The Criterion Collection

[Quake1028]

AWESOME month! For me:

Night Train to Munich (9/6)
The Story of the Last Chrysanthemum (9/13)
Blood Simple (9/20)
Dekalog (9/27)

[bwdowiak]

Originally Posted by jayembee

It may well be a case of the Coens wanting just the D.C. on it. There have been enough other instances of Criterion including an entire feature-length film (documentaries aside) as an extra, that I don't think it's that much of an issue.

Among their titles with a complete feature-length second film are:

The Lady Vanishes (Crook's Tour)
M (English-language version)
Brazil ("Love Conquers All" version)
Slacker (It's Impossible to Learn to Plow by Reading Books)
The Killing (Killer's Kiss)
Godzilla (American release version)
King of the Hill (The Underneath)
Red River (pre-release version)
Scanners (Stereo)
My Darling Clementine (pre-release version)
The Brood (Crimes of the Future)
Carnival of Souls (includes both Theatrical and Director's Cuts)
A Taste of Honey (Momma Don't Allow)

Satyajit Ray's The Big City contains the wonderful film, The Coward. At about 70 minutes, I think it is actually considered a short film, but its about as long as The Immortal Story and only 5 minutes or so shy of the run time for Pickpocket.

[Scottie]

Kes includes "Cathy Come Home"
Close-Up includes "The Traveler"
Certified Copy includes "The Report"

Perhaps my favorite: Late Spring and "Tokyo-Ga".

I'm sure there's more I'll think of and I'll add them to the list.

[Snicket]

Darjeeling Limited included Hotel Chevalier.

[thatguamguy]

There are two different things at work.

One, I don't think Criterion *ever* includes minor variations in cuts. Yes, they include the "Love Conquers All" version of 'Brazil' (per Gilliam's request), but they don't include the original European cut (which is largely the same as the Final Cut) nor the original American cut (which has extra footage that Gilliam talks on the disc about how much he loves, but the footage isn't there). They don't include the theatrical cut of "Dressed To Kill" because the only changes were minor cuts for censorship. They didn't include any alternate of "Thief".

Second, they defer to the director's wishes. They only included the actual director's cut of "Last Emperor" on the Blu (the theatrical cut is the director's cut). They only include the final approved cuts of Chaplin films -- although in that case, it's arguably not artistic, as the estate won't approve releases of the cuts they don't own the copyright on.

So, neither one of those traditional Criterion impulses would be favorable to the theatrical cut. I'm annoyed that they didn't even include the footage as deleted scenes, but honestly I'm more annoyed they didn't include the only potential extra that would've interested me, the original trailer that they shot with Bruce Campbell to attract investors.

[pedromvu]

The one I was thinking is The Tin Drum where I remember some complaints because they only included the Director's cut.

Too bad seamless branching never became too popular that is a great way to do small cut variations without having to sacrifice space.

[SignoftheHammer]

I'm pretty new to collecting Criterions (becoming a bit of an addiction for me), so please forgive me if this has been asked in this thread before. I just want to know, how does a movie qualify for a Criterion release?

Chasing Amy, Robocop and Armageddon have Criterions, but what about movies like Lost Highway or Eyes Wide Shut?

[shadedpain4]

Originally Posted by SignoftheHammer

I'm pretty new to collecting Criterions (becoming a bit of an addiction for me), so please forgive me if this has been asked in this thread before. I just want to know, how does a movie qualify for a Criterion release?

Chasing Amy, Robocop and Armageddon have Criterions, but what about movies like Lost Highway or Eyes Wide Shut?

It's a mix between Criterion wanting to release an edition, as well as being able to acquire the rights to the film.

[jmclick]

Originally Posted by jayembee

It may well be a case of the Coens wanting just the D.C. on it. There have been enough other instances of Criterion including an entire feature-length film (documentaries aside) as an extra, that I don't think it's that much of an issue.

Among their titles with a complete feature-length second film are:

The Lady Vanishes (Crook's Tour)
M (English-language version)
Brazil ("Love Conquers All" version)
Slacker (It's Impossible to Learn to Plow by Reading Books)
The Killing (Killer's Kiss)
Godzilla (American release version)
King of the Hill (The Underneath)
Red River (pre-release version)
Scanners (Stereo)
My Darling Clementine (pre-release version)
The Brood (Crimes of the Future)
Carnival of Souls (includes both Theatrical and Director's Cuts)
A Taste of Honey (Momma Don't Allow)

And don't forget my favorite release of all time ... Night and the City (1950), which includes the long-unseen extended British cut with an alternate musical score!

[xxnomad]

is there anyone here who already owns the MOC of 'touch of zen' but is considering picking up the criterion disc due to extras and cover art and such?

because i am...and i never double dip. there's just something special about this movie...

[Desslok]

Are there any further rumors about a Criterion Lone Wolf and Cub set?

[MifuneFan]

Originally Posted by xxnomad

is there anyone here who already owns the MOC of 'touch of zen' but is considering picking up the criterion disc due to extras and cover art and such?

because i am...and i never double dip. there's just something special about this movie...

They both have unique offerings so you're essentially getting the total package. If I had the money I would do it.

[jayembee]

Originally Posted by Reddington

Interesting. For those of us who haven't seen the film, are the two cuts significantly different?

Originally Posted by ThisKid

The Director's Cut has more spit and polish. The Coens decided to trim the film by a few minutes to make it flow better. I think I heard that the trimmed scenes were scenes that didn't have too much of a impact on the story, but I haven't seen the film before, so someone else might have a detailed response on what was cut out.

That sounds about right. Like Weir's Picnic at Hanging Rock, the DC is a little tighter, and there really isn't that significant a difference between the two versions. Though as the droll "Forever Young Film Preservation" intro on the extant Blu-ray puts it, "The boring parts have been cut out, and other things added". At any rate, on the "Alternate Versions" page of the IMDb entry, there's a list of the cuts made.

(I dearly hope the "Forever Young Film Preservation" intro is included on the Criterion release. I imagine it will, since it supposedly was included in theatrical screenings of the Director's Cut, and therefore might be considered a part of that version. However, on the extant Blu-ray, its running time is separate from the running time of the movie proper, which makes me wonder if it really is considered a part of the newer version.)

Anyway, I'm one of those people who feel that having a legit release version alongside a "we think this works a little better" version is a good thing. I have a copy of the original theatrical cut on laserdisc (which I haven't watched in ages; it's currently buried in my storage locker), but it's open-matte and has a music substitution, a common occurrence with MCA/Universal releases of the period.

In all honesty, if the Theatrical Cut was included, I probably wouldn't watch it in favor of the Director's Cut, but I like the idea of it being there.

[Namuhana]

Originally Posted by bwdowiak

Satyajit Ray's The Big City contains the wonderful film, The Coward. At about 70 minutes, I think it is actually considered a short film, but its about as long as The Immortal Story and only 5 minutes or so shy of the run time for Pickpocket.

Isn't it considered that any film at 60 minutes or more is considered feature-length and anything 59 minutes or under is considered a short film?

[jayembee]

Originally Posted by bwdowiak

Satyajit Ray's The Big City contains the wonderful film, The Coward. At about 70 minutes, I think it is actually considered a short film, but its about as long as The Immortal Story and only 5 minutes or so shy of the run time for Pickpocket.

Seventy minutes isn't a short film. I don't know if there's any sort of official designation for what running time separates "short film" from "feature film", but based on what I've seen here and there, it seems to be around 45 minutes (which would be about four film reels). Certainly, back in the 30s and 40s, there were a lot of "B" movies that ran around 50-60 minutes and were still considered feature films.

[pedromvu]

It depends:

According to the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences, American Film Institute, and British Film Institute, a feature film runs for 40 minutes or longer, while the Screen Actors Guild states that it is 80 minutes or longer.

[Feiereisel]

Originally Posted by Namuhana

Isn't it considered that any film at 60 minutes or more is considered feature-length and anything 59 minutes or under is considered a short film?

Originally Posted by jayembee

Seventy minutes isn't a short film. I don't know if there's any sort of official designation for what running time separates "short film" from "feature film", but based on what I've seen here and there, it seems to be around 45 minutes (which would be about four film reels). Certainly, back in the 30s and 40s, there were a lot of "B" movies that ran around 50-60 minutes and were still considered feature films.

According to the The Academy Awards eligibility rules, a short film is 40 minutes or less. A feature as anything longer than 40 minutes.

Originally Posted by AMPAS

feature length (defined as over 40 minutes),

Originally Posted by AMPAS

A short film is defined as an original motion picture that has a running time of 40 minutes or less,
including all credits.

I kind of wish they would broadcast this so filmmakers would stop making such long movies.

[thatguamguy]

Distributors won't touch a feature under 80 minutes long because exhibitors believe (with at least some evidence) that anything less than that and the audience will feel unsatisfied and want a refund. And if a movie can't get theatrical release in Los Angeles, it doesn't matter what the Academy rules say, they won't be able to nominate your fifty-five minute "feature film".

[thatguamguy]

Originally Posted by SignoftheHammer

Chasing Amy, Robocop and Armageddon have Criterions, but what about movies like Lost Highway or Eyes Wide Shut?

This is what you have to understand... Criterion started with laser discs. And when they started, there was no such thing as "special features", and a "special edition" was a marketing term for a re-cut movie (if even that). Most laser discs didn't even have special features beyond chapter stops, though companies besides Criterion had begun to include them at times. But the big selling point of laserdisc was supposed to be higher quality picture/audio, and sometimes "proper director's cuts" [and I can think of at least three that were never released on any other format].

So then DVD came along, and for a while, distributors thought that DVD would be just as niche as laserdisc. When "Robocop" and "This Is Spinal Tap" and "Silence of the Lambs" were licensed to Criterion, it was because the studios didn't think there was any money in DVD. They were also just porting over released laserdiscs, they didn't have to do much additional work on those releases. But, for a variety of reasons, DVD really did take off after a few years. While the players were never as widespread as VCRs, I think the argument could be made that more people bought DVDs than ever bought videos... but certainly more than laser disc. So very quickly, studios decided to release their own special editions. They told Criterion the rights would not be renewed, so those discs went out-of-print, and they put their own discs out.

Now we've come kind of full circle; catalog releases are no longer profitable enough for studios to release them, and it's been rumored that "Spinal Tap" may come back to the Criterion collection. I don't believe it myself, but I'd love to see it happen. ["Robocop" and "Silence" seem unlikely.]

"Chasing Amy" and "Armageddon" aren't quite the same, though; in both of those cases, the director had a relationship with Criterion and was able to convince Disney to let Criterion produce the discs which Disney then distributed. ("Amy" was also an LD port.)

The problem with releasing "Eyes Wide Shut" would be twofold; one is that Warner Brothers had a longstanding relationship with Kubrick and seems to still make money off of their various Kubrick collections, so they'd be unlikely to license it. (Criterion has released a lot of Kubrick, but hasn't released any of the WB films he made since laser disc.) Two is that Kubrick's estate doesn't like special features, so it would be unlikely that they could do much to distinguish the release of the film from prior releases. When Criterion double-dips a movie that is already available, they like to be able to have something extra for the buyer.

"Lost Highway" seems quite possible to me, but I don't know any of the details that could have an impact on it. I think, in general, American distributors are less likely to license movies that were produced in the last, say, 20 years, for the obvious reason that if a movie is big enough for a third-party license holder to make a profit off of it, then they'd make an even bigger profit themselves by releasing it themselves. But there are certainly plenty of exceptions to that generalization.

[baheidstu]

Originally Posted by thatguamguy

Distributors won't touch a feature under 80 minutes long because exhibitors believe (with at least some evidence) that anything less than that and the audience will feel unsatisfied and want a refund. And if a movie can't get theatrical release in Los Angeles, it doesn't matter what the Academy rules say, they won't be able to nominate your fifty-five minute "feature film".

Depends. If you're talking about animated movies, there are a lot of 70-80 minute long feature films simply because the target audience of children have short attention spans.