you decide to throw shade at is...Ava Duvernay?? Beyond silly.

[jshaide]

A crooked C on a blu-ray case only has as much meaning as someone gives it. It' all really means nothing. It just means a company did their job of having people fetishize them well.

[GeoffOliver]

I guess you could make similar arguments for the other labels in varying degrees, but none of them have the prestige that Criterion has.

[exzachary]

Gotta love how Duvernay cries racism because Criterion passed on some awful film she made.

[javy]

Originally Posted by ravenus

Not necessarily. For instance, I was hugely moved by Grave of the Fireflies, but it was so depressing, I never felt like watching the film again. Similarly, I avoided watching the Plague Dogs because it would be too emotionally wrenching for me. Not saying it's the same reason for Owl and The Irishman, but everyone has their own way of thinking about these things.

Originally Posted by regeyer

I have to agree. There are certain movies that I thought were excellent - but I have no desire to watch them again. Usually the movies are sad, like Titanic. For movies like that, it's one and done.

Originally Posted by MifuneFan

Yeah, more recently the documentary They Shall Not Grow Old is a film I was very moved and impressed by, but one I don't see myself ever watching again. Perhaps with more time I'll feel differently.

[blujazz]

It is a private company so it can do whatever it wants.

But also at the same time, it markets itself as curators of cinema, based in the US, so there definitely is tension there.

If, at the end of this, they end up releasing a big boxset of undiscovered films by Black filmmakers, it’ll be worth the fuss. Lots of people use that C logo as a starting point of discovering something new.

[BluProofie]

I doubt many of the people calling for resignations actually collect physical media.

[blujazz]

Cancel culture is awful - it’s just people in their echo chambers validating each other’s perceived awesomeness.

[BluProofie]

One of the film critics who was mad about the article tweeted that he had been waiting for Criterion to release Candyman and couldn’t understand why there wasn’t a release. You’d think a fan would know about the Scream Factory release.