Why Won't They Release Only What I Want?

[flyonthewall2983]

Is there any sign from Criterion about possibly releasing Cronenberg's Crash?

[Schkura]

You suck.

[HerrSchreck]

Serious question-- is that the glorious Ro-Man under your name? There goes my avatar...

Nope, is a famous Mexican character named El Chapulin Colorado, which had its looks based on Ro-Man.

I sensed a connection there. Ah, the great Ro-Man:

Boy: "You look like a pooped out pinwheel!"

Ro-Man: (off-balance) "So,"

I zapped my avatar back to Tex.

[Dear Catastrophe Totoro]

First off, cdnchris made so much sense on his last post that I'm not sure what argument the "old movies" team (want do you want your team name to be?) could reply with, but I thought for a moment I would actually put myself in the "old movies" team's shoes.

First of all, the delays have pissed me off as well. I must confess that I've been nonplused by titles falling back a month with nothing to fill the vacancies left in the schedule. I can also see how this mixed with any number of films on the release schedule that you have no interest in seeing could be frustrating. D&C, Equinox, K&S, Metropolitan, and PotM could all seem like niche titles compared to time honored classics, or at least, time honored classic directors.

As for the argument "I support the collection, so they should listen to what I say!" ...I can see the emotional connection, but to be honest, I don't see a logical one. I've been reading these boards for years (way back to the old criterion forum page), and I would say members of the Collection do read the site with more than a passing interest. Hell, they changed the cover art to Viridiana for the members of this site! I would say that sounds like a special favor for their biggest fans, not for profit but to please (at least, I hope you wouldn't pass up a film you love for the cover art). I mean, maybe they realized the old artwork had more of a Madonna-straddles-the-ground-and-sings-Like-a-Virgin feel, but I'm guessing the odds are with my former thought. To me, and sorry to make this so subjective, that is far more than any other DVD company has done for their customers. Because 40 or so people complained, they redesigned the cover.

So I would say that they do listen, but ultimately, they do understand that this is their company, not ours. I pay 25 dollars for a 40 dollar disc thanks to dvdplanet.com, which they pointed out to me. So that's five dollars more than the average DVD for amazing transfers, original bonus material, commentary tracks by film scholars and/or directors, well designed and comprehensive booklets, and even hidden art, such as the father's ghost inside the F&A boxset, or whatever is in My Own Private Idaho that I can't make out. So I'm not sure if they owe me anything. I spent $25 for a two disc set, I get the film I want with a boatload of extras, a beautiful transfer, and I'm happy at that.

As for the "we're used to older, more respected films from the CC" argument, as it has been pointed out several times, the only reason we're not seeing more films like Ghostbusters and Evita is because of rights issues. They obviously aren't film snobs. Peter has stated that they enjoyed working on The Rock laserdisc, so much so that they went ahead and started work on Armageddon before it was theatrically released. So in reality, films like Metropolitan and Kicking and Screaming are simply noteworthy modern films which HAD NOT BEEN RELEASED. Their tastes haven't changed, the market has, and these newest additions have been a continuation of their past practices that simply meet the new criteria for what they can release in the market today. Am I crazy or is that a fairly sane thought?

Finally, and this is just a guess, but I would have to say Eclipse fell through at the 11th hour, which left them with titles ready to ship. They obviously did a lot of work on Equinox, and it is possible PotM would have been the second release for Eclipse. So they're releasing them. That works for me. I haven't seen these films, so I can't comment on their quality, but b-movies have certainly gained spine numbers before, quite a few to be honest. Again, nothing new here.

That's where I'm coming from, at least. Like I said, I gave Metropolitan a try, and I enjoyed it. Was I mad that it wasn't Ozu? To be honest, at the time, yeah, a little. I realized, though, that it had nothing to do with my expectations. The collection is interested in our opinions (in fact, I was one of the assholes that asked for more Suzuki, not to bring all of that into this), but ultimately they choose the films they are going to be working on for the next few months. My guess is they have to keep their job fresh in order to put the love into, say, that elusive Ozu boxset. Maybe we're just jealous that they have the ultimate sandbox and we can only suggest and wait?

[Jeff]

I like jellybeans.

Not me. I find jellybeans to be too brightly coloured and "soft" for my taste. I much prefer the classic confections such as Toffee, Hard Caramels, and, of course, more Chocolate is always welcome. I do not understand why companies continue to waste their time distributing Jellybeans.

What is wrong with them?

[Narshty]

Finally, and this is just a guess, but I would have to say Eclipse fell through at the 11th hour, which left them with titles ready to ship. They obviously did a lot of work on Equinox, and it is possible PotM would have been the second release for Eclipse. So they're releasing them. That works for me. I haven't seen these films, so I can't comment on their quality, but b-movies have certainly gained spine numbers before, quite a few to be honest. Again, nothing new here.

Why assume Eclipse isn't happening? Criterion announced Equinox a hearty six years ago, and I presume they've become fond enough in that time not to sweep it under the rug but to make it one of the boys instead.

PS. What's "PotM"?

[HerrSchreck]

I was assuming he meant Princess of the Moon.

As for the argument "I support the collection, so they should listen to what I say!" ...I can see the emotional connection, but to be honest, I don't see a logical one.

I didn't want to punch in on this again, but I just couldn't help myself.

The above comment is amazing to me, in and of itself. With all due respect to you DCT, the concept is a time honored one, is one that CC and every successful business knows full well and dutifully acknowledge (read the back of any little white CC catalog & read their thanks & pledge to you, the loyal dedicated collector who made the CC so successful) which is: they survive on your money. It's your money which fuels future releases. It doesn't make you the boss, but it gives you the right to expect a receptive ear. It's why Mulvaney exists. It's why mail-in suggestion cards exist, e-newsletters, contests, et cetera. The second an entity decides it doesn't need it's public or a mass of eerily similar opinion (George Bush) it's dead in the water.

Again, I have no real beef with CC-- my image of them hasn't changed. But your belief that there's no logical connection between a company and it's customers... it makes you a CEO's dream-come-true.

I can guarantee you one thing-- they're definitely aware of the light uproar right now.

[nyasa]

... and I would say members of the Collection do read the site with more than a passing interest. Hell, they changed the cover art to Viridiana for the members of this site! I would say that sounds like a special favor for their biggest fans, not for profit but to please (at least, I hope you wouldn't pass up a film you love for the cover art). ... To me, and sorry to make this so subjective, that is far more than any other DVD company has done for their customers. Because 40 or so people complained, they redesigned the cover.

These days, companies (and political parties) constantly respond to the views of small numbers of people. We live in an age in which barely a decision is made without the input of 'focus groups'. The views expressed on this Forum no doubt help Criterion to judge which way the wind is blowing, and to navigate accordingly. I don't think the Viridiana episode was a question of doing anyone a favour - it made commercial sense .

Nor are they doing us a favour by releasing the films we crave. We pay for them, after all - and the profits generated by our spending help pave the way for future releases. Sort of like the tax and spend relationship between citizens and their government. So what's wrong with aspiring to a bit of democracy, and asking for our opinions to at least be taken into account.

After all, we have the ultimate power. We don't get to vote for Criterion, but we can go one better than that. If we don't like the product, we will stop buying. Criterion are mindful of that, and that's why - if they know what's good for them - they are listening to us with interest.

[skuhn8]

If we don't like the product, we will stop buying. Criterion are mindful of that, and that's why - if they know what's good for them - they are listening to us with interest.

actually, if we don't like the product we won't by that particular product. not to be mistaken with a general boycott (stop buying), which is precisely why this spring time hissy fit won't be more than an amusement for the good folks at CC. if and when battleship potemkin comes out we're going to buy it whether the previous spine number is for ozu or michael bay.

[toiletduck!]

If we don't like the product, we will stop buying. Criterion are mindful of that, and that's why - if they know what's good for them - they are listening to us with interest.

So why can't that just be the case? What is the point of this whole rigamaroll? If sales of Equinox are absolutely abysmal (which I'm not certain that they will be), I'm sure Criterion will learn a lesson. But all this decrying of Criterion! What the crap is that? Are Ozu fans seriously going to not buy Late Spring because Equinox is coming out a month later? I agree with Shrecko to an certain degree -- yes, Criterion have a responsibility to listen to us. However, not our ramblings on forums so much as the way we spend our money.

-Toilet Dcuk

[Dear Catastrophe Totoro]

As for the argument "I support the collection, so they should listen to what I say!" ...I can see the emotional connection, but to be honest, I don't see a logical one.

I didn't want to punch in on this again, but I just couldn't help myself.

The above comment is amazing to me, in and of itself. With all due respect to you DCT, the concept is a time honored one, is one that CC and every successful business knows full well and dutifully acknowledge (read the back of any little white CC catalog & read their thanks & pledge to you, the loyal dedicated collector who made the CC so successful) which is: they survive on your money. It's your money which fuels future releases. It doesn't make you the boss, but it gives you the right to expect a receptive ear. It's why Mulvaney exists. It's why mail-in suggestion cards exist, e-newsletters, contests, et cetera. The second an entity decides it doesn't need it's public or a mass of eerily similar opinion (George Bush) it's dead in the water.

Again, I have no real beef with CC-- my image of them hasn't changed. But your belief that there's no logical connection between a company and it's customers... it makes you a CEO's dream-come-true.

I can guarantee you one thing-- they're definitely aware of the light uproar right now.

I suppose I meant the company does not have to listen to every suggestion we make. They are still releasing the sort of films we love, but if we say, "Don't release this certain type of film at all," then I don't see why they have to listen as long as it sells. If product sells, the company is happy, the consumer is happy, and that is the end of it, in my humble view. I really could be naive, I give you that, but to me, I see this as the entire cycle. For instance, a director makes a film he wants to make. If the audience wants to see it, they pay for tickets, DVDs, etc. Just because I'm a fan of Studio Ghibli, for instance, doesn't mean I have any say on the types of projects they release. I take The Cat Returns and My Neighbors, the Yamadas in stride because they wanted to release them. Just because these were smaller films and anything but Miyazaki classics doesn't mean I go to the studio and yell in their ears.

Also note I went on to say (A) they do listen to us, as with the cover, and (B) I asked for more Suzuki and they released it. They listen, but, again, as I said, they know when to step out and make the decisions they are comfortable with making. I believe it's important for a company to not simply be reactionists, but to know where they want to take the company. If it results in losing profits, or alienating their fanbase, then I'm sure they will react, but since this "change" just started 3 months ago, and in reality has always been part of the mission statement, I'm willing to see where they want to go.

To be honest, I agree with most of what you said, especially what I put in bold font above, except I rarely see companies actually listen to consumers unless it reaches a point where they lose profits. For example, Universal produces cheap products on a regular basis, and if anything, their output has gotten worse, Paramount gives us bare-boned DVDs with horrible artwork, and MGM is not much better. Criterion continues to release quality transfers, interesting films and what we consider classics. This seems to be an issue of saying, "I don't like this film, what is happening to Criterion?" To me, at least. That's how this thread was started, correct?

[kekid]

I am shocked by the increasingly strong language used in this thread. Dear friends, why do we need to get so intolerant of views we disagree with? I am happy to express myself, and understand that others feel differently. As far as any impact on actual decisions, some of us will not buy some of the titles, others will; Criterion may or may not rebalance their release schedule in future based on this feedback, but why is it wrong to give them the feedback? When reason is overtaken by hostility, perhaps it is time to close the thread.

[Dear Catastrophe Totoro]

Finally, and this is just a guess, but I would have to say Eclipse fell through at the 11th hour, which left them with titles ready to ship. They obviously did a lot of work on Equinox, and it is possible PotM would have been the second release for Eclipse. So they're releasing them. That works for me. I haven't seen these films, so I can't comment on their quality, but b-movies have certainly gained spine numbers before, quite a few to be honest. Again, nothing new here.

Why assume Eclipse isn't happening? Criterion announced Equinox a hearty six years ago, and I presume they've become fond enough in that time not to sweep it under the rug but to make it one of the boys instead.

PS. What's "PotM"?

First of all, Herr is correct, I meant Princess of the Moon. Sorry!

Second, like I said, it was a complete guess, but it made sense to me. If they were going to start a line of DVDs with a plump, two disc edition of Equinox, then why not release it to put your best foot forward?

[Schkura]

This seems to be an issue of saying, "I don't like this film, what is happening to Criterion?" To me, at least. That's how this thread was started, correct?

No. Once again they are releasing movies the snobs don't like that will sell well, so they can release great DVDs of great films later that will sell much more poorly. Look for a stellar second-half of 2006, financed in large part by the very films many of you are bitching about.

[Narshty]

If you think Criterion need to release the likes of Metropolitan to make more Mizoguchi financially viable, you're mad. While I would put money on Dazed and Confused being Criterion's biggest seller this year (the only one I can think that might top it would be the Seven Samurai reissue), I seriously doubt Metropolitan, Equinox or Kicking and Screaming will be raking it in with any great speed. Criterion have always liked devoting time and attention to smaller films they're particularly fond of, whether they have a sizeable cult following or are practically unknown. At this stage, Criterion have a built-in customer base for anything they release, so can be somewhat indulgent and just release movies they think deserve a second chance. I don't buy this cuckoo-land "Not a world-renowned classic + American film from the last 20 years = Obvious moneyspinner" business model/excuse that's being touted on this thread.

[Schkura]

I don't buy this cuckoo-land "Not a world-renowned classic + American film from the last 20 years = Obvious moneyspinner" business model/excuse that's being touted on this thread.

Then offer an alternative.

[Narshty]

I did.

[Schkura]

Sorry, our connection must be fuzzy-- I'm sure Cuckooland is long distance from where you are.

[Dear Catastrophe Totoro]

Oy...

Frankly, I'm quite tired of posters "blowing up" the Dazed and Confused, Equinox, etc. threads with "what-are-they-thinking"-type posts rather than discussing the specific points of the film which they find laudable or objectionable.

I wasn't saying you were saying, "I don't like this film, what is happening to Criterion?" I'm saying you created it to discuss the issue behind the "what-are-they-thinking" posts. Correct?

Criterion have always liked devoting time and attention to smaller films they're particularly fond of, whether they have a sizeable cult following or are practically unknown. At this stage, Criterion have a built-in customer base for anything they release, so can be somewhat indulgent and just release movies they think deserve a second chance.

=D> God, I wish I could be as articulate as this.

[Tribe]

I don't buy this cuckoo-land "Not a world-renowned classic + American film from the last 20 years = Obvious moneyspinner" business model/excuse that's being touted on this thread.

Then offer an alternative.

What? There HAS to be a lame-brained scheme to supplant another?

[HerrSchreck]

My suspicion is Narshty is dead right. 2005 wrapped (according to NYTimes) with WB & CC the undisputed leaders. Everyone mimicks Criterion's commentaries, extras, their site, even the design of their boxes to fool you into thinking it's a Criterion when it's not. (Check, if my memory serves me right, the latest example which is some R0 PAL issue of SECRET BEYOND THE DOOR... box looks just like CC). Old films & noirs are very very in right now, Warner & Fox are scrambling to dig out flicks which they never dreamed they'd be rushing onto market just a few years ago. Everyone's got some "_____ Collection" in their line or some form of classics.

CC is not a starving company martyring themselves to bring you Ozu & CRANES ARE FLYING. The DVD market is very vibrant right now (albeit tech-transitory at the moment).

[Morbii]

My suspicion is Narshty is dead right. 2005 wrapped (according to NYTimes) with WB & CC the undisputed leaders.

Undisputed leaders of what? The nytimes article "Hailing the DVD Distributors: The Best Vault Raiders of 2005" does call them the undisputed leaders.... in an opinion piece related to what (older films) they have released in 2005, not to monetary gains.

Google cache

[davida2]

The Ozu film is one of his most important. The Bunuel film is one of his most important. I'll leave it to others to comment on the importance of the Welles, etc.

So you think that Late Spring and Viridana have the same level of recognition to the average cc punter as 8 1/2, Grand Illusion, Seven Samurai, Seventh Seal?

No, but they should, and getting them out will go a long way towards rectifying this. The film 'canon' (the cinematic equivalent to a classic rock station, where classics are determined by famailiarity and constant rotation) isn't a fossil, isn't set in stone - there are too many blank spots on Criterion's map. Not being as famous as 8 1/2 doesn't mean that Late Spring, or never-gonna-be-Criterions like A Touch Of Zen, or Charulata, or something recent like Kore'eda's Distance are worthless. The worst thing in the world would be Criterion turning into some musty, disengaged museum. I know Seventh Seal (not my fave Bergman) is great; it got shoved down my throat years ago.

I'm very glad to see some relatively obscure surprises make the collection - Crazed Fruit, Cleo From 5 To 7 or Sword Of Doom, all faves of mine, and they'd be dropping the ball (and not living up to their mission statement) if they ignored contemporary film. I remember being bored by K&S, but I love Dazed & Confused and Metropolitan, which aren't The Rules Of The Game, but ... they belong. When Criterion does continue to roll out bang-up jobs like Ugetsu, which was one of my most-hoped-for DVDs, and was no commercial flop, I'm happy enough.

I want - more Mizoguchi, Naruse, Satyajit Ray, Ritwik Ghatak, King Hu, Hou, Latin American film, Middle Eastern, Sembene, 5000 Fingers Of Dr. T, a 6-disc Smokey & The Bandit Box including a Sally Field commentary, everything... They'll get around to some of it, about the same time I'm actually able to afford to buy them.

[Musashi219]

I feel the need to chime in as now I have read over these pages and decided to comment.

There is something that all the disappointed folks seem to forget when it comes to Criterion: nobody is forcing you to buy and/or watch one of the "unworthy" films they're releasing. Yeah, when I learned that Metropolitan and Dazed and Confused were getting released, I wasn't too thrilled, but at the same time I didn't get all up in arms about it. Criterion has to appeal to a wide range of cinephiles AND casual film-goers. Plenty of us here love Ozu, but I'm sure they are plenty of other qualified folks who find his work uninteresting. We can't all be happy and no matter what release comes out that gets somebody into sheer excitement, there will be someone who just isn't a fan or doesn't care from the beginning.

To be honest, I find it hard to believe that a bunch of people are whining over stuff such as Metropolitan and Equinox when we've already been blessed so far this year with a Kurosawa, a Bergman, a Renoir, FOUR incredibly worthwhile Malle films, and, most importantly, an Ozu and Welles. I currently have The Complete Mr. Arkadin boxset (it arrived on Monday) and it is simply put a masterpiece. The kind of treatment we all received with The Battle of Algiers, Fanny and Alexander, The Rules of the Game, and plenty more all-out as special an edition that there ever might be release format. This release ALONE makes it a very good year for them, but considering we're getting Late Spring and Elevator to the Gallows, could it get any better?

Don't answer that question though. I don't need to see 20 people reply saying how we deserve some Naruse, some Mizoguchi, Ophuls and a dozen more names you'd like to drop. We're only halfway through 2006 and I'm sure Criterion has plenty more surprises up their sleeves this year.

[bjeggert82]

Don't answer that question though. I don't need to see 20 people reply saying how we deserve some Naruse, some Mizoguchi, Ophuls and a dozen more names you'd like to drop. We're only halfway through 2006 and I'm sure Criterion has plenty more surprises up their sleeves this year.

I agree. I really think this complaining about 2006 is for complaining's sake alone, especially when Criterion's only announced half of the year's releases. Come October when we know Criterion's full list of 2006 releases, if those of you that are complaining now are still unhappy, then whine all you want. But until then, put faith a little into one of the two DVD distributors (the other being Warner) that actually delivers on a consistent basis.