criterionforum.org

justeleblanc wrote:I think Aronofsky wants a special edition released through Criterion, not Warner, if only for validation of his labors.

Well, you can read his blog and decide for yourself. He's made it pretty clear he's asked Warner time and again for a special edition of this film and they turned him down.

justeleblanc wrote:He sold his script to Warner. That was his choice to have Warner own it from the very beginning. There were other studios that wanted to release the next Aronofsky picture. Hindsight is twenty-twenty of course. FOUNTAIN wouldn't even serve that purpose.

As I remember, they were the only studio who were initially willing to put up the cash for the huge production costs associated with the first incarnation of the film. Other studios wanted rewrites to get the cost down (which in hindsight, is also ironic). The budget was up near $80 million if I recall and production was scuttled once Brad Pitt bailed at the last minute. The choice wasn't made in a vacuum.

As for Dazed & Confused, the film has a huge following and previous DVD incarnations left much to be desired in the way of features. Criterion's edition was fantastic in delivering what fans really wanted --- that's why it did well. Aronofsky has a pretty large following as well, and I feel a special edition of The Fountain would definitely do well.

Maybe it's just Aronofsky's whining that's annoying. To me at least it's showing a strange sense of privilege that's a far cry from the studio fights directors used to have to face. Warner made his film and released it. It was a great film, but didn't make enough money. They released a high quality DVD. He released his own commentary. Where's the problem? I think he's just upset the film didn't do better. He needs to accept that and move on. It's not as if Warner released the film against Pirates and marketed it as a new Splat Pack film.

And Narshty, Aronofsky agreed to make a studio film. My point is that when you work with a large studio such as Warner, you shouldn't piss and moan if you aren't in full control of your DVD release. They gave him a fair amount of creative control over the film and they lost money on it.

As for Criterion making time to release THE FOUNTAIN, of course it would bump back their work on other films. Sorry for saying "we" -- I would rather have Criterion spending time releasing unavailable films or restoring films in need of restoration. I don't think a statement like that is so controversial.

Antoine, I think a FOUNTAIN SE would do well in a few years if more people become familiar with it. Right now, I might be under the wrong impression that people either didn't like it or heard it was a bad movie and avoided it. If that's the case, I would rather wait on the SE. Plus, speaking just for myself, I'm waiting until I have a 1080p TV and a BR player before I buy this film.

Antoine Doinel wrote:He has only requested that his fans email Criterion after trying all the channels he had at his disposal with Warner. Warner clearly has no interest in doing a special edition DVD, so he's hoping that enough people will get Criterion interested to perhaps contact Warner themselves.

[...]

Furthermore, IF this happens (which it probably won't) I highly doubt it will come at the expense of another title.

This is what I was getting at in my earlier post. Of all the studios, Warner is known for being the strictest about not licensing out its films to other DVD distributors. And what surprised me about Aronofsky's comments is that either he's totally ignorant of that fact or he believes that, out of all the films that Warner owns the rights to, Criterion would be most keen on The Fountain. To me, it just seems like a waste of time -- to Criterion in particular -- to bombard them with e-mail requests for a film that they're never going to get the rights to. Criterion will probably be so busy responding to e-mail about The Fountain that they won't be able to respond to more sensible e-mail from forum members like ourselves....

And I'm in no way referring to the quality of The Fountain itself. I haven't seen it yet, so I'm not going to comment on that yet.

About The Fountain: There's always hope. Here's an example... There was a big dibacle over the release of Yankee Hotel Foxtrot by Wilco because Time Warner didn't want to release it for some reason... Wilco opted for a buy out offering to buy the rights to the album for 50,000 dollars... Time Warner ended up handing the rights over free, then Wilco went on to distribute the album freely over the internet then ended up giving it to Nonesuch records (The distributor for The Fountain soundtrack). Maybe Arronofsky can try this with WB and his film.

LightBulbFilm wrote:About The Fountain: There's always hope. Here's an example... There was a big dibacle over the release of Yankee Hotel Foxtrot by Wilco because Time Warner didn't want to release it for some reason... Wilco opted for a buy out offering to buy the rights to the album for 50,000 dollars... Time Warner ended up handing the rights over free, then Wilco went on to distribute the album freely over the internet then ended up giving it to Nonesuch records (The distributor for The Fountain soundtrack). Maybe Arronofsky can try this with WB and his film.

He could try. And then WB would laugh and laugh. No, it's not going to happen. Never. Not in a million years. Please, as said before, if we're going to 'bug' the CC with questions let's collectively limit ourselves to those that are within the realm of possibility so they can come to see some legitimate pattern in the desires of their consumer base.

LightBulbFilm wrote:About The Fountain: There's always hope. Here's an example... There was a big dibacle over the release of Yankee Hotel Foxtrot by Wilco because Time Warner didn't want to release it for some reason... Wilco opted for a buy out offering to buy the rights to the album for 50,000 dollars... Time Warner ended up handing the rights over free, then Wilco went on to distribute the album freely over the internet then ended up giving it to Nonesuch records (The distributor for The Fountain soundtrack). Maybe Arronofsky can try this with WB and his film.

There is quite a big difference between the two scenarios. For Wilco, their fractured relationship with Time Warner was already long standing, going back to the label asking them to record a "single" for their album Summerteeth. Furthermore, at the time the rights were handed over, the only investment in the album were recording costs which if I recall correctly, they were very minimal (for a major label album). Wilco was lucky in that the album and demos leaked causing a groundswell of support and eventually Time Warner realized Wilco was probably going in a musical direction that wouldn't serve a mainstream label. Hence they washed their hands of the entire affair while saving face and letting the album get released.

Given that The Fountain has been essentially made twice (all the sets were built and cameras were just about to start rolling before Brad Pitt bailed), and given the film's poor box office take, there is no way this film has come close to breaking even. And until that happens, there is no way Warner Brother are going to sell the film back to the director (unless he's ready to pay tens of millions of dollars for it). Not only that, if Aronofsky even attempted to try something like that he would need to buy back television rights, etc etc as well which have already been sold.

Anyway, that's even less likely than Criterion being licensed the film for a DVD.

justeleblanc wrote:It's Aronofsky's problem to begin with. If he wanted it released by Criterion, the hell was he doing selling it to Warner in the first place?

Narshty wrote:I've read some boneheaded nonsense on this forum in my time, but this is almost epic in its ignorance of the real world.

Why is this considered boneheaded nonsense? I couldn't agree more with the first statement. Please explain this real world to me because I think it only exists over across the pond.

cinemartin wrote:

justeleblanc wrote:It's Aronofsky's problem to begin with. If he wanted it released by Criterion, the hell was he doing selling it to Warner in the first place?

Narshty wrote:I've read some boneheaded nonsense on this forum in my time, but this is almost epic in its ignorance of the real world.

Why is this considered boneheaded nonsense? I couldn't agree more with the first statement. Please explain this real world to me because I think it only exists over across the pond.

It's nonsense because when you are trying to find funding for your film and a major studio offers you $35 million, you don't say, "Well I really shouldn't make this film for Warner Brothers, because what if it bombs and the only way to put out the DVD product that I really want is through Criterion? Warner doesn't license to Criterion. I'll be fucked." You say, "Holy shit! Warner Brothers wants to give me $35 million to make my film." It works that way on both sides of "the pond."

What'll happen is that if the film develops a cult following, then and only then will WB want to do a definitive release. Otherwise, we're stuck with what we're stuck with.

Having just returned from holiday in Rome I was wondering what are the chances of Criterion releasing La Dolce Vita? Do Koch Lorber still hold the rights for this?

tubal wrote:Having just returned from holiday in Rome I was wondering what are the chances of Criterion releasing La Dolce Vita? Do Koch Lorber still hold the rights for this?

Koch still has the rights, they just released their discs a few years ago. The quality and special features are good. Slim to zero chance Criterion would pay to revisit this.

Anyone know what this is all about?

jackson_browne wrote:Anyone know what this is all about?

It's wrong. Terribly, terribly wrong.

CSM126 wrote:It's wrong. Terribly, terribly wrong.

That's what I thought, but I just wanted to make sure. I tried to order the regular DVD from DVDPlanet earlier today, but they just sent me an e-mail saying it has been discontinued. So that's what made me curious.

jackson_browne wrote:That's what I thought, but I just wanted to make sure. I tried to order the regular DVD from DVDPlanet earlier today, but they just sent me an e-mail saying it has been discontinued. So that's what made me curious.

I think Criterion may have tried to get their mitts on Eraserhead long, long ago, but Lynch backed out or something along those lines.

I may be remembering completely wrong...

CSM126 wrote:I think Criterion may have tried to get their mitts on Eraserhead long, long ago, but Lynch backed out or something along those lines.

I may be remembering completely wrong...

No, there is a story that went with that. As I recall, and the info was in a post in one of the prior incarnations of this forum, Criterion at some point was in fact going to release Eraserhead, but I think they over-played their hand and released some info too early, which in turn pissed Lynch off and that was it. I'm likely wrong, but as I recall the story it was something along those lines.

Tribe

EDIT: Peter Becker retells it much better than me here.

I asked Turrell about Todd Haynes's Poison and got an, "I'll pass on your suggestions but nothing planned at the moment" response.

Also, I don't think I ever posted the response I got from Kim Hendrickson regarding Decalogue:

As much as we'd love to release the DECALOGUE on Criterion, we don't currently own the rights. We are looking into this, though, so perhaps things will change in the next year or so.

This was late last year, after Veronique had been released.

a Criterion Decalogue, would probably be the greatest boxset ever!

I asked Criterion about Exterminating Angel and Tristana and I got:

We do hope to get to some of the Mexican Bunuels at some point, but there's no fixed release date right now.

jackson_browne wrote:Anyone know what this is all about?

Could it be that wrong? I mean, consider it... Although highly unlikely, maybe they made amense with Lynch. Maybe they had a secret deal going on this whole time... Like he gave them a second chance with a pat on the ass telling them not to fuck up. Maybe this is spine 400. The last DVD release just went out of print, so it couldn't be that WAY out there... Or could it. I mean, sure stores print a lot of wrong information, but isn't that a little too obvious for them not to notice? Hmmm... Now Im questioning everything I ever believed in.

justeleblanc wrote:I asked Criterion about Exterminating Angel and Tristana and I got:

We do hope to get to some of the Mexican Bunuels at some point, but there's no fixed release date right now.

Yeah, I'll shit in my dining room for that. Thanks, Juste!

LightBulbFilm wrote:

jackson_browne wrote:Anyone know what this is all about?

Could it be that wrong? I mean, consider it... Although highly unlikely, maybe they made amense with Lynch.

Dude, that stupid announcement has been floating around the internets for years by now. It's not happening.

Besides, the fact that DVD Empire doesn't even have the August titles up yet, kind of knocks any chance that they'd have unannounced titles floating around their site.

That said, they also have placeholder pages up for Eisenstein's "Strike" and a Kurosawa box of "Bad Sleep Well," "Stray Dog" and "High and Low." Just thought it should be mentioned.

-BJ

The point is a little false hope feels good sometimes, and speculating about things you know wont happen feels even better.

Any word yet on whether Rome, Open City is going to get picked up by Criterion (or any film production company for that matter)? The DVD copy that I watched is a recorded directly from a poor VHS copy and the image and sound isn't up to par. Almost half the subtitles were missing. Which is all a pity because I loved the film.

It would be nice for Criterion to give it the treatment it deserves.