Dressed to Kill (1980)

[nitin]

Originally Posted by pro-bassoonist

I most certainly did not misinterpret your post.

But here are the relevant points:

1. Madame de... is a project that was undertaken in France, with zero contribution from Criterion to the final master that was produced after the restoration.

If anything, this specific release actually proves my point, because despite the horrible job that was done in France, there is plenty of excellent exclusive content Criterion produced for the old DVD release.

2. When Criterion have initiated a project, the final result has always been of exceptionally high-quality. It is the very reason why Criterion's release of Rene Clement's Plein soleil, which uses a 2K transfer as a foundation, is vastly superior to the one Canal produced in France, which was sourced from a very expensive 4K restoration.

And this tradition of high-quality output goes all the way back to the days of LD, which is why so many companies are now trying to imitate what Criterion did for years.

The record is there for everyone to see.

Pro-B

I dont think he disagrees with you! I think the point Michael makes about Criterion being able to take more risks/incur higher costs because of their reputation and the flow on consequence that many people are willing to blind buy a lot of their releases is a good observation.

[Christian Muth]

Originally Posted by thompsonjohn

... Criterion on the other hand is missing the "Slashing Dressed To Kill" featurette for some reason, unless it's a misprint or they forgot it or merged it with the, "Video pieces from 2001 about the different versions of the film and the cuts made to avoid an X rating" segment. On the Arrow release it's called, "Slashing Dressed to Kill – Brian De Palma and stars Nancy Allen and Keith Gordon discuss the changes that had to be made to avoid an X-rating...

I'm guessing "Video pieces from 2001 about the different versions of the film and the cuts made to avoid an X rating" is that featurette. What else could it be?

Chris

[Dylan34]

I like Criterion because they've always had quality releases and have always used high res masters since the laserdiscs days. But, I don't own a ton of there stuff because I'm not into everything they release. When I buy Criterion though, I know I'm buying perfection and I can't wait to pick this edition of Dressed to Kill up!

[Mystic]

This is definitely a worthwhile purchase given the quality of the discs that Criterion has released to date.

[MifuneFan]

Originally Posted by Christian Muth

I'm guessing "Video pieces from 2001 about the different versions of the film and the cuts made to avoid an X rating" is that featurette. What else could it be?

Chris

It is

[pro-bassoonist]

Originally Posted by nitin

I dont think he disagrees with you! I think the point Michael makes about Criterion being able to take more risks/incur higher costs because of their reputation

1. And this is the point I addressed, Nitin, because I don't agree with it. People do not buy Criterion's releases because of their reputation, they buy their releases because they consistently offer high-quality products. This is the secret behind Criterion's success: consistency.

2. And they are not "getting away" with higher price tags either. The type of content they offer demands premium pricing. They also always tackle big projects with the type of authority and professionalism they demand. It is not enough to only secure the rights to a major picture.

In recent years quite a few companies have shown interest in charging more, but the difference is there for everyone to see. You can "get away" with something once, maybe twice if you are lucky, but eventually consumers will figure out that the quality isn't there. With Criterion the quality has always been there -- maybe not always in optimal form now that in the digital era there is so much sharing between different parties -- and the consumers have been coming back because for years they have been able to deliver top product.

Pro-B

[AlexIlDottore]

Originally Posted by pro-bassoonist

1. And this is the point I addressed, Nitin, because I don't agree with it. People do not buy Criterion's releases because of their reputation, they buy their releases because they consistently offer high-quality products. This is the secret behind Criterion's success: consistency.

2. And they are not "getting away" with higher price tags either. The type of content they offer demands premium pricing. They also always tackle big projects with the type of authority and professionalism they demand. It is not enough to only secure the rights to a major picture.

In recent years quite a few companies have shown interest in charging more, but the difference is there for everyone to see. You can "get away" with something once, maybe twice if you are lucky, but eventually consumers will figure out that the quality isn't there. With Criterion the quality has always been there -- maybe not always in optimal form now that in the digital era there is so much sharing between different parties -- and the consumers have been coming back because for years they have been able to deliver top product.

Pro-B

They're certainly getting away with bad encoding lately though, and unfortunately that seems to be quite consistent. If they're going to charge such a premium, they should at least encode properly.

[CouncilSpectre]

Originally Posted by pro-bassoonist

1. And this is the point I addressed, Nitin, because I don't agree with it. People do not buy Criterion's releases because of their reputation, they buy their releases because they consistently offer high-quality products. This is the secret behind Criterion's success: consistency.

So they have a reputation for consistency.....

[Todd Tomorrow]

Seems like several threads keep getting clogged up with bickering over pricing by niche labels at the moment. I'm pretty sure none of them make a huge profit and that's what they have to charge to keep producing high quality and/or obscure films. It's really now that difficult to understand.

[Mr. Thomsen]

Originally Posted by Dylan34

When I buy Criterion though, I know I'm buying perfection and I can't wait to pick this edition of Dressed to Kill up!

Oh, how I wished that still held true for me.

(... he wrote, shaking his fist angrily at the sky while lamenting the fact, that every blu-ray release of Children of Paradise is botched.)

[PowellPressburger]

Originally Posted by Mr. Thomsen

Oh, how I wished that still held true for me.

(... he wrote, shaking his fist angrily at the sky while lamenting the fact, that every blu-ray release of Children of Paradise is botched.)

Yeah there are a few titles I feel like the distributors held Criterion hostage with Children of Paradise and Earrings of Madame De.... are good examples.

I firmly believe that is why we still don't have a Criterion BLU for Le Samourai because if Criterion released a bad BLU of that I think they would be bashed intensely and the sales would be dismal.

Dressed to Kill looked fine from MGM but it is good that any film get a 4K HD scan / transfer. It may not be as dramatic a change as say Goodfellas but there should be some noticable differences.

[Dylan34]

Originally Posted by Mr. Thomsen

Oh, how I wished that still held true for me.

(... he wrote, shaking his fist angrily at the sky while lamenting the fact, that every blu-ray release of Children of Paradise is botched.)

Well, like I said earlier, I don't buy a Criterion release just because it has the name Criterion on it. It has to be a release that I'm wanting to own. In my experience with Criterion though, I've always been very pleased with PQ/AQ and supplements and that's going back to the laserdisc days as well. If you don't mind me asking, what's wrong with the disc you're referring to?

[FilmFreakosaurus]

Originally Posted by Monterey Jack

There are still several De Palma titles I'm dying to own on Blu, like Casualties Of War, Femme Fatale (come on, WB! ) and Raising Cain (I'd love to see De Palma's original edit of that, before the studio forced him to cut the narrative into a more linear style). It just seems like a waste to put out a THIRD BD release of this, especially considering how definitive the Arrow release was.

Casualties of War is the probably one of the best De Palma films, and the least like any of his others, in his career as director.

It's a devastating, unflinching look at the pure brutality of war. Men are turned into monsters and the innocent are made to suffer. It's a kind of Schindler's List for the Vietnam War and a masterpiece.

[surfinhank]

Originally Posted by AlexIlDottore

They're certainly getting away with bad encoding lately though, and unfortunately that seems to be quite consistent. If they're going to charge such a premium, they should at least encode properly.

I remember seeing one or two comments about this (The Rose being an example) but now I can't find them. If this is the case, why aren't more people complaining about it? Look in any Shout Factory thread and every other post is "bad compression this" and "bad encoding that", so I'm just curious why more people aren't up in arms about this.

[StingingVelvet]

I think Thief and Scanners are more obvious examples of why Criterion isn't "perfect" for everyone anymore. A lot of people intensely dislike the color timing changes used in those films.*

*Note I am not one of these people, just making a general point. Even Criterion is called out on these issues now.

[MifuneFan]

Originally Posted by StingingVelvet

I think Thief and Scanners are more obvious examples of why Criterion isn't "perfect" for everyone anymore. A lot of people intensely dislike the color timing changes used in those films.*

*Note I am not one of these people, just making a general point. Even Criterion is called out on these issues now.

Huh? Criterion had no say in either of those transfers. They're both supervised and approved by their respective directors. I also haven't heard anyone making general criticisms about Criterion based off those releases. I don't care for the changes made to Scanners, but Criterion is certainly not at fault for the way these films look

[StingingVelvet]

Originally Posted by MifuneFan

Huh? Criterion had no say in either of those transfers. They're both supervised and approved by their respective directors. I also haven't heard anyone making general criticisms about Criterion based off those releases.

We're talking about Criterion releases and those are two of their releases. Whoever supervised it is kind of irrelevant, the point was about buying Criterion with confidence knowing it will be a "perfect" release. A lot of people would say Thief and Scanners prove you can't do that.

And again, I am not one of those people, so don't ask me to debate their side.

[MifuneFan]

Originally Posted by StingingVelvet

We're talking about Criterion releases and those are two of their releases. Whoever supervised it is kind of irrelevant, the point was about buying Criterion with confidence knowing it will be a "perfect" release. A lot of people would say Thief and Scanners prove you can't do that.

And again, I am not one of those people, so don't ask me to debate their side.

I don't know anyone who thinks you're guanteed a perfect release just because it's Criterion. What I do see are people who believe the chances of a great release are high because of Criterion's proven track record, myself included. Additionally, I actually have more respect for Criterion for being able to get directors like Cronenberg to supervise their release, even if the end results aren't to my liking.

[StingingVelvet]

Originally Posted by MifuneFan

I don't know anyone who thinks you're guanteed a perfect release just because it's Criterion. What I do see are people who believe the chances of a great release are high because of Criterion's proven track record, myself included. Additionally, I actually have more respect for Criterion for being able to get directors like Cronenberg to supervise their release, even if the end results aren't to my liking.

Okay. "Perfect" was a word others were using before I jumped in, so I just used that word back in the same way. The point was more that before those two releases the vast majority were never disappointed with a Criterion transfer, to my knowledge, but now there are two very popular examples of a Criterion release looking "wrong" or "worse" depending on who you talk to.

[MifuneFan]

Originally Posted by StingingVelvet

Okay. "Perfect" was a word others were using before I jumped in, so I just used that word back in the same way. The point was more that before those two releases the vast majority were never disappointed with a Criterion transfer, to my knowledge, but now there are two very popular examples of a Criterion release looking "wrong" or "worse" depending on who you talk to.

Check out their Children of Paradise release from 2012, it's pretty much universally regarded as being a poor transfer

https://www.blu-ray.com/movies/Child.../48077/#Review

The earrings of Madame De from 2013 is another

https://www.blu-ray.com/movies/The-E.../72983/#Review

Both sourced from Gaumont restorations. I think both of those releases stand out more than Thief, and Scanners, in terms of Criterion's reputation taking some dings, but even still, it shouldn't be enough to shake one's confidence in buying a release blindly. Odds are still great that you're going to get a solid all-around release.