Let’s Talk About Boutiques.

[Caladriusse]

Is the label 'CultFilms' any good?

[Hammerlover]

Warner Archive Collection Sterling PQ/QC. One of the best labels in the biz.

[Ben_R]

Should I continue to add to my list to the OP with common occurrences listed alongside?

Personally I expect a boutique release to have the best PQ (in no way digitally molested) and original audio at the very least. Tat comes last and it has to be good.

Any thoughts on Turbine and Koch Media? Both have a following and both are accused of sharpening, EE and fake grain but there doesn’t appear to be any definitive proof beyond speculation and personal opinion.

[Ben_R]

Originally Posted by drush9999

You missed
101 Films Mostly garbage
Shameless Shameful

As regards boutiques generally, in an ever diminishing market, I'll take whatever I can get for certain titles.

Can this be expanded upon? Do 101 utilise Shout transfers and scans?

For Shameless is it their whole package that is terrible? PQ, AQ, Extras and QC?

Originally Posted by Hammerlover

Blue Underground Overall good PQ/QC. Only re-releasing back catalog titles though.

Haven’t they been dabbling with the colour space on some of their releases? Verging on Hiventy levels?

[Ben_R]

Originally Posted by Marv Inc.

I wouldn't class Studio Canal as a boutique label myself since there a huge company with offices all over the world. While they own and release alot of cult and classic films. They don't give them the same level of care as other labels hence there teal and yellow restorations that get passed.

As big as Warner and the WAC?

I know what you mean but their 4K sets are defo touching Boutique status even if their PQ, AQ or QC doesn’t.

Originally Posted by Ste7en

Signal One - Love (Eric the Viking was rectified)
Third Window Films - Love (every release a gem)

Both consistent every time?

Originally Posted by knuckles96

Second Run is a great wee label

Any problems ever?

[Hammerlover]

Originally Posted by Ben_R

Can this be expanded upon? Do 101 utilise Shout transfers and scans?

For Shameless is it their whole package that is terrible? PQ, AQ, Extras and QC?



Haven’t they been dabbling with the colour space on some of their releases? Verging on Hivenity levels?

BU's 4K of THE NEW YORK RIPPER is the main offender in this regard.

[CouncilSpectre]

Originally Posted by Caladriusse

Is the label 'CultFilms' any good?

In my experience, no. Just check out the sterling work done on the Fellini: Four Films set...

Almost, if not all labels will have some minor niggles working against them, whether it be questionable encodes, no/few extras, or just a range of films that don't appeal.

Personally, my favourites:

WAC - Consistently good. Only marks against WAC is minimal extras a lot of the time. When the main thing is the film it's not much of a problem for me. The WAC catalogue is almost entirely in my wheelhouse of interest.

Kino - The sheer range of films plays into my main points of interest. Encodes and framing issues sometimes arise but a lot of the time this seems to be with movies that I've already sourced domestically from one of our boutiques luckily. I've probably got more 'bucket-list/guilty pleasure' titles from Kino than any other label.

Powerhouse - Presentation-wise PH are probably top of the tree at the moment. The physical packaging is superb, the wealth of extras is usually superb, the disc presentation is usually A1 and I like a lot of the movies that go into their catalogue. Mistakes have happened previously, and (from memory) without fail they've been fixed.

Eureka - My original favourite boutique, and probably still right up there. I'm not a huge fan of HK movies and there's no denying that they've shifted focus in recent years but there's still more than enough being released to keep me interested. The mining of the Universal library for example, I am loving.

Network - I'm constantly amazed at the range of treasures that Network bring us. I love the slimline clear cases as well, Network releases look so elegant when they arrive! Technically, I have few issues with Network. Scant extras sometimes but as with WAC, it's the films that really count and Network deliver bigtime, a lot of the time.

88 Films - Probably the most-improved label over the past decade. They started off akin to 101 Films, and now they're giving Arrow a run for their money. Another label with a wide range of genres in their catalogue and a lot that I'm interested in.

Criterion - I know a lot of people have issues with their encodes, but generally, unless it's an absolute disaster of a disc I'm not overly bothered. There are genuine treasures that I've picked up thanks to Criterion; their treatment of Bogart, Cary Grant and classic Hollywood in general dictates a certain level of interest for me. Extras-wise, they're up there with Powerhouse most of the time.

Labels to be wary of:

101 Films - never blind-buy a 101 release as there's a 50-50 chance that it's a poor encode.

Cult Films - Same as the above.

Shameless - Same as the above.

Mill Creek - See above, plus no extras.

[Hammerlover]

Synapse Films Their UHD of SUSPIRIA is justly celebrated. But they take FOREVER to release anything!

[drush9999]

Originally Posted by Ben_R

Can this be expanded upon? Do 101 utilise Shout transfers and scans?

They do but then up the gamma and compress using a potato.
Then there's the titles in the incorrect AR (Blast & Rage of Honor etc). The upscaled SD transfer for Johnny Mnemonic. F/X is 1080i. I'm sure there's more

[Yami]

Originally Posted by Ben_R

As big as Warner and the WAC?

I know what you mean but their 4K sets are defo touching Boutique status even if their PQ, AQ or QC doesn’t.

StudioCanal have the third largest film library in the world and have a revenue of something in the region of half a billion euros.

I'd personally define a boutique label as any that releases films that are owned by other studios/distributors that they have under licence.

Any problems ever?

Second Run are great; their encoding has never been the best but it's usually servicable and they sometimes release pretty rough looking HD scans from unrestored sources. You can pretty much guarantee that no one else is going to release the films that they do, which is their main appeal, but when there is an overlap they usually don't come out on top.

[gap]

Originally Posted by LAPrice

My (Ltd edition) copy froze about 40 mins from the end. They sent me a replacement of the standard release.

Given that the discs are identical, what does it matter? Unless you had to return the LE, which I can't imagine being requested of you.

[Ben_C]

Anime Limited don’t often get a mention. The occasional QC issues which more often than not get sorted with replacement discs, and they have been beset with quite a few delays in recent times, but they’re near the top for me. I still think they’re top of the tree when it comes to the actual physical product - beautiful box/digipak art, books/booklets, etc.

Wish they would ditch their recent obsession with vinyl releases though.

[rapta]

Yeah, 101 are pretty hit-and-miss, but I do often gamble if it's cheap enough (£3-6 a title sometimes, obviously far cheaper than importing something for £15-20+, but depends what it is). I generally read reviews if I don't 100% trust the label, including some imports of Imprint titles recently (heard their encoding isn't brilliant a lot of the time, other times it's decent, and they seem to publish less-than-desirable masters quite frequently).

As for very small labels, you have to weigh up their consistency in terms of PQ/AQ with choice of title and level of effort. I'd definitely say that Second Run, Third Window and Signal One always aim for perfect releases but very occasionally miss the mark, and I absolutely don't mind that and don't blame them for that happening. They do the absolute best they can, and it's clear, and yet a few collectors moan when it's not as good as something from much bigger labels like Criterion, Shout Factory or Kino Lorber. I'd say those three labels are as consistent as Eureka, BFI, Arrow and Criterion in terms of quality of encode, for example, and yet still often take bigger risks in terms of the titles they pick and are operating on a much smaller level (much like Indicator, I know Signal One were previously using Fidelity in Motion for nearly all their discs, not sure if that's the case anymore or not).

[Mr. Thomsen]

Originally Posted by CouncilSpectre

WAC - Consistently good. Only marks against WAC is minimal extras a lot of the time. When the main thing is the film it's not much of a problem for me. The WAC catalogue is almost entirely in my wheelhouse of interest.

I love WAC for their catalogue and their quality transfers. Two minor caveats, though, their release of Val Lewton's The Ghost Ship had a moth erased during the digital clean-up. Since it is specifically mentioned in the dialogue, it is not so easily ignored. A replacement was teased on another forum, but does not seem to have ever happened.

The second, and to me most annoying, is that they again have released the cut version of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. hyde 1941, even though an uncut dupe-negative exists in BFI's archive. Since this may very well be the last physical release of the film, it is really a shame they did not take their time to do it right.

I guess it just shows that no label is perfect.

[Ste7en]

Originally Posted by Ben_R

Both consistent every time?

Generally, yes. Unless I've missed something...

[filmlover22]

Originally Posted by CouncilSpectre

In my experience, no. Just check out the sterling work done on the Fellini: Four Films set...

Almost, if not all labels will have some minor niggles working against them, whether it be questionable encodes, no/few extras, or just a range of films that don't appeal.

Personally, my favourites:

WAC - Consistently good. Only marks against WAC is minimal extras a lot of the time. When the main thing is the film it's not much of a problem for me. The WAC catalogue is almost entirely in my wheelhouse of interest.

Kino - The sheer range of films plays into my main points of interest. Encodes and framing issues sometimes arise but a lot of the time this seems to be with movies that I've already sourced domestically from one of our boutiques luckily. I've probably got more 'bucket-list/guilty pleasure' titles from Kino than any other label.

Powerhouse - Presentation-wise PH are probably top of the tree at the moment. The physical packaging is superb, the wealth of extras is usually superb, the disc presentation is usually A1 and I like a lot of the movies that go into their catalogue. Mistakes have happened previously, and (from memory) without fail they've been fixed.

Eureka - My original favourite boutique, and probably still right up there. I'm not a huge fan of HK movies and there's no denying that they've shifted focus in recent years but there's still more than enough being released to keep me interested. The mining of the Universal library for example, I am loving.

Network - I'm constantly amazed at the range of treasures that Network bring us. I love the slimline clear cases as well, Network releases look so elegant when they arrive! Technically, I have few issues with Network. Scant extras sometimes but as with WAC, it's the films that really count and Network deliver bigtime, a lot of the time.

88 Films - Probably the most-improved label over the past decade. They started off akin to 101 Films, and now they're giving Arrow a run for their money. Another label with a wide range of genres in their catalogue and a lot that I'm interested in.

Criterion - I know a lot of people have issues with their encodes, but generally, unless it's an absolute disaster of a disc I'm not overly bothered. There are genuine treasures that I've picked up thanks to Criterion; their treatment of Bogart, Cary Grant and classic Hollywood in general dictates a certain level of interest for me. Extras-wise, they're up there with Powerhouse most of the time.

Labels to be wary of:

101 Films - never blind-buy a 101 release as there's a 50-50 chance that it's a poor encode.

Cult Films - Same as the above.

Shameless - Same as the above.

Mill Creek - See above, plus no extras.

I generally agree with you. Surprised I didn't see Arrow in your list....

[filmgenius89]

We have missed

FLICKER ALLEY
CINEFLIX

Both fantastic and do some of the best work in the game jn my humble opinion.

Flicker, while expensive, knocks it out of the park each time.

[CouncilSpectre]

Originally Posted by filmlover22

I generally agree with you. Surprised I didn't see Arrow in your list....

They would have been once, but their QA has deteriorated to the point where they’ve had to have a couple of light months as a circuit-breaker, and generally their business model has shifted significantly. Don’t get me wrong, I still buy from Arrow, but since they ditched the Academy line they’re just not as important to me as the other boutiques I mentioned. I know Fran has only said nice things about Arrow since his departure, and I would expect no less, he’s a class act, but given the scope and direction that Radiance are outlining, I imagine he might have been frustrated as well (just a guess, but it wouldn’t surprise me).

The one I did forget originally and should mention now, the BFI. They do sterling work and long may it continue!

[BDBert]

Originally Posted by CouncilSpectre

Eureka - My original favourite boutique, and probably still right up there. I'm not a huge fan of HK movies and there's no denying that they've shifted focus in recent years but there's still more than enough being released to keep me interested. The mining of the Universal library for example, I am loving.

There's a post in the dedicated thread where they explain they get less and less access to archives and that in some cases they've even had to halt work on movies that did end up released in other territories by other companies. HK movies have kept them afloat in recent years.

[AnnThrope]

And then there's Grace Brothers but they've really gone to the dogs lately since Mrs Slocombe left to set up her own boutique, if you will.

slocombe.jpg