Why Won't They Release Only What I Want?

[Musashi219]

The whole vote-with-your-pocketbook thing came up as a response to those complaining about Criterion releasing DVDs of films they didn't like. While I'm not sticking up for the complaining, this is a problematic response. In the past whenever someone complained about Criterion focusing their efforts on Michael Bay titles instead of something else, someone else would invariably try to put an end to the discussion with, "Well, just don't buy them." But not buying them won't have any impact because even though a large portion of Criterion's supporters have avoided buying these Bay DVDs, they sold very well. If Criterion were easily influenced by what sells the best, that would actually discourage them from releasing slow-selling but important works by little known directors. Sales certainly have an influence, but the election is rigged because there's already much more familiarity with and demand for Chasing Amy and the like than A Nous la Liberte. Yi Yi is one of the most important releases Criterion has done in some time, but it has sales disadvantages because many major retailers like Best Buy generally avoid stocking non-English language films and because Yang isn't as familiar even to most buyers of non-English language DVDs as e.g. Akira Kurosawa.
One of the things I appreciate most about Criterion is that they have standards completely apart from what sells best. For example, Becker said a couple of years ago that they had decided to release Ugestu Monogatari without regardless of how much it might sell. Due to these same standards they also release a certain number of titles like Equinox and Koko regardless of how well or how poorly they sell. It's part of doing what they like and how they see themselves as a company, and for our peace of mind we'd all do well to just accept it and be patient for the titles we'd rather have.

Actually, I wouldn't be surprised if Best Buy were to end up carrying more and more newer Criterion releases. I was there just last night and they had Mr. Arkadin ($35.99!) but also Fists in the Pocket ($21.99) and Elevator to the Gallows ($28.99 - yes I bought it) - two titles that aren't even out til next week. Considering Criterion is releasing more "mainstream" titles, I'm sure more retailers are becoming more attracted to their general release schedule rather than just select titles.

[Gregory]

There may be considerable difference depending on the store's location. Maybe your Best Buy has started to realize they can make money selling classic foreign films to Indiana U. students. Anyway, even if Best Buy is carrying more Criterion titles overall, I think my point stands that Yi Yi has many marketing disadvantages compared to, say, Videodrome, or even High and Low. The failure of many people on this forum to buy Chasing Amy hasn't resulted in low sales and in turn influenced Criterion's decisions about what kinds of titles to release. And that's a good thing because the line of reasoning that low sales would necessarily influence the possibility of future similar releases is a double-edged sword that would mean very bad news for areas of film important to many of us here.
Also, I disagree that Criterion is releasing more mainstream titles. Equinox has similar market appeal to Fiend Without a Face and The Blob. Precedents for the recent U.S. independent films, in addition to George Washington and the like, also go all the way back to the laserdisc days when they were putting out films such as Bodies, Rest and Motion. Koko is similar to General Idi Amin Dada in some ways, as someone else pointed out. I don't mean to be argumentative but I don't see any new trends represented in the films some people are decrying. But this is all repetition.

[Jeff]

Best Buy is definitely carrying many more Criterion titles now. At the Denver store that I frequent, they have received just about every title released in 2006. What's more, they have also broken street date on the last three or four waves of titles -- which seems to be an oddly pervasive nationwide occurence based on several posts that I have read. I am sure that this has everything to do with the fact that Image is distributing for them now, and little to do with anything else.

[cdnchris]

THe ones near where I live seem to get all of the new releases in (though I never found Virgin Spring there). Decently priced, too (not as good as online, but they're still pretty good)

[Dear Catastrophe Totoro]

I live three hours north of Bloomington (was just down there on Monday for the Wilco show, actually), and my Best Buy had Arkadin but not the other two April releases (then again, my city has more than its fair share of Nascar dads). When I lived in California less than a year ago, though, the Best Buy near my house would carry every CC new release, without fail. However, when their first shipment sells out, they never reorder, unless it is Fear and Loathing or something.

[pzman84]

If the poster (pzman) who has spent months and months doing all the moaning about cc not releasing 'quality' films is unaware of Yi Yi, then how can he be in a position to so loudly voice his opinions on the quality of what they do release?

Um...I never pick on Yi Yi. I have been going after D&C and Equinox. Hell, when people were bitching about Koko, I was saying it actually looked interesting. I think the thing that bothered me the most about Yi Yi was the price. The commentary has been recorded and the transfer will probably not cost all that much because it's not that old of a film. So, n.w., if you like paying more money, go ahead. Complain I am asking too much. On this thread, I have seen people defend crap like pictureboxing and the "Figure 8" packaging for 2-disc sets. It would not bother me.

Anyway, I sould not be that unhappy. CC is finally releasing A Canterbury Tale. Of course, you will probably find a reason to get angry with me for liking that title.

[justeleblanc]

Not to take sides in this rediculous argument... but I think we should lay off the pzman only because of his avatar.

Dazed & Confused.... great movie?... or greatest movie?

[zedz]

Precedents for the recent U.S. independent films, in addition to George Washington and the like, also go all the way back to the laserdisc days when they were putting out films such as Bodies, Rest and Motion.

And, as noted a long time back, it seems that Criterion is very consciously focussing on improving their representation of American independent cinema in 2006 (4 titles announced so far, with at least four more - Kicking and Screaming, She's Gotta Have It, Grey Gardens Redux and Mala Noche on the cards - and not all of these are big commercial prospects), just as there was a distinct focus on Japanese samurai / action cinema last year.

[Gregory]

I think that, while there are often clusters of releases that have certain things in common, their general pattern has remained pretty constant overall. I'm not sure how often these clusters are intentional.

[Doctor Sunshine]

I have a feeling that the surge of early 90s films has more to do with the fact that they're all well over a decade old and have become less profitable for their distributors than they were in their youth. Criterion's sort of like their really classy retirement community.

[Narshty]

And, as noted a long time back, it seems that Criterion is very consciously focussing on improving their representation of American independent cinema in 2006 (4 titles announced so far, with at least four more - Kicking and Screaming, She's Gotta Have It, Grey Gardens Redux and Mala Noche on the cards - and not all of these are big commercial prospects), just as there was a distinct focus on Japanese samurai / action cinema last year.

Where was the confirmation for She's Gotta Have It?

[Napoleon]

Anyway, I sould not be that unhappy. CC is finally releasing A Canterbury Tale. Of course, you will probably find a reason to get angry with me for liking that title.

Not Likely!


Good to see you are finally happy about something.

[zedz]

Where was the confirmation for She's Gotta Have It?

New York Times confirmed it was coming out this year not long ago, plus it's already linked to Criterion, isn't it? Of course, nothing's "confirmed" until it's announced, but this is pretty close.

[Andre Jurieu]

But selling movies and selling hammers are completely different things.

Actually, they are more similar than you think. Once you simply view Criterion's DVDs as a product on a market, there is no difference between how a hammer company views their product and how Criterion views their DVDs.

Movies - and art - are ultimately a matter of taste.

As are hammers to a certain extent. In fact almost every decision by a consumer whether or not to purchase a product is a matter of taste. Just because one product is supposed to provide a observable utility and the other is a matter of subjective interpretation doesn't mean the respective companies that produce the products view their product's performance any differently once they are placed on the market.

Just image that there is a hammer company that specializes in creating the world's best hammers. They are placed at a higher price point because of their esteemed reputation and are bought by serious craftsmen who want the very best equipment.

Either way, if the company starts to deliver an inferior product on the marketplace, they risk losing their customers (whether potential or loyal). If the hammer company starts making their hammers out of inferior metals with a slippery grip, it is akin to Criterion beginning to release Chairman of the Board with a crappy-ass transfer and no extras. In either scenario, the companies cannot just assume the loyal customer that passes on their product will be replaced at a 1:1 ratio by another new customer.

The reason I can say that if I don't purchase X title, somebody else will is simply because, in the case of Criterion, that is entirely possible.

It is entirely possible, but it isn't a logical action that Criterion can depend upon entirely. You as a consumer may justify your decision to pass on a product by assuming someone else will purchase the product, so you don't have to worry about the fate of your favorite company, but Criterion cannot just put out any movie expecting that enough people will purchase the film eventually.

The entire "vote with our pocketbooks" train of thought may not make sense to us as enthusiastic individuals, especially since we believe that we are supporting Criterion in various other ways. I'm sure the individuals working at Criterion appreciate the loyalty and devoting that we, as well as their other customers, display. However, the only thing that matters to Criterion as a business entity is the financial performance of their product. In such a case, Criterion is willing to deal with customers deciding not to purchase their product only if they have enough new consumers to balance, or outweigh, the individuals that refuse to spend their money on such titles. That isn't an assumption they can make with every or any title they produce, no matter how sound we believe our personal justifications to be.

To try and speculate what releasing "X title" will mean in terms of sales and future viability of the company - without anything at all to base it on - is an argument as silly as it is futile.

Very true, but I'm not talking about individual sales for a specific title. I'm just saying the notion that someone will always replace you as a Criterion customer is not a sound assumption to make. If the product doesn't satisfy the needs of consumers, the product/company will fail. So we can't just brush off a inferior title/package as just being someone else's taste, and it would be a dangerous strategy for Criterion to follow. I have a feeling that a Carrot Top DVD at $39.99 just doesn't attract a viable market.

The argument dealing with the financial performance of Criterion based upon the titles they choose and packages they assemble is a valid one in my opinion, but the only problem is there are no concrete figures to base our claims upon. The part of this discussion that doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me is whether or not a title is "worthy" of being included in the collection because the judgment is never based on anything more that subjective personal taste. I find that argument to be useless, no matter how much I enjoy someone's avatar (which I'm beginning to think is misplaced).

[Narshty]

Where was the confirmation for She's Gotta Have It?

New York Times confirmed it was coming out this year not long ago, plus it's already linked to Criterion, isn't it? Of course, nothing's "confirmed" until it's announced, but this is pretty close.

Criterion put it out on laserdisc, but there's been no real indication that they'll be handling it on DVD. It'd be nice, but I wouldn't be surprised to see it coming out from another label.

[pzman84]

Looking back on my rants in this tread, I acted foolishly. I am sorry. I too easily get carried away. I hope people can accept my apology. Anyway, I would like to get back to my first post in this tread, a post I think is not entirely unfair and can explain my anger at Criterion these last couple of months.

I think people are not just complaining about the releases of Dazed, Equinox, and the eventual release of Kicking and Screaming. There is no way just these three releases could cause so much controversy. However, it has been Criterion's whole attitude this year.

First, there were the extensive delays (this is off the top of my head, so feel free to correct me):

Young Mr. Lincoln
The Children Are Watching Us
The Complete Mr. Arkadin
Fists in the Pocket
Viridiana

Then, the horrible packaging for the two discs:

Kind Hearts & Coronets
Young Mr. Lincoln

Also, there was the pictureboxing:

Forbidden Games
The Virgin Spring
La bête humaine
Kind Hearts and Coronets

We also had that whole Viridiana Cover Art controversy. On top of that, we have the new editions of Grey Gardens, The 400 Blows and certain sections of the Monterey Pop Festival, releases no one was calling for.

Looking back on my rants of Dazed, Equinox, Kicking, and Metropolitan, they were, in many ways unfair. However, it is easy to pick on these titles because they are not respected classics like Virgin Spring and La bête humaine. No other service would release classics like these. I guess my fear, as is many, Criterion will sell out and stop releasing the films we come to enjoy or release the classics without the quality we expect (and pay for) from Criterion.

No matter how you slice it, so far the year has been very bad for Criterion. They have really fumbled. It is becomming so disconcerning because we expect so much out of Criterion. People are not ranting about MGM or Universal all that much because we expect them to do a lousy job on DVDs. Criterion is the standard bearer when it comes to DVDs. It is time Criterion changes or else it will stop being the Criterion we all love.

I think this still holds true when I posted it. It has been with every release there has been a problem. Either it was pictureboxing or those damn 2-disc containers. Like I said in that post, we expect a lot out of Criterion. It is the Ferrari of DVDs (those were not from me but from Scott Simon of NPR). This year, they have failed to live up to our expectations. My only hope is they do a really good job on A Canterbury Tale. Maybe this will be a sign of them reversing course.

[backstreetsbackalright]

Where was the confirmation for She's Gotta Have It?

New York Times confirmed it was coming out this year not long ago, plus it's already linked to Criterion, isn't it? Of course, nothing's "confirmed" until it's announced, but this is pretty close.

Criterion put it out on laserdisc, but there's been no real indication that they'll be handling it on DVD. It'd be nice, but I wouldn't be surprised to see it coming out from another label.

I believe this is our primary evidence.

[Narshty]

Ahhh! Splendid.

[Donald Trampoline]

Looking back on my rants in this tread, I acted foolishly. I am sorry. I too easily get carried away. I hope people can accept my apology. Anyway, I would like to get back to my first post in this tread, a post I think is not entirely unfair and can explain my anger at Criterion these last couple of months.

I think people are not just complaining about the releases of Dazed, Equinox, and the eventual release of Kicking and Screaming. There is no way just these three releases could cause so much controversy. However, it has been Criterion's whole attitude this year.

First, there were the extensive delays (this is off the top of my head, so feel free to correct me):

Young Mr. Lincoln
The Children Are Watching Us
The Complete Mr. Arkadin
Fists in the Pocket
Viridiana

Then, the horrible packaging for the two discs:

Kind Hearts & Coronets
Young Mr. Lincoln

Also, there was the pictureboxing:

Forbidden Games
The Virgin Spring
La bête humaine
Kind Hearts and Coronets

We also had that whole Viridiana Cover Art controversy. On top of that, we have the new editions of Grey Gardens, The 400 Blows and certain sections of the Monterey Pop Festival, releases no one was calling for.

Looking back on my rants of Dazed, Equinox, Kicking, and Metropolitan, they were, in many ways unfair. However, it is easy to pick on these titles because they are not respected classics like Virgin Spring and La bête humaine. No other service would release classics like these. I guess my fear, as is many, Criterion will sell out and stop releasing the films we come to enjoy or release the classics without the quality we expect (and pay for) from Criterion.

No matter how you slice it, so far the year has been very bad for Criterion. They have really fumbled. It is becomming so disconcerning because we expect so much out of Criterion. People are not ranting about MGM or Universal all that much because we expect them to do a lousy job on DVDs. Criterion is the standard bearer when it comes to DVDs. It is time Criterion changes or else it will stop being the Criterion we all love.

I think this still holds true when I posted it. It has been with every release there has been a problem. Either it was pictureboxing or those damn 2-disc containers. Like I said in that post, we expect a lot out of Criterion. It is the Ferrari of DVDs (those were not from me but from Scott Simon of NPR). This year, they have failed to live up to our expectations. My only hope is they do a really good job on A Canterbury Tale. Maybe this will be a sign of them reversing course.

Someone has already stated that this argument has gotten circular, but if you're going to reiterate your own damn post by re-posting it, then it's now officially spiraling, and will just end up spiraling out of control and then back in on itself and collapsing. And all of us will be dead.

Argument over!

Please?

[godardslave]

hey why dont you all quote yourselves, like a recursive function...oh wait.

[justeleblanc]

hey why dont you all quote yourselves, like a recursive function...oh wait.

Not a bad idea, I made a couple of brilliant jokes most people glossed over. Maybe they're worth a second try....?

[kinjitsu]

Frankly, I think Matt would be doing us all a big favor if he zapped this thread!

All those in favor, say Aye!

[Cinesimilitude]

I've been extremely happy with criterion this year, The Malle Boxset and Kind Hearts and Coronets are all I've purchased so far, and I'm actually glad I have no interest in some of the titles they are releasing, it makes paying the rent each month a little easier.

[justeleblanc]

Frankly, I think Matt would be doing us all a big favor if he zapped this thread!

All those in favor, say Aye!

I say we keep it, just to keep it contained.

I kind of missed the prediction threads we used to have... I see no reason why we can't predict August in this thread.

[lovermanzig]

I'd be thrilled if Criterion would release another Brakhage collection and perhaps look into other avant-gardists.

Or even essay films, by Marker for example. Why not, as opposed to a *cough* Louis Malle box set?

I understand that Marker's work is available on DVD all over the world, but still...something else!