How to identify (and avoid) Criterion bootlegs

The scuttlebutt on Criterion, Eclipse, and Janus Films. Lists and polls are STRONGLY discouraged.
Post Reply
Message
Author
gum.on.shoe
Joined: Fri May 27, 2011 3:27 pm

Re: How to identify (and avoid) Criterion bootlegs

#101 Post by gum.on.shoe » Sat Jun 25, 2011 12:11 am

tholly wrote:
richast2 wrote:
gum.on.shoe wrote:It's my belief that these amaray cases with shallow openings on the side are indicative of bootlegs.
My Andrei Rublev came in a case like that. I seem to recall several other early Criterions coming in those cases, as well.
Yea, those cases have been used to CC.
You've bought them New from reputable vendors (e.g. Best Buy, Amazon, etc)?

I'm not sure if I'm clear enough when I say "shallow". It's like there is no opening on the side to put your fingers in to open the case. Rather, it's just a gradual, smooth indentation (maybe like if you were peeling an apple).

I have about 40 of the first 55 spine numbers, probably half of which I bought new from Amazon, Borders, BestBuy back when they were first being printed. The rest I bought more recently used on eBay. Of these ebay purchases, only 3 have the "shallow" sides, including 2 OOP titles (Silence of the Lambs, Unbearable Lightness of Being). I actually bought 3 copies of Unbearable lightness (one supposedly Brand New, still wrapped, with special edition sticker). One of these copies (not the new one) has the shallow side-opening and different color insert. The third more recently bought DVD with a "shallow" side is Branded to Kill. I also noticed the insert for this appears to have a printing defect, a couple of ink blotches similar to those that exist on the well-known Dead Ringers bootlegged disc (which I've seen for myself and compared to a seemingly legit copy)--these blotches do not exist in the packaging images on this site or a user image uploaded on Amazon. There is also a very large/wide white security tag in the case of which I've never seen the likes of in any DVD I've ever purchased, it is very large.

All of these factors lead me to believe it can't just be coincidence, but if you can confirm that you've bought these "shallow" indent cases new it would help put my mind to ease and chalk up the other discrepancies to coincidental printing defects.

User avatar
Feego
Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2007 7:30 pm
Location: Texas

Re: How to identify (and avoid) Criterion bootlegs

#102 Post by Feego » Sat Jun 25, 2011 6:45 am

My Picnic at Hanging Rock is in one of those "shallow" cases, and I bought it brand new many years ago from my local Hastings. I believe some of my other, older CC discs are also in cases like that (all bought brand new from reputable vendors), but I know for sure that Picnic is.

User avatar
Gary Gnu
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2011 5:50 pm

Re: How to identify (and avoid) Criterion bootlegs

#103 Post by Gary Gnu » Sat Jun 25, 2011 4:31 pm

Feego wrote:My Picnic at Hanging Rock is in one of those "shallow" cases, and I bought it brand new many years ago from my local Hastings. I believe some of my other, older CC discs are also in cases like that (all bought brand new from reputable vendors), but I know for sure that Picnic is.
My copy of Dead Ringers has one such case. I don't have many of the early ones, since it seems like Criterion will get around to re-releasing all of them. (Maybe not the ones they regret having released.) However, my Dead Ringers was new; and is definitely the real deal. I think my Unbearable Lightness of Being also has the shallow indent, and is legitimate. Really, they look better than the ones with the deep indents. (Don't hold a candle to the clear cases, though.)

bigmamou
Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2011 12:42 pm

Re: 288 F for Fake

#104 Post by bigmamou » Mon Jul 04, 2011 1:01 pm

Here's a story all can appreciate. I bought a new, sealed copy of "F for Fake" from a dealer on amazon.com which I received this past Friday. Upon pulling it from its mailing envelope it seemed "funny" to me and upon further examination the cover (when compared to the cover on the criterion website) looked slightly shifted to the left, "fuzzy" and his last name as it appears on the cover was mis-punctuated (the apostrophe was in the wrong place)?! The overall package seems lighter than normal as well. Has anybody here run across a similar package? I've been looking on the net for a copy of the back cover for that comparison.....can anybody point me to one on the net? The amazon.com dealer seems to be on the up and up and I have an email in to Jon Mulvaney for his opinion about this package. What an irony if it is a "fake"!!

Interestingly the cover on my package is shown at this website (a legitimate web dealer?)

User avatar
Gary Gnu
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2011 5:50 pm

Re: How to identify (and avoid) Criterion bootlegs

#105 Post by Gary Gnu » Mon Jul 04, 2011 2:37 pm

I bought a copy of The Ice Storm from Amazon two weeks ago. It had this thing that said "On the same page" on a white bar at the bottom of the cover. The art looked truncated, or something. It looked like a copy from the University of Berkley. (Maybe a school library copy??) I returned it, ordered another one, and it had the same white banner at the bottom and the truncated art. Is this a bootleg, or what?

naersjoen
Joined: Fri Aug 13, 2010 6:46 pm

Re: 288 F for Fake

#106 Post by naersjoen » Mon Jul 04, 2011 3:00 pm

bigmamou wrote:I've been looking on the net for a copy of the back cover for that comparison.....can anybody point me to one on the net?
My copy (bought the disc when it first came out) looks just like this, including the "Welles's" spelling.

User avatar
Roger Ryan
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 12:04 pm
Location: A Midland town spread and darkened into a city

Re: 288 F for Fake

#107 Post by Roger Ryan » Mon Jul 04, 2011 3:26 pm

bigmamou wrote:...Upon pulling it from its mailing envelope it seemed "funny" to me and upon further examination the cover (when compared to the cover on the criterion website) looked slightly shifted to the left, "fuzzy" and his last name as it appears on the cover was mis-punctuated (the apostrophe was in the wrong place)?! ...

Interestingly the cover on my package is shown at this website (a legitimate web dealer?) - http://www.cduniverse.com/images.asp?pi ... r+Fake+DVD" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Did Criterion change the front cover on this title within the last couple of years? The image shown at the "cduniverse" link is the same cover image I have and I purchased this title the week it was released via Amazon. Every copy I've seen of it uses Welles's to denote the possessive, which is correct although Welles' is equally acceptable. I tend to prefer the latter since it looks cleaner and I wonder if Criterion decided the same thing and altered the cover.

The image is a little "fuzzy" on all the copies I've seen so I don't think you have a "fake"...as much fun as that would be.

bigmamou
Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2011 12:42 pm

Re: How to identify (and avoid) Criterion bootlegs

#108 Post by bigmamou » Mon Jul 04, 2011 11:41 pm

I guess the confusing point for me is that the current cover is spelled with the apostrophe at the end of his name and the overall image now seems sharper with richer color?? Also, upon looking at the image of the rear cover there seems to be "wave" effect of lighter color emanating from the lower left corner moving upward.......this is lacking on mine - it is just solid and dark. When would they have changed the cover and more importantly...why? Would this then constitute a later printing of the disc? This cover of mine states "first printing", does anyone have a very recent copy that states other than a "first printing"?

bigmamou
Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2011 12:42 pm

Re: 288 F for Fake

#109 Post by bigmamou » Thu Jul 21, 2011 1:21 pm

Roger Ryan wrote:
bigmamou wrote:...Upon pulling it from its mailing envelope it seemed "funny" to me and upon further examination the cover (when compared to the cover on the criterion website) looked slightly shifted to the left, "fuzzy" and his last name as it appears on the cover was mis-punctuated (the apostrophe was in the wrong place)?! ...

Interestingly the cover on my package is shown at this website (a legitimate web dealer?) - http://www.cduniverse.com/images.asp?pi ... r+Fake+DVD" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Did Criterion change the front cover on this title within the last couple of years? The image shown at the "cduniverse" link is the same cover image I have and I purchased this title the week it was released via Amazon. Every copy I've seen of it uses Welles's to denote the possessive, which is correct although Welles' is equally acceptable. I tend to prefer the latter since it looks cleaner and I wonder if Criterion decided the same thing and altered the cover.

The image is a little "fuzzy" on all the copies I've seen so I don't think you have a "fake"...as much fun as that would be.
I finally was able to talk to Jon Mulvaney about all of this last week. He confirmed for me that the "F for Fake" cover was originally issued with the name spelled as Welles' and was never spelled as Welle's. I emailed him a scan of my package and he confirmed that it is a bootleg.......the cover photo is fuzzier (a copy of the original cover) and offset on the box and, of course, the name is wrong. I received today from B&N another copy that is legitimate (the cover is identical to the cover shown on the Criterion website) and it is also heavier than the original box I received. I think I will keep the counterfeit copy as I kind of like the irony of having a fake of "Fake"!! I don't know what to make of web dealers showing the bootleg cover on their websites though so buyer beware?

gum.on.shoe
Joined: Fri May 27, 2011 3:27 pm

Re: How to identify (and avoid) Criterion bootlegs

#110 Post by gum.on.shoe » Sun Jul 24, 2011 6:19 am

bigmamou wrote:I finally was able to talk to Jon Mulvaney about all of this last week. He confirmed for me that the "F for Fake" cover was originally issued with the name spelled as Welles' and was never spelled as Welle's. I emailed him a scan of my package and he confirmed that it is a bootleg.......the cover photo is fuzzier (a copy of the original cover) and offset on the box and, of course, the name is wrong. I received today from B&N another copy that is legitimate (the cover is identical to the cover shown on the Criterion website) and it is also heavier than the original box I received. I think I will keep the counterfeit copy as I kind of like the irony of having a fake of "Fake"!! I don't know what to make of web dealers showing the bootleg cover on their websites though so buyer beware?
I don't trust Amazon sellers other than Amazon (or like Target @ AMZ, etc), I would actually trust eBayers over Amazon marketplace. Based on my experience, ebayers seem to be more accountable and sensitive to negative feedback, there's better communication, provide better descriptions and pictures, and not to mention usually lower prices.
Feego wrote:My Picnic at Hanging Rock is in one of those "shallow" cases, and I bought it brand new many years ago from my local Hastings. I believe some of my other, older CC discs are also in cases like that (all bought brand new from reputable vendors), but I know for sure that Picnic is.
FYI, I recently bought The Killer on ebay, with frosted ring, reflective disc art and NIMBUS logo, also using the same shallow, short-lengthed indent/crease where the case opens. I assume this to be legit...

I own about 275 CC titles. The only ones with these cases:

Hard Boiled (1 of 2 copies have the shallow indent)
The Killer (1 of 1)
Silence of the Lambs (2 of 2)
Tokyo Drifter (1 of 1)
Unbearable Lightness of Being (1 of 3)

Note, all but 1 of these were bought after they went OOP, and a few of them have other discrepancies in the printing. I also assume the first 3 to be some of the most commonly bootlegged titles in CC.

Ater buying over 100 CC titles new from BestBuy, Amazon, Borders, and Walmart that as soon as I bought about 10 on eBay I encountered the distinctly different cases.

I emailed the Criterion dude, John or w/e, regarding this over a month ago, but never received a response.

Based on what others are saying on this forum though, I'll tentatively assume these are legit, and just happens to be coincidence.
zenosparadox wrote:Hello all. I am in need of some assistance identifying the bootlegyness of my copies of Hard Boiled and The Killer. I have done some research, but I need advice.

The Killer:
I own two copies of this one. My wife, who used to work at a UPS store, told me that she doesn't think that the inserts are glossy paper. They are hard paper, nonetheless. All the artwork has pointed, non-rounded edges. The discs have the mirror effect, and it has the correct NIMBUS and serial numbers. Honestly, the only difference I can see between these two copies of The Killer is that one has a disc where the center is non-transparent and the same color/style as the blood and title of the disc, and my other copy has the white frosted ring. I have read that Criterion put out both versions of these disc. Also, for both discs, when I put them in my computer, they pull up UNDEFINED, which I also understand might be normal for these. Anybody have any clues?

Hard Boiled:
Two versions of this one, too. I actually just discovered which of the two was a bootleg. The insert was printed on glossy, thick paper. The artwork on the outside of the case was printed lower, if that makes any sense. One way to see this is that the logo on the top, front of the case, containing the words "THE CRITERION COLLECTION", is too tall. The correct version is slightly shorter. Here is an example. Both of my Hard Boiled copies have the NIMBUS and correct serial numbers. The bootleggers are getting good, I guess.
From what I've seen and read, older CC titles were typically printed on non-glossy paper. I think the assumption is that bootleggers cannot replicate the NIMBUS logo or the white frosted ring on the disc. Though I've seen some sketchy looking NIMBUS logos where it is like overwritten/superimposed on some type of serial number. Also, I noticed that as long as a disc has white frosted ring and NIMBUS logo, it basically always sells at the authentic price/value on ebay--so for the purpose of resale value, it may as well be legit.

Regarding your copies of The Killer. I recently bought one with frosted white ring and NIMBUS logo with the reflective disc artwork--no black print. I assume this to be legit. I've read elsewhere through a 3rd party that people owning both versions as you described/pictured both swear to the authenticity of their copies. Also, the packaging images of The Killer on this site shows the black print on the disc--they really ought to include more angles (e.g. case spine, case opening, back of disc). You may want to check the back of the case at the bottom fine print for (first printing vs second printing) as this may explain the discrepancies, though being so short-lived as a CC title, I doubt it had more than one printing. I actually own a legit Flesh for Frankenstein that was printed by a second printer (w/o NIMBUS logo) that still says First printing--so maybe this doesn't mean anything anyways.

Regardless, if they both have the NIMBUS logo, I think they both would be generally accepted as authentic. If you decide to sell one, I'd hold onto the one with the frosted white ring and reflective (all grey/silver and no black) disc art as this is probably the more coveted of the two.

User avatar
Roger Ryan
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 12:04 pm
Location: A Midland town spread and darkened into a city

Re: 288 F for Fake

#111 Post by Roger Ryan » Sun Jul 24, 2011 1:14 pm

bigmamou wrote:
Roger Ryan wrote:
bigmamou wrote:...Upon pulling it from its mailing envelope it seemed "funny" to me and upon further examination the cover (when compared to the cover on the criterion website) looked slightly shifted to the left, "fuzzy" and his last name as it appears on the cover was mis-punctuated (the apostrophe was in the wrong place)?! ...

Interestingly the cover on my package is shown at this website (a legitimate web dealer?) - http://www.cduniverse.com/images.asp?pi ... r+Fake+DVD" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Did Criterion change the front cover on this title within the last couple of years? The image shown at the "cduniverse" link is the same cover image I have and I purchased this title the week it was released via Amazon. Every copy I've seen of it uses Welles's to denote the possessive, which is correct although Welles' is equally acceptable. I tend to prefer the latter since it looks cleaner and I wonder if Criterion decided the same thing and altered the cover.

The image is a little "fuzzy" on all the copies I've seen so I don't think you have a "fake"...as much fun as that would be.
I finally was able to talk to Jon Mulvaney about all of this last week. He confirmed for me that the "F for Fake" cover was originally issued with the name spelled as Welles' and was never spelled as Welle's. I emailed him a scan of my package and he confirmed that it is a bootleg.......the cover photo is fuzzier (a copy of the original cover) and offset on the box and, of course, the name is wrong. I received today from B&N another copy that is legitimate (the cover is identical to the cover shown on the Criterion website) and it is also heavier than the original box I received. I think I will keep the counterfeit copy as I kind of like the irony of having a fake of "Fake"!! I don't know what to make of web dealers showing the bootleg cover on their websites though so buyer beware?
Hmm, you first mentioned your cover was identical to the one in the linked image which spelled the name "Welles's" and now you say your original cover had the spelling as "Welle's" - the latter is clearly incorrect and would indicate a bootleg. However, I am quite surprised that Mr. Mulvaney claims that the first issue printed the title as "Orson Welles' F FOR FAKE" given that both myself and, apparently, "naersjoen" bought copies where an additional "s" was consistently used when stating the possessive: "Orson Welles's F FOR FAKE". This appeared not only on the cover, spine and back cover, but throughout the booklet, even in the title of Jonathan Rosenbaum's essay (which is still listed as such on Criterion's website despite the change in punctuation on the front cover). Again, every retail outlet I saw the product in (Barnes & Noble, Borders, etc.) featured a cover with the spelling as "Welles's". Could the bootleggers have gotten into mass distribution to all of these outlets? My copy not only contains properly-pressed discs, but a 14-page full-color booklet and a separate complete "2005" Criterion Collection catalogue advising the customer to go to the correct website. Would there be any sense for a bootlegger to go to that extreme in replicating this title?

User avatar
Drucker
Your Future our Drucker
Joined: Wed May 18, 2011 9:37 am

Re: How to identify (and avoid) Criterion bootlegs

#112 Post by Drucker » Sun Jul 24, 2011 3:15 pm

gum.on.shoe wrote: I don't trust Amazon sellers other than Amazon (or like Target @ AMZ, etc), I would actually trust eBayers over Amazon marketplace. Based on my experience, ebayers seem to be more accountable and sensitive to negative feedback, there's better communication, provide better descriptions and pictures, and not to mention usually lower prices.
I don't understand the anti-Amazon sentiment I've seen a couple of times by some people posting. I've never had a bad experience on Amazon. Anytime a buyer didn't deliver or messed up an order, I've received a refund. Same with ebay.

bigmamou
Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2011 12:42 pm

Re: 288 F for Fake

#113 Post by bigmamou » Sun Jul 24, 2011 3:32 pm

Roger Ryan wrote:Hmm, you first mentioned your cover was identical to the one in the linked image which spelled the name "Welles's" and now you say your original cover had the spelling as "Welle's" - the latter is clearly incorrect and would indicate a bootleg. However, I am quite surprised that Mr. Mulvaney claims that the first issue printed the title as "Orson Welles' F FOR FAKE" given that both myself and, apparently, "naersjoen" bought copies where an additional "s" was consistently used when stating the possessive: "Orson Welles's F FOR FAKE". This appeared not only on the cover, spine and back cover, but throughout the booklet, even in the title of Jonathan Rosenbaum's essay (which is still listed as such on Criterion's website despite the change in punctuation on the front cover). Again, every retail outlet I saw the product in (Barnes & Noble, Borders, etc.) featured a cover with the spelling as "Welles's". Could the bootleggers have gotten into mass distribution to all of these outlets? My copy not only contains properly-pressed discs, but a 14-page full-color booklet and a separate complete "2005" Criterion Collection catalogue advising the customer to go to the correct website. Would there be any sense for a bootlegger to go to that extreme in replicating this title?
Sorry, I inadvertently dropped an "s" in my posting. As for what is the real story with this title........I'm just reporting what I'm being told by a Criterion rep, I have NO idea what the real story is with this title......nor have I claimed to know. For all I know EVERYTHING is a fake.

Here is Mr. Mulvaney's email reply to me verbatim:
Hi Mr. XXXXXXXXX,

Thank you for your email.

It seems like you have a fake on your hands. Ours has Welles' name spelled correctly. I'm glad to know you are getting a good copy during the B&N sale!
Counterfeiting is a serious issue, but unfortunately very difficult to combat. We tell our customers, if a Criterion seems too good to be true or if you are at all suspicious, it probably is not a real Criterion.

Thank you for your support of The Criterion Collection!

Best,

Jon Mulvaney

User avatar
Roger Ryan
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 12:04 pm
Location: A Midland town spread and darkened into a city

Re: How to identify (and avoid) Criterion bootlegs

#114 Post by Roger Ryan » Mon Jul 25, 2011 8:55 am

bigmamou - Thank you for the clarification and for providing Mr. Mulvaney's email. I apologize if I've come off irksome here; I'm really just amazed at the possibility that the "Welles's" printing may have been a fake. I'm thinking Mr. Mulvaney may have forgotten (or never knew) that the initial printing contained the extra "s" given how prevalent this version was in the marketplace (at regular Criterion pricing I might add). If this was, indeed, a bootleg, then it was an extraordinarily successful one as it perfectly replicated the official packaging while completely supplanting the proper release on-line and in numerous brick-and-mortar retail stores beginning on the day of release!

User avatar
cdnchris
Site Admin
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 2:45 pm
Location: Washington
Contact:

Re: How to identify (and avoid) Criterion bootlegs

#115 Post by cdnchris » Mon Jul 25, 2011 10:36 am

gum.on.shoe wrote:Also, the packaging images of The Killer on this site shows the black print on the disc--they really ought to include more angles (e.g. case spine, case opening, back of disc).
The disc shown in the picture is actually of a disc that's frosted. Unfortunately I had issues reflecting this because of the lighting and tried different camera angles to show this but the print always came out black. I had this issue with other frosted titles as well. Also I am planning on going back through the OOP discs (at least) to capture more angles.

User avatar
Minkin
Joined: Thu Aug 06, 2009 11:13 pm

Re: How to identify (and avoid) Criterion bootlegs

#116 Post by Minkin » Sat Sep 10, 2011 7:05 pm


User avatar
manicsounds
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 10:58 pm
Location: Tokyo, Japan

Re: How to identify (and avoid) Criterion bootlegs

#117 Post by manicsounds » Sun Sep 11, 2011 9:53 am

All Region DVD - plays on all DVD players worldwide. English Dolby Digital audio with optional English and Korean subtitles. English DVD menu. Case (as pictured) displays English and Korean text, with film synopsis in both languages. Film presented in 2.35:1 wide screen format.
Oh man, imagine what that would look like!

The Korean copies of those Criterions have been pretty rampant over the years, some copyright loophole in older films, but they are copying the artwork as well, and I don't think that is really legal...

User avatar
tojoed
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2008 11:47 am
Location: Cambridge, England

Re: How to identify (and avoid) Criterion bootlegs

#118 Post by tojoed » Sun Sep 11, 2011 10:07 am

I've heard that a few of the Korean "Criterions" are exactly that: Licensed from Criterion.
"Notorious" is one example I read about. I don't know whether or not it's true, but..
Jeff Adkins at HTF wrote: I'd say chances are about 95% that the Korean is legit. I had a conversation with 2 different people from Criterion regarding the Korean ports about a year ago. At first they acted like they didn't know what I was referring to, but they finally relented and admitted that they did indeed license some supplements to some Korean companies. They don't like the fact publicized since the Korean ports in many cases are significantly less money and often Region 0 (i.e. Notorious). I can't speak for this particular title, but I have confirmed that The Seventh Seal, Notorious, Rebecca, and The Magic Flute are all legit.

User avatar
Tribe
The Bastard Spawn of Hank Williams
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 7:59 pm
Location: Toledo, Ohio
Contact:

Re: How to identify (and avoid) Criterion bootlegs

#119 Post by Tribe » Sun Sep 11, 2011 4:52 pm

tojoed wrote:I've heard that a few of the Korean "Criterions" are exactly that: Licensed from Criterion.
"Notorious" is one example I read about. I don't know whether or not it's true, but..
Jeff Adkins at HTF wrote: I'd say chances are about 95% that the Korean is legit. I had a conversation with 2 different people from Criterion regarding the Korean ports about a year ago. At first they acted like they didn't know what I was referring to, but they finally relented and admitted that they did indeed license some supplements to some Korean companies. They don't like the fact publicized since the Korean ports in many cases are significantly less money and often Region 0 (i.e. Notorious). I can't speak for this particular title, but I have confirmed that The Seventh Seal, Notorious, Rebecca, and The Magic Flute are all legit.
Licensing supplements is a far cry from licensing the feature itself. And it boggles the mind somewhat that Criterion is sub-licensing DVD rights to companies in other parts of the world. Criterion is NOT the owner of the film in question, so it is very, very doubtful that it can sub-license the rights to publish a feature on DVD in a different region.

User avatar
jindianajonz
Jindiana Jonz Abrams
Joined: Wed Oct 12, 2011 8:11 pm

Re: How to identify (and avoid) Criterion bootlegs

#120 Post by jindianajonz » Wed Oct 12, 2011 8:21 pm

I'm hoping somebody can help verify a copy of Flesh for Frankenstein that I purchased on eBay.

The cover on the DVD case is printed on glossy paper and has rounded corners. The DVD case itself is unlike any that I've seen before; the "release" button that holds the DVD in place says "push" in the middle and is attached to the case from the 3 o'clock position. The DVD is held in place by a tab on the right side of the push button and a tab on a semicircle that surrounds the left side of the button (I will try to get some pictures if I am able).

The DVD itself is the white Ritek variety (as pictured on Amazon) rather than the clear center Nimbus type that is shown on the packaging photos of this site. There is, however, no Ritek logo that I can see on the DVD. The serial number is 11.1.DV.CC1546D.1.S5A, which is very close to the one listed earlier in this thread except for the fact that it ends in S5A rather than SSA. The closest thing to a logo on the serial number ring is "Deluxe(R)/AR." Does anybody else have an authentic DVD that matches this one, or do I have a (rather impressive looking) bootleg?

User avatar
Napier
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 9:48 am
Location: The Shire

Re: How to identify (and avoid) Criterion bootlegs

#121 Post by Napier » Wed Oct 12, 2011 10:14 pm

It's exactly the same as mine in every aspect you mention. I purchased it sealed, around 1999 or 2000. Sounds legit.

User avatar
TMDaines
Joined: Wed Nov 11, 2009 1:01 pm
Location: Stretford, Manchester

Re: How to identify (and avoid) Criterion bootlegs

#122 Post by TMDaines » Thu Oct 13, 2011 5:24 am

I'm never sure why people put so much emphasis on the DVD case when trying to identify if their second-hand copy is legit or not. I really don't think it's too uncommon for people to swap the cases with horrible buttons for a nice Amaray or swap the case if it just looks a little old and the foil has plenty of scratches.

User avatar
Professor Wagstaff
Joined: Tue Aug 24, 2010 11:27 pm

Re: How to identify (and avoid) Criterion bootlegs

#123 Post by Professor Wagstaff » Thu Oct 13, 2011 12:36 pm

Agreed. I just got a Robocop Criterion last week and my first instinct was to swap out the case for one that didn't have so much shelfwear.

User avatar
vsski
Joined: Thu Oct 13, 2011 3:47 pm

Re: How to identify (and avoid) Criterion bootlegs

#124 Post by vsski » Thu Oct 13, 2011 4:01 pm

Regarding the Flesh for Frankenstein DVD - I own the original DVD that I purchased the week it came out way back when in 1998 from a US DVD retail store (when such a thing still existed).

The DVD cover I have is printed on glossy paper, however, the edges of the cover are not round and the case is the then standard black / dark grey Amaray keep case.
The DVD itself has the clear Nimbus ring in the middle and on the front (non movie side) inside the clear ring shows letters and numbers saying DVD (D0373), as well as in a separate area the letters IFPI LI27 (this one being very small and the last I may be a 1 as well). On the movie side of the disc the Nimbus logo is shown inside the clear ring, the same IFPI combination as well as the the following: CC1546D (D1057). There is also an even smaller letter/ number combination engraved in the smallest part of the ring saying IFPI 242A.
I'm ver confident that this is an orginal, as I bought it long before the bootlegging mania started.

I don't know if any other pressings were made, this one is labeled First Pressing on the back side of the cover.

Hope that helps!

User avatar
jindianajonz
Jindiana Jonz Abrams
Joined: Wed Oct 12, 2011 8:11 pm

Re: How to identify (and avoid) Criterion bootlegs

#125 Post by jindianajonz » Thu Oct 13, 2011 8:16 pm

Thanks for the help, guys.

I only bring up the DVD case because if anybody else has the same case, that lends credence to the fact that it is an original (though it is by no means conclusive.) One of the difficult things that I've found about authenticity is that it is relatively easy to prove wrong, but almost impossible to prove right. Anything that helps confirm authenticity is helpful, in my opinion, even something as easy to swap out as a DVD case.

Vsski, there are indeed two versions of Flesh for Frankenstein that I've heard of. The one you describe (which is featured in the packaging photos on this site) and one done with a white cover by Ritek Media (not Nimbus). There are photos of the disc from this version on amazon.com; the main difference is the label printing goes all the way to the hole in the center, and is white rather than reflective. Based on what Napier said, I'm satisfied that mine is a legitimate copy of the second type.

On a side note, does anybody know if its possible to burn serial numbers (or logos, for that matter) onto the inside ring of a DVD?

Post Reply