Why Won't They Release Only What I Want?

[Michael Kerpan]

> CRITERION IS PROUD TO ANNOUNCE THE STAR WARS SAGA. EPISODE'S I-VI

If they presented the "original" -- but restored -- form of the initial three films, I'd buy it in a flash. (Though I'd be happier if these were split into two box sets -- so I could spend my money only on the older films).

[Mr Sausage]

Wow. The sheer ingratitude from some people here is astonishing. Here's a company that's spent a decade releasing great DVDs of great films on a consistent, industry standard basis, and yet the minute they release some films during a couple of months that no one here finds particularly interesting, the fangs come out and people try to tear them to shreds with all sorts of abuse. I've seen people suffer through painful diseases with more stoicism than some here can muster over being deprived of a few Criterions over the next few months.

[Michael Kerpan]

Mr. S -- if Criterion was the only DVD/BDR company in the world, I might understand the hysteria of the disappointed (but probably not).

I won't tell Criterion what movies they have to release, so long as they don't tell mewhat movies I have to buy

[Tommaso]

I agree with both of you, though I cannot help taking into consideration that Criterion over the last decade have created a certain public image of themselves (the type of films they release, a focus on classics, the number of 'firsts' and so on) that now seems to be somewhat changing which might not be to everyone's taste (me included). And although I never understood why, the number of region-locked people here still seems to be surprisingly high, and this creates a dearth of high-quality releases of 'typical' CC films if you have to rely on the US market and cannot get the goodies from the BFI, MoC and other such companies.

[Michael Kerpan]

But one can get a decent region free DVD player for about the cost of 2 Criterion DVDs. ;~}

[aox]

the problem with that is my other few hundred friends might not have a region-free. most people in the US don't. Really sucks if I want to loan something out or am responsible for bringing something to a screening.

[Tommaso]

But one can get a decent region free DVD player for about the cost of 2 Criterion DVDs. ;~}

That's why I said that I really don't understand that situation (with 'here' I meant this forum). And aox, if all your friends aren't region-free, just show them around your flat and show them all the good films they're missing. Perhaps they then get the idea

[Michael Kerpan]

the problem with that is my other few hundred friends might not have a region-free. most people in the US don't. Really sucks if I want to loan something out or am responsible for bringing something to a screening.

If you are responsible for a screening, most new region-free DVD players are light enough to take along to wherever you are planning to show the film. ;~}

[Tom Amolad]

But one can get a decent region free DVD player for about the cost of 2 Criterion DVDs. ;~}

That's why I said that I really don't understand that situation (with 'here' I meant this forum). And aox, if all your friends aren't region-free, just show them around your flat and show them all the good films they're missing. Perhaps they then get the idea

Other problem that still afflicts those of us who aren't technically region locked is that it's tough to justify a lot of blind buys of $30 import DVDs that, were they available domestically, we could explore via netflix, video stores, or libraries. I can order a few, but I don't get to make the sorts of impulse explorations of odder titles I could if there were Region 1 editions.

Not saying that justifies the sort of whining that you find around here, assuming Criterion's slowdown lets up eventually. I'd rather see them survive the recession than release Out 1 now and promptly fold.

[Gregory]

I think a lot of people think it's written in stone (or in some interpretation of the mission statement) that Criterion should focus overwhelmingly on international arthouse films from the 1930s-'70s. In fact, the main reason they did that in the last ten years is that their licensing options for newer films were more limited during the "DVD boom." That has changed now, opening up opportunities for releases that would not have been possible before.
I'm seeing a lot of comments that assume economic realities have forced Criterion to release more recent films. However, if we can take Turell's word for it, their sales are not hurting that much, and the economy has actually given them more freedom to release exactly what they've wanted to release. I would like just as much as the next person to see more releases of classic films not previously available on DVD, but that's just not what Criterion wants to focus on. Eventually, people are going to have to get used to a many more contemporary releases (and special editions of things like Stagecoach) in Criterion's catalog and stop associating the Criterion brand mainly with classic international arthouse, especially releases of films previously unavailable on DVD.

[Tom Amolad]

I'm seeing a lot of comments that assume economic realities have forced Criterion to release more recent films. However, if we can take Turell's word for it, their sales are not hurting that much, and the economy has actually given them more freedom to release exactly what they've wanted to release.

I'm inclined to take a lot of people at their word, but not so much executives bragging about how their company is doing. (Not that I blame him if he's spinning the PR; it's just the sort of statement you have to read with a wink, I think.)

[Gregory]

The notion that Criterion has been forced to release newer films due to the economic climate would contradict quite a few statements from that interview, not just the one that their sales are down a small amount at most. I could believe he'd spin something a certain way or making a slight exaggeration; it's less convincing that he'd fabricate an entire explanation for the increase in newer films. I happen to think his explanation makes sense. Also, if his purpose was to brag about how well the company's doing, surely he'd have claimed that their Blu-Ray releases have brought them new customers.

[Michael Kerpan]

I wouldn't say that Criterion has been _forced_ to release newer films -- but rather that they have been given the opportunity to release some newer films -- that they hope will bring in extra cash. (No criticism -- I don't consider Criterion an eleemosynary institution).

[Napier]

I custom built a "shelving system" in an entire room of my old New England house, with a special section to hold up to 1500 Criterion DVD's. All my film collecting friends love to come over and ogle the Criterion's in particular. I've been collecting them since 1998, and have everything they've ever released. So, since they're spine numbered, I'm pretty much a guaranteed sell on whatever it is they decide to release. Plus I've never seen some of the newer releases in the pipeline, but let me just state for the record I'm no fan of Benjamin Button, and I tried and tried to like it. As long as I get a Blu-ray of The Quiet Man they will have won my heart forever.

[Gregory]

I wouldn't say that Criterion has been _forced_ to release newer films -- but rather that they have been given the opportunity to release some newer films -- that they hope will bring in extra cash.

Some of the newer films they're releasing (such as Benjamin Button) can surely be projected to bring in "extra" cash, others not. I still believe a lot of the more recent films in the Collection are there mainly because producers or others in the company had a genuine enthusiasm for the film. To name an example off the top of my head, they certainly didn't release Ratcatcher -- a film practically no one saw when it was released -- because it would earn them extra money. Many of the recent titles of late were also not huge box-office favorites even on an arthouse scale. I don't have anyone specifically in mind, but I think quite a few people have talked about the newer films released and announced lately in general as if most or all of them are cash cows, and were possibly chosen partly for that reason, which I think think is probably inaccurate on both counts.

[Nothing]

I must say, I take offense at this comment being moved into the "Why Won't Criterion Release Only What I Want" thread. This isn't about "what I want", or about Criterion's failure to release any particular title - it is about a major flaw, a major misstep, in their policy towards contemporary cinema that, frankly, calls into question their entire motivation.

As I said, if they are serious about contemporary cinema, they should scout for titles themselves (as they have occassionally done in the past, eg. Fat Girl and Ratcatcher, both reasonably worthwhile releases). There is a lot of frustration on the festival circuit at present at the increasingly conservative and intellectually vacuous approach taken by US buyers. Many great films with distribution in other countries have been passed over altogether by the US in recent years, whilst others have been bought for peanuts by IFC, months or even years after their premiere, for a fraction of what they would have been worth even 5 years ago. This is hurting producers and sales agents and having a negative impact on the kinds of films that are able to make it into production. In teaming up with IFC, striking a deal with the devil as it were, Criterion are bringing absolutely nothing to the table - indeed, they are helping to cement some very troubling power structures. Gratitude is not the word that comes to mind, no.

If this is about making money to support more 'risky' releases, what are these supposed to be exactly? What 'risky' contemporary acquisitions are you talking about? Would that be the Lisandro Alonso boxset they announced with great fanfare, or perhaps that edition of Colossol Youth they released on schedule a couple of years ago...? If you're talking about catalogue then, as someone else said, why the hell is Monsoon Wedding getting a spine number before Ray or Ghatak (indeed there is no Ray or Ghatak even on the horizon)? Is it really a coincidence that myself and many others have been far more excited by Masters of Cinema and BFI releases over the past year or two? I wouldn't look at Monsoon Wedding or Gomorra or Hunger as particularly large sellers either, the latter being a cynical faux-arthouse effort that'll be forgotten in a year or two, the former two being low-level hits that already have US DVD releases. This is laziness as much as anything, combined with a dull capitalist motive.

The bottom line, are Criterion now a company simply seeking to cash-in in a lazy fashion, now that the bulk of their more famous catalog titles have already seen a release, a mark of 'prestige' for Hollywood players to slap on their high-profile releases. or are they an organisation with a genuine interest in cinema as an artform (as they present themselves to be)? If the latter, and if they wish to continue delving into the contemporary arena, I seriously suggest they get their hands dirty and send a couple of acquisitions executives to Cannes, Venice and Berlin next year.

[Lemmy Caution]

Well, they did recently take such a step with Revanche, a film that otherwise wouldn't have been heard of outside a small circle. So it appears that they are open to exploring the path you suggest.

[Tribe]

There is a lot of frustration on the festival circuit at present at the increasingly conservative and intellectually vacuous approach taken by US buyers. Many great films with distribution in other countries have been passed over altogether by the US in recent years, whilst others have been bought for peanuts by IFC, months or even years after their premiere, for a fraction of what they would have been worth even 5 years ago. This is hurting producers and sales agents and having a negative impact on the kinds of films that are able to make it into production. In teaming up with IFC, striking a deal with the devil as it were, Criterion are bringing absolutely nothing to the table - indeed, they are helping to cement some very troubling power structures. Gratitude is not the word that comes to mind, no.

I certainly don't consider myself an expert or indeed even well-versed in the economics of film acquisition and distribution and the like, but it would appear at first glance that if a number of US distributors believe a film might make a profit, the various distributors would bid and that would increase the amounts the producers or rights holders would receive. The fact that's not happening is because there's a perception not enough money will be made to warrant the investment (or the scenario you paint of no distributions deals at all).

Yeah, that is too bad...I wish it weren't that way and all kinds of movies made in other countries were freely available in the USA.

If IFC is the only company bidding (as it seems your argument goes), then if they are successfully bidding and acquiring distribution deals for these films at rock-bottom prices, it appears no one else is bidding. I don't see why you're taking umbrage at that. After all, if the price is too low (or if IFC is lowballing), then they could pass on the offer, right? If there were enough bidders than the original rights holders could correspondingly jack up their asking price...I doubt you'd be complaining about that.

If you're talking about catalogue then, as someone else said, why the hell is Monsoon Wedding getting a spine number before Ray or Ghatak (indeed there is no Ray or Ghatak even on the horizon)? Is it really a coincidence that myself and many others have been far more excited by Masters of Cinema and BFI releases over the past year or two? I wouldn't look at Monsoon Wedding or Gomorra or Hunger as particularly large sellers either, the latter being a cynical faux-arthouse effort that'll be forgotten in a year or two, the former two being low-level hits that already have US DVD releases. This is laziness as much as anything, combined with a dull capitalist motive.

Which is exactly why your original post ended up in this thread...your "faux-arthouse effort" is another man's compelling all-time classic. It's that subjectivity that makes this thread the burial ground of posts that question "why such crap" is being released as opposed to your _____ (insert the name of your favorite director).

The bottom line, are Criterion now a company simply seeking to cash-in in a lazy fashion, now that the bulk of their more famous catalog titles have already seen a release, or are they an organisation with a genuine interest in cinema as an artform (as they present themselves to be)? If the latter, and if they wish to continue delving into the contemporary arena, I seriously suggest they get their hands dirty and send a couple of acquisitions executives to Cannes, Venice and Berlin next year.

I don't understand why this makes or doesn't make what Criterion does any more or any less worthy.

[Mr Sausage]

The bottom line, are Criterion now a company simply seeking to cash-in in a lazy fashion, now that the bulk of their more famous catalog titles have already seen a release, a mark of 'prestige' for Hollywood players to slap on their high-profile releases. or are they an organisation with a genuine interest in cinema as an artform (as they present themselves to be)? If the latter, and if they wish to continue delving into the contemporary arena, I seriously suggest they get their hands dirty and send a couple of acquisitions executives to Cannes, Venice and Berlin next year.

*sigh*

Everyone complaining about the supposed sea-change in Criterion's manner and judgement really ought to familiarize themselves with this list, noting such entries as: The Princess Bride, Ghostbusters, Silverado, The Big Chill, The Bonds, Tootsie, Monty Python and the Holy Grail, Bram Stoker's Dracula, Menace II Society, Prince of Tides, Halloween, Pulp Fiction, Once Were Warriors, Dead Presidents, Trainspotting, Supercop, Sling Blade, Boogie Nights.

[knives]

So criterion traded one Python for another?

[Tommaso]

*sigh*

Everyone complaining about the supposed sea-change in Criterion's manner and judgement really ought to familiarize themselves with this list, noting such entries as: The Princess Bride, Ghostbusters, Silverado, The Big Chill, The Bonds, Tootsie, Monty Python and the Holy Grail, Bram Stoker's Dracula, Menace II Society, Prince of Tides, Halloween, Pulp Fiction, Once Were Warriors, Dead Presidents, Trainspotting, Supercop, Sling Blade, Boogie Nights.

Now you're making ME sigh, noting that that list contains films as: Letter from an Unknown Woman, Dersu Uzala, Magnificent Ambersons, Miracle in Milan,The Life of Oharu, and Nostalghia.

[Jun-Dai]

Other problem that still afflicts those of us who aren't technically region locked is that it's tough to justify a lot of blind buys of $30 import DVDs that, were they available domestically, we could explore via netflix, video stores, or libraries.

Man, I really miss Nicheflix for exactly that reason. The only options that leaves us are blind buys and torrents, which will guarantee you coal in your stocking and the enmity of all DVD producers in this forum.

[Kirkinson]

Man, I really miss Nicheflix for exactly that reason. The only options that leaves us are blind buys and torrents, which will guarantee you coal in your stocking and the enmity of all DVD producers in this forum.

Facets has DVDs from other regions and you can rent from them across the country. Though I imagine the turnaround time isn't great for NY, as their only distribution center is their own little store in Chicago. But still.

[Michael Kerpan]

They have ton of dvds not available in R1. Are these bootlegs or the real R2 releases?

Some are bona fide all-region Asian releases that can't be commerically distributed in the US (but which can be ordered on a retail basis from online retailers such as YesAsia). I note that Facets will often sell copies of such releases for $25 or so dollars -- though these can be bought just as easily from YesAsia for $10 or so.

[Lemmy Caution]

They have ton of dvds not available in R1. Are these bootlegs or the real R2 releases?

Some are bona fide all-region Asian releases that can't be commerically distributed in the US (but which can be ordered on a retail basis from online retailers such as YesAsia). I note that Facets will often sell copies of such releases for $25 or so dollars -- though these can be bought just as easily from YesAsia for $10 or so.

Do they come with a free eyepatch and hook?

Sounds mighty fishy to me.