Criterion and Audio Commentaries (1 Viewer)

[Patrick McCart]

I don't really listen to commentaries as much anymore, but I do watch pretty much any video-based extras. Especially stuff like visual essays and new interviews. To be honest, I'd probably listen more if they were available as a download so you could listen separately like a podcast.

 

[battlebeast]

Lee Grant was nominated; no win.

No. Lee Grant won for SHAMPOO.

 

[PMF]

This company essentially invented the alternate-track audio commentary with its laser disc releases. [...] Criterion seems to be only those that were previously included on its own or other studios' releases.[...]

Great topic, Dave.

Bottom Line: Criterion should continue to port over the old but strive to include new voices and commentaries. ​

 

[Brian Kidd]

I don't think that production costs are an issue, as digital recording technology has come far enough that a halfway-decent microphone, a laptop (or even an iPad), and something on which the commenter can watch the film are all that is needed to record a good-sounding commentary. There are costs involved with paying the talent for their time and effort, so that may be an issue, depending on the status of the commenter, but recording and editing a commentary track is relatively inexpensive these days.

I may be alone in this opinion, but I don't think that every film can have a great commentary track. Unless the film is one that warrants a serious analysis by a film scholar or some major player in the production of a film is available, willing, and has worthwhile stories to tell about a film, commentaries aren't a necessity. Heck, even if a Director or actor, etc. is available and willing, some folks just aren't good at talking about the kinds of things that make a commentary interesting and valuable. Ever listen to a Tim Burton commentary? No question that the man is talented, but he's just not very interesting to listen to on a commentary track. I've heard wonderful commentary tracks by the likes of Tim Lucas or Terry Gilliam, but I've listened to far more that seem to either be reiterating what was just on the screen or are full of pauses and tangents that don't relate to the film in question.

I guess what I'm saying is that the commentaries that Criterion does put on their discs tend to be top-notch. They just don't need to and can't be expected to put them on every release.

 

[Martin_Teller]

Count me in the camp who prefers a concise video essay or interview over a feature-length commentary. Too often commentaries are loaded with uninteresting trivia, common knowledge stuff, excessive fawning, repetition and dead air. Sometimes even MISinformation!

 

[bujaki]

No. Lee Grant won for SHAMPOO.

That is correct. Old age strikes again. Plus I must have blocked her win since I didn't like the film when I saw it back when it opened. My apologies.

 

[English Patient]

I may be alone in this opinion, but I don't think that every film can have a great commentary track. Unless the film is one that warrants a serious analysis by a film scholar or some major player in the production of a film is available, willing, and has worthwhile stories to tell about a film, commentaries aren't a necessity. Heck, even if a Director or actor, etc. is available and willing, some folks just aren't good at talking about the kinds of things that make a commentary interesting and valuable. Ever listen to a Tim Burton commentary? No question that the man is talented, but he's just not very interesting to listen to on a commentary track. I've heard wonderful commentary tracks by the likes of Tim Lucas or Terry Gilliam, but I've listened to far more that seem to either be reiterating what was just on the screen or are full of pauses and tangents that don't relate to the film in question.

I guess what I'm saying is that the commentaries that Criterion does put on their discs tend to be top-notch. They just don't need to and can't be expected to put them on every release.

You're right about not every film can have a great commentary track. It's pretty hit or miss, depending on the personality of the commenter. I'd say about half of the commentary tracks I've listened to have either been bad or simply forgettable, and these include the actual directors of the movies (like Friedkin on Exorcist: The Version You Haven't Seen). Over the years I've gotten to prefer well-research books (like Rinzler's Star Wars making-of books) or articles about a film, rather than commentaries - although there are some great commentaries out there. Coppola's tracks for Godfather and Apocalypse Now, for example. But if a disc doesn't have a commentary, it's not a huge loss. There are other easily accessible avenues to get info on a movie.

 

[MaxMorrow]

Commentary costs can add up. The cost of just the recording can be anywhere from $0(if the commentator has some aptitude with home recording; usually this is a historian) to a couple thousand dollars (if, like most film professionals, they prefer to record in a studio with a skilled engineer.) And many people-historians and participants in the film alike- would like to be compensated for their time. Then you consider the time a disc's producer puts into making these things happen, which adds more to the total. It may not seem like a lot, but as we all know, the days where the home video industry sees no trouble in throwing a wad of cash at Arnold Schwarzenegger to say what he's doing onscreen while we watch him onscreen are largely over. It's a matter of economics and risk management, unfortunately.

For what it's worth on the anonymous internet-- I say this as someone who has recorded several commentaries, and produced a few as well.

 

[battlebeast]

That is correct. Old age strikes again. Plus I must have blocked her win since I didn't like the film when I saw it back when it opened. My apologies.

Dont feel bad. We all make mistakes!

 

[Tommy R]

Group commentaries are the best, especially when they are “fun” and have you laughing a lot. Some of the best ones I can think of are horror movies (Bruce Campbell is the best commentator of all time, both on the group ones he’s down as well as his solo-track he did for the first Evil Dead).

 

[B-ROLL]

Group commentaries are the best, especially when they are “fun” and have you laughing a lot. Some of the best ones I can think of are horror movies (Bruce Campbell is the best commentator of all time, both on the group ones he’s down as well as his solo-track he did for the first Evil Dead).

There have been a few "comedies" where the commentary track was better than the film ...

 

[English Patient]

Commentary costs can add up. The cost of just the recording can be anywhere from $0(if the commentator has some aptitude with home recording; usually this is a historian) to a couple thousand dollars (if, like most film professionals, they prefer to record in a studio with a skilled engineer.) And many people-historians and participants in the film alike- would like to be compensated for their time. Then you consider the time a disc's producer puts into making these things happen, which adds more to the total. It may not seem like a lot, but as we all know, the days where the home video industry sees no trouble in throwing a wad of cash at Arnold Schwarzenegger to say what he's doing onscreen while we watch him onscreen are largely over. It's a matter of economics and risk management, unfortunately.

That's what I assumed, too - I assumed it would be in the thousands of dollars at least.

I think back in the '90s the idea of a commentary track was novel and intriguing but now I think it's a feature that really doesn't drive sales for most people - not like 4K, or Dolby Atmos, or whatever the newest bell and whistle is. I wonder if Criterion or other labels pay close attention to what people are saying about their releases and what people tend to fixate on as most important - I would guess most of the discussions concern image quality, and commentaries probably aren't nearly as important. So if I were a label like Criterion I'd probably shift more of my resources to remastering/restoration rather than special features, just based on what the majority of customers are looking for.

 

[Harold Chasen]

Good news for the OP!

According to DVD Beaver, the new Criterion Blu-Ray of Stranger Than Paradise will include the commentary track recorded by them for the laserdisc and not included on the Criterion DVD: http://www.dvdbeaver.com/film/DVDCompare2/strangerthanparadise.htm

I know it's not new, but at least they're not omitting something.

 

[Martin_Teller]

Three commentaries I listened to this weekend:

Kat Ellinger on Female on the Beach: lively, informative, relevant. I enjoyed this one.

David Del Valle and David DeCocteau on Female on the Beach: a few good anecdotes, but Del Valle's effusive fawning over Joan Crawford was painful to listen to. I was disgusted by the way he demonized Christina Crawford (at one point even sneerily emphasizing that she was adopted).

Alan Rode on My Name Is Julia Ross: incredibly dry... lots of boring studio stuff, listing people's other credits, or simply narrating the action onscreen. Ended up skipping large chunks towards the end.

1 out of 3 is not a good ratio. I'll always give a commentary a chance, but more and more I'm getting comfortable bailing on one if it's not doing it for me.

 

[MaxMorrow]

That's what I assumed, too - I assumed it would be in the thousands of dollars at least.

I think back in the '90s the idea of a commentary track was novel and intriguing but now I think it's a feature that really doesn't drive sales for most people - not like 4K, or Dolby Atmos, or whatever the newest bell and whistle is. I wonder if Criterion or other labels pay close attention to what people are saying about their releases and what people tend to fixate on as most important - I would guess most of the discussions concern image quality, and commentaries probably aren't nearly as important. So if I were a label like Criterion I'd probably shift more of my resources to remastering/restoration rather than special features, just based on what the majority of customers are looking for.

I think most labels probably pay attention to what the fan base says--but as we can see even in this post and thread, what they want can vary wildly. As far as commentaries go, I'm sure the labels all hope to get the big names involved, but for a variety of reasons it may not be feasible. Historian tracks can be a great option, but there is often a dislike of them from some vocal fans--expressing disappointment that those big names weren't involved, or writing off an entire track because of a seemingly unforgivable error (never mind that directors and actors can and do make similar mistakes or misspeak on the films which they actually made). And when all is said and done, due likely to the volume of discs that come in for reviewers, reviews may not even critique the bonus features at all--opting for a simple list or even just neglecting to mention their existence. So all that time and money can lead to precious little in the bottom line, particularly with catalog titles.

 

[English Patient]

I think most labels probably pay attention to what the fan base says--but as we can see even in this post and thread, what they want can vary wildly. As far as commentaries go, I'm sure the labels all hope to get the big names involved, but for a variety of reasons it may not be feasible. Historian tracks can be a great option, but there is often a dislike of them from some vocal fans--expressing disappointment that those big names weren't involved, or writing off an entire track because of a seemingly unforgivable error (never mind that directors and actors can and do make similar mistakes or misspeak on the films which they actually made). And when all is said and done, due likely to the volume of discs that come in for reviewers, reviews may not even critique the bonus features at all--opting for a simple list or even just neglecting to mention their existence. So all that time and money can lead to precious little in the bottom line, particularly with catalog titles.

Yeah, that makes sense. If I worked at one of the labels and had to spend thousands of bucks and lots of man-hours to get a commentary recorded and then to have it not even mentioned or not see any appreciable spike in sales, it would be exasperating and make me think I would have been better off not bothering and shifting the financial resources to maybe additional remastering work. Because in this day and age of 65-inch and bigger screens, image quality seems to be (based on my reading of various forums) the most important factor. And I admit I've fallen prey to that concern - if Criterion's Tree of Life edition had a commentary but was basically the same video transfer from the old Fox version, I probably wouldn't have bought it. But since Criterion promoted it as being a new 4k restoration/remastering, I bought it. I like commentaries, but I like improvements in video even more.