Can Criterion Survive in Today's Market? (1 Viewer)

[Ted Todorov]

Also, unlike previous MK2 releases, you do realise the upcoming edition of The 400 Blows WILL NOT have English subtitles. Irritating, as the previous Truffaut discs had subtitles for EVERYTHING - commentaries, extras, etc., it is a huge shame, as the French version looked set to trounce the Criterion edition with an anamorphic PAL transfer, commentary by Robert Lachenay, scholarly introductions, an early short film by Truffaut and a mass of archival footage (including interviews and footage from the legendary Cannes premiere).

In fact both us were wrong: it DOES have English subtitles, as do all six new Truffaut DVDs from MK2. See this menu screen shot from The 400 Blows: http://www.musicbox.fr/cgi-bin/music...012131_01;1306
There are similar shots available from all the other DVDs as well. So it looks like Criterion has in fact been trounced.
I can see why all the wrong info and confusion started: the back of the box (which also available at http://www.musicbox.fr/ ) is very poorly & ambiguously worded. musicbox.com interpret it as meaning an English dub with French subtitles, but when you look at the actual menus, musicbox.com are plainly wrong.
Ted

 

[Rouslan Sytnik]

-
[Edited last by Rouslan Sytnik on September 07, 2001 at 09:59 PM]

 

[Ken_McAlinden]

I don’t like the message it gives to studios: if it a good job we’ll pay more

...but I would pay more! Also, for the record, if it is a crappy job, I will pay less. Finally, if I don't like the film, I will pay nothing. I think the various marketing departments at the DVD producing companies have grasped these secrets, though, and have different ideas about how to apply them.
Regards,
------------------
Ken McAlinden
Livonia, MI USA

 

[Jeff Ulmer]

I would like to add more Ruscico titles to my collection, but they don't seem to be any cheaper than Criterion in most cases, in fact they are more. I can buy Criterions for either $20.99 or $27.99 if I preorder. Solaris is $39.99, though was as low as $34.99.
I'm all for various companies releasing great editions of film, and like I've said previously, all of the titles that have been brought up as criticisms of Criterion have been early releases from years ago, which are only now being released by others in better format. Mainstream studios are doing this with their own titles in less than a year!
I would also say that I'm a big fan of Anchor Bay as well; great product and reasonable pricing. We are lucky to have them Criterion and now Ruscico available in the market.
One comment about Ruscico from what I've seen so far is that they do not have near the same level of artistic presentation in their discs as far as menu design and packaging go that Criterion does. This may not matter to some, but part of what I enjoy about Criterion's releases (especially later ones) is the attention to detail they have when putting the package together.
As for paying $200 for Salo, that is not for the movie's sake, it is the collectability factor at work here. Collectors will pay insane prices for things they value, and it has no bearing on the quality of the product. This is a completely different set of circumstances, and not solely limited to Criterion.
Also, as has been noted in the anime threads, DVDs in Japan are not that expensive. The reason they seem expensive to us is the exchange rate.
------------------
Link Removed | Burt Lancaster is Link Removed | dOc

 

[Rich Malloy]

Just to follow-up on Jeff's post a bit, while I love the Ruscico discs (and my most anticipated Fall titles are Ruscico's MIRROR and STALKER), these are very expensive discs - moreso than Criterion - and while they're quality discs, they're simply not of Criterion quality.
Yes, yes, Ruscico's Andrei Rublev has improved video and an anamorphic transfer, but it's also the censored and recut version, marred by the occasionally quite cheesy sounding 5.1 remix. The extras are a grab-bag of interesting shorts that more or less relate to topics from the film - and there's some cool on-set footage of Tarkovsky - but it's nowhere near the level of sophistication of Petric's commentary and video lecture, Hoberman's liner notes, the Rublev/Tarkovsky/Russia historical timeline, the excerpts from Tarkovsky: The Poet of the Cinema... And why in the world does the Ruscico disc default to that strange "French narration" track (it's the Russian language version with a French transcription read over it)?
Simply put, Ruscico's disc is a lessor product for more money. Of course, in my opinion it's also a must-have disc belonging in every self-respecting cinephile's collection.
Further, Ruscico will soon be releasing Tarkovsky's first feature (aside from his diploma film), Ivan's Childhood. It'll be the "official" version that we're all familiar with.
But Criterion will then be releasing the never-seen, uncut version that includes previously censored material.
I love Ruscico. Definitely the most exciting new player (so long as you're interested in Russian films). But Criterion's still better. And getting better all the time.

 

[Edwin-S]

I would like to see Criterion do more animated film releases. I would like to see "ALLEGRO NON TROPPO" as I have not had an opportunity to see it and I don't believe that any big media conglomerate is going to release it any time soon. Another one I would like to see released is the orignal animated version of George Orwell's "ANIMAL FARM". It would be nice if they could get the rights to "THE PLAGUE DOGS" as well. I do not foresee any large company releasing these films any time soon because the ROI would not fit their inflated expectations.
If they were to restore and release these films, I would be willing to pay a little more, just to get them.
------------------

 

[Jacques]

Al,
I'm curious... the Ruscico Andrei Rublev is censored, but you also believe that it belongs "in every self-respecting cinephile's collection"? Can you please expound on that?
Thanks.
[Edited last by Jacques on September 06, 2001 at 02:44 PM]

 

[Jon Robertson]

I'd like to point out about the MK2 400 Blows that only the feature and short film have subtitles, which leaves the majority of the supplements utterly inaccessible for many English-speaking viewers.
It looks like it's a toss up.
The Criterion was non-anamorphic NTSC, and the MK2 is anamorphic PAL, but has no English commentary track, and the print quality and subtitle translation remains to be seen, as the Criterion disc boasted digital image restoration and newly translated subtitles.
[Edited last by Jon Robertson on September 06, 2001 at 03:50 PM]

 

[Jun-Dai Bates]

Rouslan,
I think you're missing an important point: loyalty. Criterion has had a long time in which to establish loyalty, first in the Laserdisc market, then in the DVD market, it didn't come overnight.
Not everyone is looking for the best deal. It's not as though price is irrelevant, but $30 is not a lot of money for something that brings me as much joy as Criterion's edition of Playtime. I'm happy to give them that money, but I wouldn't be so happy to give that money to Winstar, or even Anchor Bay. Niether of those companies has earned my loyalty. Winstar because of their crappy treatment of fine films, and Anchor Bay because they never release anything that interests me (with a few exceptions), and their transfer quality is usually a couple notches down from Criterion's.
Criterion is more than a dvd company. They conserve films, using what they have at their disposal. They don't release films for purely financial purposes (not even Michael Bay's films), but rather each film they release they consider to be important--the best of its kind.
Even if Winstar's 400 Blows had been better than Criterion's (a laughable prospect), I would have found the prospect of Criterion losing it to them sad, because I know that Criterion took the film seriously, and that they were sad to lose it. Criterion takes all their films seriously, gives the best transfers that they can (an important qualification), and where possible, supplies carefully selected, relevant supplemental features. Their commentary tracks have always been the best. This is why they have my loyalty, even though not all their transfers are perfect, and even though I don't like all the films they put out, and even though they charge more than many other companies. If Ruscico works very hard, then they will instill this kind of loyalty in some of their customers, and ensure their success for years to come.
Loyalty is a quality that Criterion relies upon. Not that their discs don't sell themselves, but having a (relatively) large and loyal following allows them to keep doing what they do, and to be able to produce 4 discs a month without sacrificing quality.
The last thing I would like to see is Criterion adjusting their prices and trying to evaluate the market. That's a significant amount effort that they could be spending on these films. I like their prices just fine. I'd rather pay more for Criterion. In fact, if I had enough money to spare, I'd love to donate money to Criterion. Does that bother you as well?
I guess my problem is that you expect us to treat Criterion just like any other company. To go compare shopping for each Criterion title, look for the best bang for our buck. Well, I won't do it. Criterion isn't any other company. When I buy DVDs, my first question is "do I have all the Criterions that I really want right now?" If I do, then I think about buying Nashville, or Lawrence of Arabia, or the Woody Allen collection. Additionally, I fully intend to watch every film Criterion puts out (though I won't buy them all sight unseen).
If Ruscico's transfer of Solaris is better than Criterion's, then I'll have no choice but to buy both of them. This is because however good the transfer is, it won't have a better commentary track, and it won't have the liner notes. Additionally, I know that Criterion will try their hardest to preserve the director's intentions, and so even if Ruscico has a nice anamorphic, artifact-free transfer, it may not look the way the director wanted (which is why Criterion tries to get the director or cinematographer to approve their transfers).

 

[Jun-Dai Bates]

One more comment. Even if Criterion got the rights back to the Killer and Hard Boiled (say, if Winstar goes under), they probably won't revisit it so much as rerelease it (like Seven Samurai). They simply don't have the time to do one film twice. Granted they are popular enough titles that they might make an exception, but I believe their policy is to not revisit titles (they consider their laserdiscs to be an entirely different collection).

 

[Rouslan Sytnik]

-
[Edited last by Rouslan Sytnik on September 07, 2001 at 09:58 PM]

 

[Jeff Ulmer]

I think comparing the prices I can actually buy discs for is a pretty valid comparison, especially when part of the argument is that Criterion's pricing is too high. How can this be invalid?
My argument that comparing Criterion's Silence of the Lambs to MGMs, or 400 Blows to whoever's is comparing a 4 year old disc to a current one is also valid - I would hope the new one is better. Is there a recent Criterion title that has a superior version available elsewhere?
As for Criterion losing licenses, this is not too much cause for concern. First, there is already a Criterion version. Second, as long as they keep getting new licenses, they'll keep making discs. There seems to be no shortage of material coming from Criterion, and their quality is improving over time.
As for needing a flame suit, you obviously know that part of the reason Criterion will survive is because they do have a loyal following. People will buy their discs because they are Criterion, even if they don't know the film (which in my case is with almost every disc!). Most of the time, you wll be getting the best version available - at that time. There will always be improvements made, new elements found, a better restoration, or the licensor finally delivering proper masters (Monty Python and the Holy Grail anyone?). However, VHS was once considered the best there was, so was it stupid to buy the best when it was available?
To get back to the topic, Criterion CAN and WILL survive in today's market for all the reasons outlined in this thread, despite competition both domestically and from abroad. They have made a reputation for themselves, and by continuing to produce some of the best product out there, they will continue to keep their reputation. They are not infallable, but at the end of the day Criterion's are still some of the best discs I own.
------------------
Link Removed | Burt Lancaster is Link Removed | dOc

 

[Rob Robinson]

For example Apple has a loyalty following. Several my friends were and still fanatic about Macs. They always say how much it better than Windows (and I agree with this), but now they works on Windows. Apple been in red for long time, and I’ not convince they will survive long.

Sigh. I don't want to drag this conversation off topic, but if you're going to use an outside industry as an example, you should really get your facts straight. Non mac users have been screaming about the death of Apple since Windows came out. It simply will not happen. Ever. And this isn't a "mac zealot" spewing dogma- I'm typing this on my PC (I have both platforms on my desk at home and work).
First, Apple has TREMENDOUS cash reserves. Second, just before the recession (which pounded EVERY pc maker), Apple had profitable quarter after profitable quarter. Finally (and this is the thing that folks who "don't get it" seem to have issues with:
Apple does not make general purpose computers. They are not the best business machine, and they aren't the best casual home use machine (though many may feel otherwise). Apple makes products for 2 groups: Education, and most importantly, the Content Creation market. I would bet 90% of your DVD cases were designed on macs (not to mention the menus etc). And I bet Criterion's sexy new website was designed on a mac.
Again, sorry to drag this off topic; it looks like you spent alot of time typing that big post, but that one poorly thought out idea based on something other fact calls your credibility into question, at least as far as judging the marketplace is concerned.
On the other hand, perhaps the Criterion /Apple analogy may be on the money- neither are going to move massive sku's at walmart, and both are premium priced. go figure.

 

[Kevin M]

Yes but Rouslan you seem to want to paint anyone who enjoys Criterion's product as being mindless zombies because we won't argue the price that Criterion asks or perhaps you think we won't buy from any other Indi-DVD company because we are something like "groupies" I guess? I just think they offer a fine fine product that I am willing to pay the extra cash for.....what is so wrong with this?
I have more Anchor Bay dvd's than Criterion dvd's if that makes you happy* but I promise you it has nothing to do with price, I just happen to be a horror film nut.
* that's a joke by the way.
quote: (I) Don’t what to get this kind of reputation.[/quote]
No offense guy, okay? but I think you might be a little late on that point.
We can still have a beer sometime, right?

------------------
-Kevin M.
"Have a good time all the time........that's my philosophy, Marty."
[Edited last by Kevin M on September 07, 2001 at 09:43 AM]

 

[Rich Malloy]

Al,
I'm curious... the Ruscico Andrei Rublev is censored, but you also believe that it belongs "in every self-respecting cinephile's collection"? Can you please expound on that?

Sure. This is the cut upon which the film's reputation was established. This is the cut that won the various festival prizes, and which was named one of the five greatest films of all time. It has extraordinary historical significance, as well as extraordinary scholarly significance (by way of comparison to the longer cut). Remember: the 205-minute cut represented on the Criterion disc premiered at the Dom Kino in 1988, fully 20 years after the premier of the shorter cut.
Further, the notion of "censorship" is a touchy one with this film. After all, Tarkovsky later endorsed this cut and claimed to have been the only one who actually cut it (even though we know the Soviet film ministry objected to many scenes and even tried to completely suppress the film). And, in addition to the removal of various violent and gory scenes (which the Soviet film ministry cited, but which Tarkovsky also later suggested might have been detrimental to the film's psychological impact), and other shots that are truncated or removed seemingly with an eye only to shortening the runtime, there are also sequences that have been extensively re-edited with scenes that take on new meanings in their new context. And while, on the whole, I prefer the longer cut, there are certain re-edited sequences in the shorter one that seem much more elegantly constructed to me.
And one simply cannot dismiss the extraordinary image quality (and anamorphic transfer) that Ruscico has given the film. Of course, this is a meaningless if the transfer in question is a hacked-and-slashed hatchet edit... but that's certainly not what we have in the shorter cut. (With certain exceptions IMO.)
To have both these cuts, carefully presented on two superior DVDs, is more than a Tarkovsky fan could ever have honestly hoped for. He may be the greatest modern filmmaker, but his films simply don't have the market potential of many of his lessor contemporaries. I mean, in a day when New Line will lavish Platinum status on a unmitigated piece of shit like DETROIT ROCK CITY, one wonders just how askew the tastes of the DVD-buying public truly are. After all, there's not a single Bresson film on DVD and he's only one of the two or three greatest artists to ever work in cinema. So, the existence of both cuts of ANDREI RUBLEV on two superior DVDs strikes me as nothing less than miraculous.
------------------
"Only one is a wanderer; two together are always going somewhere."

Link Removed
Al's Criterion Collection

 

[Rich Malloy]

quote: quote:
while I love the Ruscico discs (and my most anticipated Fall titles are Ruscico's MIRROR and STALKER), these are very expensive discs
Very expensive? You can get Mirror for $17.99. http://www.deepdiscountdvd.com/dvd.cfm?itemid=IMA000150 [/quote]
I've already got that one - it was produced by KINO two years ago. The transfer sucks donkey balls. It's as perfect an example of the lesser attention routinely given to these kinds of titles by companies other than Criterion.
The Ruscico version won't street until next month at the earliest. And by reference to the "announcement" trailer included on the Ruscico SOLARIS and RUBLEV discs, the image quality will be miles beyond that cheap, crappy Kino release from two years ago. Again, hooray for Ruscico! And I can't wait for their Paradjanov discs!
But Ruscico is "the Russian Cinema Council", and their mission is limited to Russian films. As an admirer of Russian cinema, I'm very fortunate that such a wonderful company is preserving the great Russian films for home video. But this doesn't even begin to cover Criterion's territory, and certainly can never replace them in the market.
And, btw, Eisenstein is by no means one of my favorite filmmakers (though I do admire his sublimely subversive Ivan the Terrible). Of the early Russian masters, I much prefer Dovzhenko.
[Edited last by Al Brown on September 07, 2001 at 10:32 AM]

 

[Ted Todorov]

I should probably let sleeping dogs lie, but I do have one important point to make about Criterion. quote: I'd like to point out about the MK2 400 Blows that only the feature and short film have subtitles, which leaves the majority of the supplements utterly inaccessible for many English-speaking viewers.[/quote]
While I would agree about the commentary tracks, I can’t imagine how the Cannes Festival documentaries for instance would be rendered “utterly inaccessible” by the lack of subtitles. I watch German, Italian & Spanish stuff without subtitles from time to time (I speak none of those languages) and I’ve yet to encounter something that was “utterly inaccessible”.
But all this talk about The 400 Blows has reminded me of Criterion’s biggest flaw: their excessive, and sometimes wrongheaded selectivity. After all IMHO, anyway, The 400 Blows, while a good movie, is nowhere near Truffaut’s best work. I think that two of the other films that make up The Adventures of Antoine Doinel – Stolen Kisses & Bed and Board are far superior works (as are many of his other films, not part of that cycle). Stolen Kisses is one of the greatest movies ever made – certainly in my personal top 3. So where was Criterion edition, back before Fox-Lorber started laying their turds? Criterion just released the one famous one.
We can argue all we want about the relative merits of the Criterion vs. MK2 400 Blows, but what, in this instance, makes MK2 undoubtedly superior is that they are releasing all of the Antoine Doinel movies as well as a substantial portion of Truffaut’s life work, and lavishing every single one of them with the same first rate, wonderful presentation.
Ted
[Edited last by Ted Todorov on September 07, 2001 at 11:36 AM]

 

[Gary Tooze]

quote: their excessive, and sometimes wrongheaded selectivity...[/quote] Ted that is pretty subjective... don't you agree ?
Besides Criterion never said they were distributing the "greatest films"... but rather: "A continueing series of classic and important contemporary film..."
BTW, I happen to think Truffaults best film IS The 400 Blows... sorry, MHO...
------------------

[email protected]
DVD COLLECTION CONTEST , My DVD Collection , My Home Theatre
DVDBeaver's 15 Member choices of the TOP 111 DVDs available today!
[Edited last by Gary Tooze on September 07, 2001 at 12:34 PM]

 

[Marc Colella]

Besides Criterion never said they were distributing the "greatest films"... but rather: "A continueing series of classic and important contemporary film..."

actually it's:
"... a continuing series of important classic and contemporary films"
- which means that regardless of era, the film is important.
I don't know how Criterion considers Armegeddon, The Rock, and Fishing with John (among others) to be important. What's so important about them?

 

[Rich Malloy]

Is the topic of this thread even relevant to the discussion anymore? It certainly seems like it's degenerated into just so much carping, nitpicking and provoking.
I've got a list of movies that I don't think Criterion should have bothered doing: the two Bay films certainly, but also And the Ship Sails On, Chasing Amy, Variety Lights, The Blob, And God Created Woman, The Night Porter, How To Get Ahead in Advertising, and Time Bandits.
But that's neither here nor there, now is it? And what reason could I possibly have for mentioning them other than a perverse hope that I may have treaded upon someone's favorite, along with the delicious expectation that my words might provoke a huffy and defensive response?
In other words, I'd be acting like a child.