The Criterion Price Point In The Future

[HerrSchreck]

As mentioned in the BRUTE FORCE (and MONSTERS & MADMEN, NAKED CITY, etc) thread.

Not a pleasant discussion of course for many, but one that all would admit is not going to go away.. in fact I can only see it increasing in frequency rather than diminishing.

I'd begin by saying that for my part, I still think the vast bulk of CC 39.99 srp'd items are still worth it... particularly the two-discers: LATE SPRING, SPIRIT OF THE BEEHIVE, RULES OF THE GAME, PLAYTIME, (hell I'll even throw PANDORA in there despite the interlacing) and so many more. They are just perfect, A-plus in all departments, so far over and beyond what one expects in a premium disc presentation in SD (or any def for that matter) of a film. Not only are there commentaries, a genuine book, but there is an entire second disc of extra features which remove all doubt regarding the feeling of holding in one's hands something quite special. The excess love, research, quality and care, reminds me of the feeling I get holding Kino's EDISON in my hands, or UNSEEN CINEMA, or Flicker Alley's PHANTOM or JUDEX.

Some of the single disc presentations with a simple commentary and a couple of standard extra features of a ten-twenty minute length, people are increasingly wondering what it was they just paid the extra ten bucks for. It's quite easy to pick up a film with equal quality in telecine & print quality, with a commentary (often with the exact same folks like Urisini/Silver who appear on far less expensive discs) and an extra feature or two. Folks look at what they're holding in their hands, and everything is identical to parallel releases but the price is vastly more expensive.

As mentioned on the M&M thread, some folks wondered why that box set had such a huge purchase price versus similar boxes like the LEWTON, WB LEGENDS OF HORROR, the Universal Franchise boxes, other material like the Columbia Karloff, etc. For god's sakes M&M was priced in the same zone of TREASURES FROM THE AMERICAN FILM ARCHIVE boxes as well as UNSEEN CINEMA which contained seven of the most sublime discs ever created!

Once upon a time Criterion was doing something with their releases that virtually nobody else was doing: commentaries, widescreen, progressive, vault-scouring for best elements, digital cleanup, original extras, etc. One was proud to pay the extra bucks for such a lone premium product.

Compared to, say, Kino's catalog of 50's to 80's material (i e Soviet & French material), CC can still look like they way they did in the good old days.. but that's more because of Kino's overpricing and lack of preconversion of material that has enough of a market whereby they should produce an NTSC master.. god knows they did and do do it i e the KIESLOWSKI box. But I would say that that zone of Kino's catalog is overpriced.

But in general, versus what is being produced by all the major labels as industry standard, and boutique labels like MoC, Second Run, Tokyo Shock, Flicker Alley, BFI, HVe and Image (and Kino when they feel like it) etc, it is getting increasingly difficult to pinpoint what one is paying for in the single-disc, Ameray-cased CC releases of 39.99 srp'd products. They just don't have the hugely glaring edge in telecine and extras anymore-- at least versus what it was back in the late 90's/early 2000's.

That said, there are plenty releases-- particularly the 2-disc 39.99'ers-- which are veritable works of art in and of themselves.

[domino harvey]

I know you are an established figure around these parts and I'm sure my response will be met with some level of insult, but why beat this horse any more? People will pay the price, so Criterion will charge the price.

Why is this even an issue for anyone? At what point do consumers feel so entitled to having their demands met that they complain about the list price that they surely don't even pay to begin with? Who cares what Studios A, B, and C are releasing at X price, Criterion charges Y, have always charged Y, will presumably continue charging Y. Zo what

I like BMWs but KIAs are so much cheaper and they both have a radio and wheels!!!!!!! WHY ARE BMWS SO MUCH MORE. UGH IT'S UNNFFFAAAIIIRRRR

[HerrSchreck]

I know you are an established figure around these parts and I'm sure my response will be met with some level of insult, but why beat this horse any more? People will pay the price, so Criterion will charge the price.

Why is this even an issue for anyone? At what point do consumers feel so entitled to having their demands met that they complain about the list price that they surely don't even pay to begin with? Who cares what Studios A, B, and C are releasing at X price, Criterion charges Y, have always charged Y, will presumably continue charging Y. Zo what

I like BMWs but KIAs are so much cheaper and they both have a radio and wheels!!!!!!! WHY ARE BMWS SO MUCH MORE. UGH IT'S UNNFFFAAAIIIRRRR

Hey douche bag-- ya don't wanta talk about it, don't talk about it.

But I think you do want to talk about it, otherwise you wouldn't have staggered in beating your head against the third rail.

Your BMW analogy is absolutely idiotic. Any nitwit with a half a fuckin congitive sense knows exactly what he's getting with a BMW and why the thing is priced more than a Hyundai (or Kia) furchrissakes.

Note to retard: this is a Criterion forum. So occasionally Criterion-related issues will come up. And price vs value is the premier consumer issue bar none. If you werent busy snapping your fuckin spine working your feet behind your head digging your face between your own legs you'd produce a contribution here worthy of something beyond sick-room bedpans.

[domino harvey]

Based on that reply, are you sure we're on a Criterion forum?

[HerrSchreck]

Positive. Despite your usual attempts to derail it.. now please... just... go away if you have nothing to contribute.

[Darth Lavender]

Relevant subject, although I have my doubts about wether people are going to be able to have an intelligent conversation on this thread...

A few random thoughts on Criterion's pricing...

- I think the main reason for their high prices is just because they can. The name-recognition thing means that more people (especially the sheep) will pay for a Criterion at those prices.

- DVD prices have come down considerably in the last ten years; something which Criterion seems to have ignored. I just noticed recently that the bare-bones 'Batman' films released in 1997 have a RRP of $35 (Australian) and the 2-disk, remastered, DTS, Special Editions have a RRP of $20 (Australian)

My breakfast is ready, so I'll post more later...

[Tommaso]

Tut tut... It's funny to see how something which is potentially a worthwhile thread right from the start develops into something best continued in the 'Infighting and Navel Gazing' section. ..
EDIT: this of course doesn't apply to Darth's post, which happened to come in while I was typing.

To put in my tuppence: I agree with the assertion that many CC's seem to be too pricey, but honestly: if I look at what they actually cost from various internet sellers, the prices are far, far lower than that 39.95 $ Criterion officially charges. The end result is pretty much on the same level as discs from the bfi or from MoC. As you say, there is often only a small amount of extras, and audio commentaries are pretty common now also from other labels. But: do the commentaries from other labels have the same quality? Very rarely so, in my opinion. One needn't cite those ridiculous attempts of doing a commentary on the MGM Bergman set to see that other labels rarely come up with something that could match a commentary by Ian Christie, Stephen Prince or even Peter Cowie. I also think that in most cases, other extras are chosen very well and are extremely helpful getting into the respective film. Have a look at that much-maligned "Bicycle Thieves". The book may be 'only' 80 pages, but there's more text and information in it than in the 192 pages of MoC's Naruse book. Together with the docus on disc 2, I find it more inspiring than many a book on Italian neo-realism.

Also, CC often has to cross-finance less well selling films with other films; now that of course is general practice, but it might explain why they cannot charge less on some discs that have little extras (like many of their older Kurosawas), as these will certainly help to finance things like "WR: Mysteries of the Organism" or "Koko" (and no, I don't think these films have anything in common apart from the sales probably being not very high).

I totally agree with "Monsters and Madmen" to be at a ridiculous price, and why they didn't include these films in the Eclipse series remains a mystery to me. Also, I wonder why they don't make their sub-standard early discs cheaper, discs like "High and Low" or "Autumn Sonata". But apart from this, I really see no reason to complain as long as they continue to do such marvellous packages as "Secrets of the Beehive" or "49th parallel". That other labels increasingly know how to make a decent transfer is good to see, but still: the advantage of Criterion isn't as spectacular anymore, but very often still there. There are a lot of new discs from other labels which have visible compression artefacts despite high bit rates etc., and in general only MoC and the BFI (recently) are labels which offer the same consistently high quality one is expecting from CC.

[HerrSchreck]

in general only MoC and the BFI (recently) are labels which offer the same consistently high quality one is expecting from CC.

I'd have to disagree with you there on that one Tom. CC's noir series doesn't have a thing on Fox's Noir Series (I take it we're talking transfers). Warner Brothers has long been the only label since the very start to keep CC's nuts held hard in the fire, telecine-wise, one-upping them here & there in a virtual technological leap frog since the late 90's. Universal's transfers have been absolutely astounding since at least two-three years ago (aside from their beautiful b&w transfers on vintage films back to the early 30's, buy ARABIAN NIGHTS to see a color transfer that not even CC has anything to come close to yet... and the disc costs about ten bucks dude); ditto for Paramount & Columbia.

And it's only recently that MoC have been consistently producing transfers worthy of contention. But they're consistent now. Up to 05/06 you'd get PITFALL & ONIBABA (gorgeous) back to back with FACE OF ANOTHER & ASPHALT, both of which are seething with artifacts & odd pal phenoms. And the jaggie & interlacing issues (Solaris Digital is no Criterion Post) on their early silent catalog is well known.

[Tommaso]

It shows that actually we watch different films, as I'm not familiar with the Fox Noirs. Well, I think for many labels we could find great transfers and ones that are not so great (think of the doubtful colours on the WB "Unbearable Lightness of Being" and especially their "Searchers", both of which also have examples of audio commentaries that come nowhere close to CC perfection). Same goes, as you pointed out, for some early MoC's. And though Universal brings out nice discs at great prices, hell, I'd give a lot for a CC style package of "Shrinking Man" or "Tarantula".

In general I wouldn't want to compare CC to the major companies. It's no wonder that these can offer dvds at cheaper prices, simply because they got greater financial resources, and for the most part, their films seem to be more 'commercial'. Looking at the future pricing of CC (that was your original point, wasn't it?), I guess it will not go down significantly, but they will also make their product more special. I don't think we will see many more barebones (or almost barebones) discs in the future. If they want to keep their reputation, producing great extras is the only way to fight their rivals, and I guess we may be the more happy about the final product.

[arsonfilms]

In the past and on other threads I've frequently defended Criterion's price points for the usual reasons: we're paying for the transfer AND the digital restoration AND the care given the supplements and packaging AND the level of quality accomplished by an independent studio that licenses most of their output from other studios. That argument has been well documented.

I agree, however, with HerrShreck. I haven't purchased a single-disc DVD at all from any studio since Pickpocket came out, simply because I can't justify spending all that money to have something on my shelf that I won't come back to repeatedly. I won't even pay the $20 for a lower tier Criterion, let alone an extra $6 for a commentary I might not even listen to. Don't want to pay that much for little in return? Don't! Rent the damn thing! There are a lot of Criterion discs I would have gladly bought if they'd made it worth my while, but that extra disc and the quality of its contents is the deciding factor on anything I'm interested in.

I've recently found some of the old Anchor Bay boxsets (Herzog, Wenders) online for under $30. Now why in the world would I want to spend $26 on an amazing film by itself on one disc when I can spend roughly the same on 7 films? I'm happy to shell out for something I think is of value to me, but I'll watch everything else for a $3 rental fee, and nobody will stop overpricing their discs until more people start doing the same.

[Scharphedin2]

Honestly, I think there are discs that are cheap, then there are discs that are cheaper, and then there are discs that are cheaper still, and so on down the line. I do not really find that quality of transfer or packaging, or abundance of extras in any logical way follows the pricepoint at any studio. That is of course coming from someone, who grew up with laserdiscs, where the cheapest releases usually went at the price of an upper tier Criterion DVD, and expensive releases ran 2 or even 3 times that (on top of this the dollar was exactly twice as strong in those days).

For me, the only deciding factor is the quality of the film itself, or, rather, my interest in seeing the film. Whenever I order films, it becomes this impossible game of ranking the hundreds of DVDs I would like to see according to how eager I am to see the particular film, and then there are budget considerations, of course. I find that at least 90% of Criterion's releases are titles that I would like to see, and be happy to have on my shelf, which is not to say that I own 90% of their releases (yet).

Really, DVDs are not expensive, not even Criterion titles (certainly not when relative obscurity of selection, quality, etc is taken into account). It is not only the pleasure of seeing the film, and the extras, it is the idea of having access to the film for the rest of your life -- just the same as purchasing music or books -- is this not really the idea of purchasing these films on DVD? It is a small (or large) library that you build. You can return to the films you love whenever you feel like it, and always have the pleasure of knowing that a given film is right within arm's reach. I think it is hard to put a price on that.

[Belmondo]

I'm the guy who grumbled about price over on the BRUTE FORCE thread, so let me make a couple of points.
Money is always an issue; when I look at my DVD collection, I am flabbergasted at how much money I have spent. Sure, I can afford any given DVD that comes along, but recently I spend more time adding to my Netflix rental queue than I do in calculating the discount on a CC release with my Borders Reward Card. Why should I buy BRUTE FORCE or NAKED CITY when I can watch them both in pristine trasnfers on Turner Classic Movies? And speaking of noirs....
The comparison of the Fox Noir series to CC noirs is a good one. Some of the Fox titles, such as LAURA, show up on cable regularly, but most must be rented or purchased if you want to see them. I bought several of them at BEST BUY for $9.99 and it becomes tough to spend so much more on THIEVES HIGHWAY, so I rented it.
I will continue to purchase CC discs of those filmmakers whose works I just have to have - Powell and Pressburger come to mind, and I'm happy I bought THE RED SHOES even though it has been showing up on TV recently.
So the issue is this - Price is forcing me to reconsider what it is that I just " have to have."

[Tommaso]

It is not only the pleasure of seeing the film, and the extras, it is the idea of having access to the film for the rest of your life -- just the same as purchasing music or books -- is this not really the idea of purchasing these films on DVD? It is a small (or large) library that you build. You can return to the films you love whenever you feel like it, and always have the pleasure of knowing that a given film is right within arm's reach. I think it is hard to put a price on that.

True, and often it's entirely up to yourself whether you want to have the film as supa-dupa Criterion edition or as a cheapo edition from some other distributor (at least if you look across the border of your own particular market, many CC films can be found in other and cheaper releases). We shouldn't take the name Criterion in itself as a reason for collecting their discs, but while I certainly don't buy every disc they release, I surely appreciate their effort even on those that don't interest me or don't interest me that much to buy again (that's why I abstained from their "Mabuse" and "Pandora" discs).

But of course the pricing is much less a stumbling block if they put out a film NOT available anywhere else. So if there's a certain film I really want to see and it finally comes from Criterion, it's really not the price that I care for (and in those cases of a first release worldwide I'm glad it comes from Criterion because you never know what other companies might do to that film you're craving for...).

[skuhn8]

I'm the guy who grumbled about price over on the BRUTE FORCE thread, so let me make a couple of points.
Money is always an issue; when I look at my DVD collection, I am flabbergasted at how much money I have spent. Sure, I can afford any given DVD that comes along, but recently I spend more time adding to my Netflix rental queue than I do in calculating the discount on a CC release with my Borders Reward Card. Why should I buy BRUTE FORCE or NAKED CITY when I can watch them both in pristine trasnfers on Turner Classic Movies? And speaking of noirs....
The comparison of the Fox Noir series to CC noirs is a good one. Some of the Fox titles, such as LAURA, show up on cable regularly, but most must be rented or purchased if you want to see them. I bought several of them at BEST BUY for $9.99 and it becomes tough to spend so much more on THIEVES HIGHWAY, so I rented it.
I will continue to purchase CC discs of those filmmakers whose works I just have to have - Powell and Pressburger come to mind, and I'm happy I bought THE RED SHOES even though it has been showing up on TV recently.
So the issue is this - Price is forcing me to reconsider what it is that I just " have to have."

Perhaps it was on the Naked City thread, but I was 'the other guy' bitching about Brute Force. I still think that one's bullshit. Of course I don't have TCM or Netflix here so I'll have to shell out for it...but I wish the CC would stick to films that would otherwise be neglected or that they can add worthwhile content to. That package just reeks of rip-off. Perhaps I'm just spoiled from all the Fox Noirs: same content, quality transfers and $10 price point. Excellent. The argument was raised that the CC has to pay for rights. Well, DON'T then! Leave it be. I'm sure Universal would've put it out with the same transfer. Wild Side managed it. Rant over. I'm cool with the CC being more expensive; I don't mind giving them my money because I get the sense that they generally care about cinema (and yes, I do appreciate that in a DVD company!), but there's got to be a line. Those four US noir Dassins come to $100 plus! OUch.

[sevenarts]

I usually don't care at all about the CC price point, but it does become a bit absurd with their noir releases. I bought the first 16 (!!!) Fox Noir discs in a bundle on Amazon.com for $130 or so. I got the first Warner noir box for a little under $40 for 5 films. And both of those series look gorgeous and have commentaries on most films (not that I ever listen to commentaries, but apparently many people care about that). Compare those bargains against the aforementioned $100 for 4 (!!!!!) Dassin noirs from CC, and the discrepancy is obvious. And this is for discs with similar extras and similar quality of transfer, which if not for CC would probably still have come out in a similar, much cheaper package from another company.

Their high price point makes perfect sense for their usual run of foreign and art films, and corresponds pretty closely to similar packages from BFI, MOC, the much less consistent Kino and New Yorker, etc. I usually have no complaints, even if it's a near-barebones release (I could care less about 95% of extras; the transfer's it for me). But I'm not sure the price point makes as much sense when applied to US noirs and monster movies, which are coming out in stellar and cheap editions everywhere. I understand why Criterion wants to vary their collection by releasing these things, and I equally understand why they won't vary their pricing structure to reflect other noir distributors, but it's still a bit frustrating.

[Steven H]

I'm sure Universal would've put it out with the same transfer. Wild Side managed it. Rant over.

This kind of boils the argument down, I think, to what it's really about. Why is Criterion focusing on some films that will probably be available somewhere down the line in a cheaper edition if they don't touch it? I think the answer is really simple, because customers will pay for it and the Criterion people like the films. What seems to distinguish the films in question, from classic noir and horror to 90s indie stuff, is that they're from major studios and are somewhat better known than their foreign language counterparts (in a lot of cases). Therefore, they're probably the films most often requested. People can get Anderson's Bottle Rocket on amazon.com for $5, and yet I'm sure it's still one of the most requested Criterion DVDs (I wonder how often Universal is asked if they're going to do a special edition of the film theirselves.)

But that only covers why they would release a film in the first place, not why it's still the same $29.95. That's something only they really know, but it probably has a lot to do with how much is done in house vs. outsourced regarding commentary recording, telecine work, etc. Criterion has also mentioned a few times that they follow an almost loss leader style with some of their smaller releases (didn't they say they sold about 500 copies of Andrei Rublev) and clean up on things like The Royal Tenenbaums. With the major noir on DVD explosion in the last two years, I can only imagine the Dassins bringing in the bucks for other releases, and not the other way around. Then again, I don't really have the head for business, so I'm probably off the mark.

[GringoTex]

For online shoppers, the difference in pricing between Criterion and the other quality Boutiques is generally pretty negligible.

The real pricing difference, of course, is between Criterion and WB/FOX/Universal. A title like Brute Force would probably be given a commentary and stills gallery by a WB and be available for $10. So we're paying $15 more for a booklet, an interview, and better art design. That's probably too much. I'm not sure it's big issue for me, though, because Criterion doesn't release that many titles in the WB/Fox/Universal vein.

The argument was raised that the CC has to pay for rights. Well, DON'T then! Leave it be. I'm sure Universal would've put it out with the same transfer.

Would they have? I can only think of a few noirs that Universal has released on DVD.

[souvenir]

The most frustrating thing about these price discussions is the assumption that another studio will release something Criterion's putting out. For those of us who'd prefer not to go the bootleg route, Criterion is often the only company interested in releasing the Dassin films and so forth. Sure Fox owned the rights to Thieves' Highway and Night and the City, but they didn't release them on DVD for seven or eight years. There's certainly no guarantee they would have come out in the Fox Noir line. The R2 of Thieves' is a bargain now, but it's not even released yet and one wonders if the interest from the Criterion edition propelled that release forward. The other two, Brute Force and The Naked City, were not actually licensed from Universal, a studio that continues to sit on countless classic films including some great noirs. They've both been out of print, fetching ridiculous prices in barebones Image releases, for several years. This is not a situation where you've got two products already released, one costing significantly more than the other. It's Criterion adding titles to the market that are not available and who knows when they would have been otherwise. Plus, what more, realistically, could they have included with the four Dassin titles? Each has commentary, interviews, etc. Aside from commissioning a lengthy documentary on Dassin, they all seem fairly well put together to me.

[skuhn8]

Even when I suggested that Universal would put them out eventually I had the feeling I was making an utterly lame argument. True, they've averaged about 1/3 of a noir per year so it probably would've been 2020 by the time they got around to this.

But--and I know I'm belaboring the point--the CC Brute Force stands IMO as the greatest CC gouging since they went anamorphic (High and Low is pre-anamorph rip-off).

[zedz]

I totally agree with "Monsters and Madmen" to be at a ridiculous price, and why they didn't include these films in the Eclipse series remains a mystery to me.

I don't really want to get into this discussion, as I've said my piece in previous iterations of this discussion, but I think Monsters and Madmen may be a bit of a red herring.

Here's a possible scenario. These titles were developed as part of the original conception of Eclipse (i.e. cult / genre films), and may well have been intended to be released at a lower price point (since we have no idea what the pricing structure of the original Eclipse would have been). Equinox and Jigoku are other likely refugees. When plans changed, Criterion was left with four films with fully-developed extras (and the extras on these discs are generally better than the films, from what I've seen) which no longer fitted with the 'New Eclipse' model. Thus they become Criterion releases, but they need to conform to the established Criterion pricing structure (see previous discussions of 'brand values' - they're not going to start discounting their product because we consider a given title 'less worthy').

It's probably not an ideal situation for anybody, including Criterion, but I suspect that they're also going to be looking at the sales of this set and the Paul Robeson set with great interest, as they're both departures from Criterion's previous box sets. I think the Robeson is a magnificent set, even though several of the films included are pretty weak when considered on their own merits. It's an excellent example of the whole being greater than the sum of its parts.

I'm outta here.

[Damfino]

I agree, and sometimes when I look at a barebones (or near it) $30 disc from Criterion at a store I ask "why?" But then I think about how much restoration costs, and that maybe actually finding and getting the rights to the film were costly. The WB are making AMAZING special editions now, and Fox Film Noir and Classics rule- but they don't have to pay for right or anything, they just turn to the left and voila- there it is. I think Eclipse is a step in the right direction, and some discs I'd only buy if on extreme sale or used- but for the most part I understand why Criterion is sometimes costly and don't hold them against it. HOWEVER- if Mr. Criterion is reading this- if you lower prices you'll sell much more, so don't hold back!

[HerrSchreck]

Licensing is a big ass red herring in this discussion. Anchor Bay, Milestone, Kino, Second Run/Sight, Image Ent, Blue Underground, Optimum, Tokyo Shock, Flicker Alley, not to mention the BFI & MoC... and on and on and on... deal with the licensing issue; all the Wade Williams and Kit Parker discs (some can be of so so quality but many are actually quite nice)... but none would ever slap a 39.99 retail price on a one- discer, at least not as a rule.

A good example is This superb Image edition of Richard Gordon's DEVIL DOLL, complete with commentary by Weaver and Gordon, both the domestic and rare "racy" European cuts of the film, with a booklet containing an interview with the writer of the original DOLL short story, etc... anomorphic in 1.66 OAR, progressive, beautiful... for $9.99.

[ByMarkClark.com]

DEVIL DOLL is $9.99 now. But it carried a $24.99 MSRP when it debuted, and went through two subsequent price drops to get to its current price point. So, if you look at per-film cost, the Criterion MONSTERS AND MADMEN set is actually a better deal than the initial pricing of DEVIL DOLL.

Speaking of price-drops: The only real issue I have with Criterion's pricing is that they almost never price-drop anything. At this point it's absurd to continue to charge $39.99 MSRP for things like GREAT EXPECTATIONS or HIGH AND LOW -- aging transfers, bare-bones discs. Those older, bare-bones titles should be dropped to $29.99 (or perhaps even lower).

[Antoine Doinel]

I'm surprised that the thread has carried on this long without this point being made:

Who here has actually paid $39.99 for a Criterion disc? We all know that smart pre-ordering or snooping around can help you snare these discs at prices at least 30% off.

So, now let's really see what we're talking about - paying $28 for a Criterion disc. And is that really so bad?

[Tommaso]

Those older, bare-bones titles should be dropped to $29.99 (or perhaps even lower).

I'd say they should be dropped altogether and be re-released, just as they already started to do with some other titles. One of the main arguments here was Criterion's 'image' as being the standard-bearer of great dvd production. These earlier titles are of course seldom taken into consideration nowadays, but as a whole they are surely not fortunate for the Collection's image.

I'm surprised that the thread has carried on this long without this point being made:

Who here has actually paid $39.99 for a Criterion disc?

Well, I made that point quite at the beginning of the discussion, but you're the first to pick up on it. I still think its a valid point, although the same thing goes for nearly every other label. The MoC discs have shown up at internet retailers like cd-wow or play.com at even lower prices. 28$ or less indeed isn't very much for a great dvd, but it doesn't reflect the fact that dvds generally have gotten cheaper in recent years. So I guess it all comes down to your personal interest in a film and financial capacity whether you're willing to spend your money for what are still (even at 28$) the most expensive dvds around. But in many cases, they are also the best dvds around. However, if people pick up a sub-standard disc like "High and Low" only because they feel they need to complete their collection and can't go without a single film CC has released, well... fetishes have their price.