Kino: What's your definition?

[bhampton]

I have One, Fallen Angels.

I watched it,... Can't remember anything about it,... I think it made no sense.

[Scottie]

While only having seen a couple Kino films, I still prefer Criterion.

I think Criterion puts more work into their releases and has a better and more interesting selection. Kino does have its share of cool releases, but nothing that really stands out for me.

I like how Fritz Lang is a part of their collection, though.

[Abdrewes]

Originally Posted by iScottie

While only having seen a couple Kino films, I still prefer Criterion.

I think Criterion puts more work into their releases and has a better and more interesting selection. Kino does have its share of cool releases, but nothing that really stands out for me.

I like how Fritz Lang is a part of their collection, though.

This whole post proves my point. If the films were released by CC, there would be more curiosity towards the films.

[SimBelm]

I think the Wong Kar-wai comparisons don't work too well as the Criterions are arguably his most well known films (along with 2046). I'd imagine more people have bought Kino's Metropolis than Criterion's Ministry of Fear. I buy less from Kino because I'm not that into such early American cinema, and sometimes there's a better UK release of the ones I do want.

[AgentOrange]

Originally Posted by Abdrewes

This whole post proves my point. If the films were released by CC, there would be more curiosity towards the films.

Maybe,

But after checking out a good number of Kino releases on blu-ray and DVD, there is no comparison whatsoever to their overall quality. They are more wildly inconsistent than Criterion. So perhaps the different levels of interest are warrented?

Criterion surely had some mis-steps in the DVD days, but Kino has some absolutely HORRID quality releases, and even some of their blu-rays leave much to be desired. I know that some of it is "source related" and cannot be repaired, but I suspect that in alot of cases SOMETHING could have been done about it if there was just any budget whatsoever.

(and I'm not saying Criterion is faultless either, because they have a few poor blu-ray releases as well - but they aren't nearly as "all over the map" as Kino)

[HD Goofnut]

Overpriced classics for the most part. The only I own is The Complete Metropolis.

[The Great Owl]

When Kino hits the mark, they really hit the mark. They just don't seem to do so quite as often as Criterion does.

I've got a few choice Kino DVDs (Nosferatu, etc.), but no Kino Blu-rays just yet.

[MifuneFan]

I have Die Nibelungen, and the 1984 version of Metropolis, and I'm pleased to own both. I'd get the regular Metropolis from them too but I have the Masters of Cinema version. They put out quality releases from what I can see, and I don't consider them any more overpriced than Criterion. Both labels sell premium movies with usually great PQ/AQ, and extras, and both have their respective 50% off sales at different retailers which bring the price down to "normal" levels. I paid less than $25 combined for both of mine, which is more than worth it. Die Nibelungen alone is worth full price considering the amount of work that has gone into it, and the amount of content you get. It's unfortunate that more people don't appreciate silent cinema, as it should really be in more collections

[AgentOrange]

Originally Posted by HD Goofnut

Overpriced classics for the most part. The only I own is The Complete Metropolis.

Well there's certainly a few more "must own" Kino titles than just Metropolis.

But I do agree they tend to be overpriced for what many of them are, public domain titles with ZERO restoration work...

Other than a few gems, I think they've disappointed me more than anything. It seems like the interest in the Kino thread has gone way down as well, as I'm noticing among the pinned threads the Kino one tends to hover towards the bottom of the list. Whereas a couple of years ago it tended to hover more towards the top. Maybe just an anectodal observation on my part, but it probably has some basis in the reality.

[explodedparts]

To be fair, I much prefer a release sourced from a good print with absolutely no restoration than one marred by DNR and edge-enhancement in the pursuit of making something look "hi-def". At least it will look like film, which is the most important thing really.

[Sherlock_Jr]

I own a decent number of KINO releases - The Buster Keaton box set, Metropolos, Strike, Potemkin, Les Vampires, The Penalty, Die Nibelungen, Tarkovsky's The Sacrifice, Fallen Angels, Scarlet Street...

on DVD, The Last Laugh, Nosferatu, Dr. Mabuse The Gambler.

I don't compare them to Criterion or any other distributor, since each one has a different library, different market, different means to an end. Love the work they do, with a variety of silent classics to film noir to artists like Tarkovsky and Wog Kar Wei.

Also, I don't think they are anymore overpriced than Criterion. The Buster Keaton box set, brand new, is still $160 at ImportCDs, almost 50% off MSRP. Just like with ANY company, you can always wait for/find deals if you're patient and know where to look.

[Rizor]

The reason Kino doesn't have the reputation of Criterion is simply they're not as good. It's certainly not a question of the quality of their films, as both release masterpieces. Criterion just seems to give more love and care to their releases. Maybe Criteiron has a bigger budget to create new supplements, do additional film clean-up, and hire a great art team.

I think Kino has greatly improved since their DVD days. Their DVDs were often interlaced versions of PAL European masters. Artwork and extras always felt slapdash and cheap. With the move to Blu-ray, I imagine the uniformity of HD masters helped them a great deal (they can simply use what's given to them from other international companies instead of converting to NTSC specs). But their package design still feels rather amateurish. Their Blu-ray menus are obviously "inspired by" Criterion's. They don't really produce their own extras or commentaries. And my biggest pet-peeve is they don't include subtitles for English-language releases. Compare them to a company like Masters of Cinema which has released the same films (Metropolis, Fear and Desire) with subtitles, newly recorded commentaries and more extras and it's easy to see the difference in quality. Either Kino doesn't care or they just don't have the resources to create great packages. Unfortunately, they're still quite pricey. So if I had to choose whether a film was released by Criterion or Kino, I'd choose Criterion every time.

With that said, I do very much appreciate Kino's role in distributing many classic silents in high quality.

[DarknessBDJM]

I enjoy the fact that Kino doesn't do any digital cleanup, even Criterion does that (though they do a very good job of it), and Kino isn't afraid of releasing b movies and genre films.

[Sinthetic]

Originally Posted by bhampton

I have One, Fallen Angels.

I watched it,... Can't remember anything about it,... I think it made no sense.

I think that statement says more about you, than the film.