criterionforum.org

knives wrote: Fri Aug 21, 2020 10:19 am

hearthesilence wrote: Fri Aug 21, 2020 8:16 am There's a long list of African films that I hope to see release soon (though I'm bracing for the possibility of rights and source material issues with many of my long-available wishes because that's been a frequent problem with many other favorites elsewhere in the world).

A lot of the best examples are with California Newsreel. A company no one has ever heard of.

I sure as hell haven't - I just checked and I get the impression they're no longer interested in offering home viewing for any of their African titles, just really expensive educational licenses. Ugh.

hearthesilence wrote: Fri Aug 21, 2020 8:16 am There's a long list of African films that I hope to see release soon (though I'm bracing for the possibility of rights and source material issues with many of my long-available wishes because that's been a frequent problem with many other favorites elsewhere in the world).

Sadly, looks like the one at the top of my list, Harvest: 3000 Years, won't be on the table anytime soon.

hearthesilence wrote: Fri Aug 21, 2020 11:24 am

knives wrote: Fri Aug 21, 2020 10:19 am

hearthesilence wrote: Fri Aug 21, 2020 8:16 am There's a long list of African films that I hope to see release soon (though I'm bracing for the possibility of rights and source material issues with many of my long-available wishes because that's been a frequent problem with many other favorites elsewhere in the world).

A lot of the best examples are with California Newsreel. A company no one has ever heard of.

I sure as hell haven't - I just checked and I get the impression they're no longer interested in offering home viewing for any of their African titles, just really expensive educational licenses. Ugh.

Thats kind of always been the case, I think it might just be UCLA’s distribution arm, but some of their releases are distributed through Kino and nearly all of them are streaming on Kanopy if you have that.

It might just be me, and my English might not be subtle enough to express this properly, but Becker talks about having the right people around him to explain why would be important in a movie like Daughters of the Dust, and felt that's... actually my case too. I've been reading dedicated boards and buying from boutique labels for more than a decade now, in cases buying pretty much anything they release and I still wouldn't know in general where to look for in African or African-American (or anything African-... because for instance, African-American would prevent counting Steve MacQueen). I just wouldn't. Because the canon I'm usee to, have read about, learned about pretty much don't touch this.

So yes, Criterion is just an expression of a larger problem : are they looking enough outside this rather known canon ? Do they have the people to make them look there ? Have the concerned POC directors have enough visibility ? Access to labels like Criterion ?
And what about festivals ? Do these movies have access to those ? Can they get funds to be restored first ?

It feels like this article first is throwing away many very practical issues, but also fails, in the end to properly contextualise a much wider issue. By focusing on Criterion, it's putting a magnifying glass on a few specific people that, sure, are probably better known to the general audience than other boutique labels, are part of a much bigger industry which basically has a structural blind spot.


As for Ava DuVernay, I don't know how she is in interviews or other coverage, but her tweets on such hot topics are often unsufferable in how opportunistic they can read.

One of the replies to DuVernay's tweets suggested the creation of a "Black Criterion," which would be cool, but it does highlight the extent to which Criterion is thought of as the *only* canon-making label around. No one is asking for a Black Indicator, or a Black Arrow, or a Black Kino, etc.

I didn't realize until yesterday (and maybe this is foolish of me, given, say, the name of this very website) how effective that marketing strategy has been for Criterion, to the point that it is immediately apparent what someone suggesting a "Black Criterion" label is referring to regarding the canon (or at least the canon as seen by people who buy into this strategy).

I did find it interesting that the authors didn't get a quote or feedback from Spike Lee, but then maybe he would've taken the slight edge off their intentions...

tenia wrote: Fri Aug 21, 2020 5:20 pm It feels like this article first is throwing away many very practical issues

with a practical point of view and giving Criterion some leeway

I mean once criterion wanted to rectify something they did, from 1998-2016, criterion released about 850 spines and only 21 were directed by women. From 2017-2020 they’ve released about 200 spines and 28 of them are by women, that’s a massive improvement they consciously made and is not even counting the Varda set, which is another 22 feature films!

So I expect them to make a similar change. But it takes a few years for the change to matriculate to the release schedule in a major way.

2016: 1 release directed by women
2017: 5 releases
2018: 3 releases
2019: 9 releases
2020: 11 releases (counting Varda as one release here)

Wouldn't a "Black Criterion" be worse though? It would make those films seem as if they're getting a consolation prize.

It seems like Criterion has taken the criticism to heart, and will be making efforts to improve. I think that's great, actually, I just worry it will be enough for the Twitter crowd, just because most of the suggestions I've seen bandied about (the Complete Spike Lee box set; the Criterion edition of Black Panther; a significant chunk, if not majority of, Franklin Leonard's Letterboxd list he created last night) won't happen due to rights issues. Quite frankly, I don't think "Middle of Nowhere" will happen, and it was called out directly in the article. How will that go down with folks?

These Twitter folks are the same ones clamoring for Criterion to release every A24 film that already has a Blu-Ray out, so I really wouldn’t take their requests too seriously. (And if they branched out beyond the wacky C they’d know Kino just put out a bunch of Spike Lee’s films.)

Have you guys seen some of the people who post in A24 groups? They want Criterion to put out everything without putting much effort into understanding why that isn't possible or feasible.

American Honey is the one A24 film that could use a better edition. Andrea Arnold is already in the Collection, so it's possible, right? Right?!

Nope.

Yes, I know (other reasons aside, the music rights would probably be a big headache). It'd be nice, though. (If it isn't abundantly clear already, I have a soft spot for this movie.)

criterionoop wrote: Thu Aug 20, 2020 9:19 pm Controversial statement(s):

Whenever things get into a black vs white binary, the significance of other “people of color” get lost (I say this as a gay man of Mexican descent). The article barely mentions any Mexican films, South American films, Asian films, Middle Eastern films, and seems to focus more on African American filmmakers rather then focusing on international black filmmakers.

...

This is not an excuse to say that Criterion is free from blame, but I think - like with Oscars so White - Criterion is a symptom of a problem. The bigger issue is the film industry itself. If the industry is not emphasizing a bigger push for diversity and gender parity, then you only get a select few films that are put out by female filmmakers and by black filmmakers. And if those films are omitted from the Criterion announcements, then the issue becomes conflated to say that Criterion is the sole problem, when it is a more complex issue than that. And then people are quick to cancel Criterion.

I agree with a lot of this. In terms of nationality, Criterion offers a genuinely diverse group of movies and has brought international films into the spotlight that otherwise wouldn't have been there. Bravo them!

I also agree that Criterion's race problem is a symptom of a larger issue. The "important film canon" is predominately white and male because the various gate-keepers of that canon favor white/male movies. Every level, from movie production, to availability, to critical reception, and academic regard--white/male movies have a leg up. Criterion's failing is that they, being an influential force in canon creation, have not bucked that trend.

I'm glad Becker seems to acknowledge the weight of that responsibility (or at least feels the market pressure to do so) and promises changes. I only see good things coming from this. I.e. more black films on blu.

TheKieslowskiHaze wrote: Sat Aug 22, 2020 12:41 amblack...n blu.

Now there’s a fun name for a label.

Finally I can upgrade to therewillbeblackblus

soundchaser wrote:These Twitter folks are the same ones clamoring for Criterion to release every A24 film that already has a Blu-Ray out, so I really wouldn’t take their requests too seriously. (And if they branched out beyond the wacky C they’d know Kino just put out a bunch of Spike Lee’s films.)

Not just Twitter. The Criterion subreddit is pretty much the same.

Netflix partnership + drive to release more movies by black directors = criterion release of CUTIES!

knives wrote: Fri Aug 21, 2020 3:08 pm

hearthesilence wrote: Fri Aug 21, 2020 11:24 am

knives wrote: Fri Aug 21, 2020 10:19 am A lot of the best examples are with California Newsreel. A company no one has ever heard of.

I sure as hell haven't - I just checked and I get the impression they're no longer interested in offering home viewing for any of their African titles, just really expensive educational licenses. Ugh.

Thats kind of always been the case, I think it might just be UCLA’s distribution arm, but some of their releases are distributed through Kino and nearly all of them are streaming on Kanopy if you have that.

Also, if it helps, here are 177 California Newsreel titles on Vimeo.

A few years ago I bought two of the African films they released on DVD, Dôlé and Wend Kuuni, and not surprisingly they were DVD-Rs. I think it makes complete sense for a nonprofit with a mission like theirs to focus on educational/institutional distribution and streaming rather than trying to release DVDs commercially.

Brian C wrote: Sat Aug 22, 2020 2:21 pm Netflix partnership + drive to release more movies by black directors = criterion release of CUTIES!

And in an unusually bold move, Criterion has decided to keep the original poster artwork!

The cover story of tomorrow's Arts & Leisure section in the New York Times is about the Criterion Collection. It hammers Criterion for how few Black filmmakers are in the collection (it counts only six in all the films released through June; thus Med Hondo in the upcoming WCP3 is omitted). Peter Becker says that Barry Jenkins's Medicine for Melancholy is a good bet soon, and he adds that Gordon Parks's The Learning Tree is planned for next year. Becker also has his eye on Ava DuVernay's Middle of Nowhere. Lots of stuff to chew on.

Uncharacteristically late to the party on this one

Bressonaire wrote: Sun Aug 23, 2020 4:00 amBecker also has his eye on Ava DuVernay's Middle of Nowhere

No one has their eye on this film besides Ava DuVernay

Evidence of what I was talking about yesterday re: people not broadening their horizons. Criterion posted on their Instagram today that Ganja & Hess is streaming on the Channel. The top comment, of course, is “Put a spine # on it.” If the person who said this were actually interested in having the film on Blu-Ray, they’d know why it’s impossible for Criterion to do that (namely: because Kino already has a release!) Needless posturing.