I think the issue is that there are very few major gaps for most of those filmmakers. Some of them are clearly trickling out slowly, but I just don't know if we can expect more than 1 film a year from most "canonical" directors (we've had Death in Venice and The Damned from Visconti, fwiw; we've also had the Rohmer blu upgrade with the 4 seasons films imminent). Some of them are more perplexing than others: I think the very slow roll-out of the Almodovars, even though we know they have plans to release most of them, is really frustrating. But for others, it sort of makes sense. Like, what's the market for The Story of Adele H or one of the Rosselinis that hasn't been released?vsski wrote: ↑Sat Nov 20, 2021 10:49 amI'm not up to date with all the right's issues, but I would have hoped by now to see more Truffauts (upgrades and new titles), some Chabrols (not sure they really don't like him), more Resnais, definitely more Kurosawas (but Michael may be correct that Toho is the problem), more Mizoguchis, at least some Naruses (I still refuse to believe that he would sell less than Man Push Cart), more Oshimas, some more Ozus, some of the early Viscontis, although the materials may not be up to snuff, some more Rosselinis, some Francesco Rosis, more Almodovars (surely they still have his licenses), some of the silent Hitchcocks (although they may not have more, I'm not sure), more World Cinema, some of the older Scorseses, some early Wenders, more Rohmers, some silent Hollywood and some more classic Hollywood, although they have published a few nice ones in recent years.
I think the overall argument is especially strange because I've found this last year or two to be some of the most exciting releases in a very long time. Of course this is a question of the way we make canons but also the age of the people programming. Clearly, hiring Ashley Clark has changed some of the emphasis, and in particular, I think we've seen a huge shift into the way younger cinephiles view film history. It's interesting that you mentioned something like Throw Down as a type of release that doesn't fit the normal Criterion paradigm, but for a lot of people I've seen, that is a massive release because Johnnie To is a massive, massive filmmaker, especially for younger cinephiles. For me, that shows the Criterion is starting to recognize how things are changing and what younger cinephiles think is important. And to be fair, I think a release like Deep Cover, for example, is way more exciting than a potential release by nearly any of the directors you've mentioned, even though I love most of them and am anxious for more of their films. But watching Deep Cover, in the context of a Criterion release, was one of the best viewing experiences I've had recently. I'm happy that they are starting to re-examine their blindspots and re-claim some of these films that always should have been revered.
